The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9.a. Dual Track Airport Planning Process ,� ' City of Rosemount Executive Summary for Action City Couacil Meeting Date: Januarv 17. 1995 Agenda Item: Dual Track Airport Planning Agenda Section: Process NEW BUSINESS Prepared By: Andrew Ma.ck Agenda No: Senior Planner i��A � (� � � IVI / Attachments: 1992 Resolution; Proposed 1995 Approved By: Resolution. Mr. Kevin Carroll representing SOAR, has requested that the City of Rosemount consider adopting a resolution in support of the Minnesota Legislature and the State Advisory Council on Airport Planning requiring the Met Council and Metropolitan Airports Commmission to adopt a recommendation in favor of one of the airport proposals; and to thereby conclude the Dual Track Airport Planninq Process by the July 1996 Legislative deadline. The resolution also supports that the recommendation be considered and a final decision made on the issue by the 1997 Legislature. Mr. Carroll has also requested to provide Council with an update of current activity centering around the Dual Track Process. Concerns have arisen regarding the pending study and evaluation of a remote runway scenario, even though this concept was rejected by the first appointed task force in 1991. At it's meeting held on November 21, 1994, the Metropolitan Airports Commission held discussions on the consultant selection process to further study the remote runway concept and a scenario involving the diversion of a portion of MSP air traffic to Rochester. Rosemount would have obvious concerns with a remote runway scenario due to the anticipated noise impacts along with the double negative effect of no economic bennefit from limited terminal facilities. To heighten this concern, a possibility could exist under this scenario to revisit the alternative sites in the search area. For example, the U of M Site may be considered due to it being the shortest distance as a link to MSP both in terms of time and cost of connecting infrastructure such as light rail. Mr. Carroll will be prepared to further expound upon these and other issues during his presentation on Tuesday. The bottom line is that these additional studies will likely generate the need for additional study time. This may result in the Met Council and/or MAC initiating legislation to extend the study period for an additional period of years. This continued delay will further prolonge Rosemount' s own ability to quide, plan for, and self-govern it's community as impacted by State Leqislation affecting the new airport search area. The position taken in this proposed resolution is consistent with the previous position taken by the City in March 1992 by the passage of a resolution opposing the relocation of the airport and the continuation of the dual track process. The City of Hastings has also adopted the same resolution and a number of Townships in Dakota County are also considering similar actions. Recommended Action: MOTION To adopt a resolution supporting timely completion of the Dual Track Airport Planning Process and that a final decision be made on the recommendation by the 1997 State Legislature. City Council Action: 01-17-95.004 � ;---; CITY OF ROSEbiOIINT DAROTA COIINTY, MINNL�SOTA RESOLIITION 1992- 28 �� A RLSOLIITION OPPOSING TSL RSLOCATION OF TS}3 MINNEAPOLIS-ST. PAIIL AIRPORT AND THE CONTINUATION OF THE TDQO-TRACR PROCLSS FOR AIRPORT PLANNING IN MINN�SSOTA �PSEREAS, the Metropolitan Council was directed to proceed with airport planning in Minnesota by the Minnesota Legislature in 1987 through a "dual track° process. Track "A" called for planning to expand the current Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport, and Track 'B° called for the selection of a site for a new airport if needed; and �1HEREAS, the Metropolitan Council, the agency for making recommendations to the legislature on whether to finally build a new airport or continue to use the existing facility, did (1) Draw up its own criteria for selection of a new airport site; (2) Developed a unique environmental process for determining site adequacy; � � (3) Developed self-guiding rules for controlling developrnent in `� areas affected by the new airport search area selection; (4) Applied its own defined criteria for site selection; and (5) The criteria established eliminated the possibility of choosing options such as use of the Rochester Airport as a reliever airport and other existing airports in the Metropolitan area; and WHEREAS, the entire dual track process continues with public input limited to public information meetings, no access to those persons making decisions on this process and no public accountability for the Metropolitan Council on its development of' the dual track plan; and WSEREAS, the state legislature has given the Metropolitan Council, the same agency responsible for development, management and enforcement of the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework, the autonomy to recommend whether or not a new airport is needed; and this same agency has already violated the guidelines set out in its own "Guide Plan" for managing development in the region; and � � RESOLUTION 1992 - 28 - �PHEREAS, the premature selection of a search area encompassing ; :-.: some 115 square miles of Dakota County and the development '- ' guidelines established by the Metropolitan Council without giving the affected cities, county and townships an opportunity to affect those decision has already adversely affected property owners, taxpayers and residents in those municipalities; and WHEREAS, the relocation, and even the serious discussion of the relocation of the airport, causes economic harm to farmers, business owners, employees and families who derive their income from and develop their lifestyle around the existing airport and the agriculturally based economy of rural Dakota County; and WHEREAS, this planning process has already stymied the timely completion of the City of Rosemount' s Comprehensive Guide Plan update and caused delays, additional expenditures and taken away from the City total land use regulatory control; and aTSEREAS, no study has been completed, as reguested by hundreds of Dakota County residents, which can determine the socio-economic effects of the planning process, developmental controls and eventual relocation of the airport; and - WHEREAS, the relocation of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport and +^ the planning to accomplish this is and will be the most ; � significant public works project in Minnesota history; and the k i State of Minnesota, its cities and towns and the region are all experiencing extreme difficulty in meeting financial responsibilities to provide senrices to their residents; and WBEREAS, there exists no overall plan for the region or the state for transportation planning and development, and this process for airport planning has become a state-wide issue affecting all taxpayers in Minnesota and more significantly the economic/social development corridor between St. Cloud and Rochester; and WHEREAS, the residents of Rosemount, Minnesota, taxpayers to the city, county and region and state, are being negatively and irreversibly affected by the planning process and the potential relocation of the airport. NOW THEREFORE BL IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount does hereby call on the Governor of the State of Minnesota, - the legislators of this state and the Metropolitan Council to: (1) Take action to stop the "Dual Track" airport planning process immediately because the data referenced as "Revenue •-.-� 2 . RESOLUTION 1992 - 2$ . ' Emplanements" and "Total Operation" figures used to support ; � the need to either expand or relocate the airport in 1987 `� "J are no longer at such levels to encourage such need; and (2) Take action to remove all developmental regulations in and around the designated search area regarding airport related planning, including any site protection regulations and land banking procedures taken or proposed. (3� Address the people of the state and this region to present an overall plan for transportation in the region and the state that justifies either the expansion or the relocation of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport; (4) Show evidence that the Metropolitan Council and its staff is carrying out the intent of the direction given to them by the legislature; (5) Request that the Federal Aviation Administration conduct a separate needs assessment to lend their expertise and objectivity to the consideration of expansion or relocation. (6) Show evidence that the Metropolitan Council has provided, in its governance of developmental policies, for the protection � of the legal, economic and social rights of those citizens affected by the selection of the Dakota Search Area and the �,."; continuation of the Dual Track process; (7) Address the people of this state and the region with a plan that establishes an office for citizen awareness, research and information processing that is separate from the Metropolitan Council and reports directly to the legislature, and whose sole purpose is the unbiased review and policy development for decision making on this issue; and develops a Minnesota transportation plan for highway, . mass transit, air and river travel including the socio and economic ramifications of such decisions including the need for and relocation of the Metropolitan-St. Pau1 Airport; and BE� IT FIIRTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount supports HF2153 legislation which provides for the strengthening of the State Advisory Committee on airport planning and the appointment of persons to that committee which are neutral to this issue; and BE IT FIIRTHER RESOLVFD, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount opposes any further consideration for the relocation to Dakota County, of the Minneapolis - St. Paul Airport; and ..1 3 \ RESOLUTION 1992 - 28 .--, ��.T... --' B$ =T FIIRTSBR RSSOLYSD, that this Resolution be sent to Governor Arne Carlson, Metropolitan Council Chair Mary Anderson, State Representative Dee Long and Senator Roger Moe. ADOPTED this 17th day of March, 1992 . '��• /3 • �2c E. B. McMenomy, Mayor ATTEST: , us n M. Wa h, City Clerk ; ; ; � � Motion by: Klassen Seconded by: Willcox Voted in favor: Willcox, Wippermann, McMenomy, Staats , Klassen Voted against: None , ,__� 4 \ ` CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 1995 - A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING T�iE TIlViELY COMPLETION OF THE DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS WHEREAS, the 1989 Dual Track Airport Planning Legislation clearly defined a generous seven year period within which the Metropolitan Airports Commission and Metropolitan Council could study and recommend how to best meet Minnesota.'s aviation needs, specifically requiring a recommendation by 7uly 19, 1996, and; WI3lEREAS, the agencies and their numerous consultants managed an elaborate process involving hundreds of citizens in the selection of the fmal designated site in the Southern Dakota County Townships of Empire, Vermillion, Nininger and Marshan, and a portion of the Ciry of fIastings, and; WHEREAS, the design of the Dual Track Airport Planning Process was democratic and well know to all affected units of government under the governance of the agencies involved since the beginning, and; WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount and its residents have participated in the process in good faith and deserve a reasonable and timely conclusion to this process which supersedes its own ability to plan and govern. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rosemount resolves that the Minnesota Legislature and its State Advisory Council on Airport Planning require the Metropolitan Airports Commission and Metropolitan Council definitively recommend one of the three options described in Statute and thereby conclude the Dua1 Track Airport Planning Process on time in 1996. BE IT FITRTHER RESOLVED, that the recommendation be considered and a fmal decision rendered by the 1997 5tate Legislature. DATED this 17th day of January, 1995. ATTEST: E.B. McMenomy, Mayor Susan M. Walsh, City Clerk Motion by: Second by: Voted in favor: Voted against: