HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.a. S.O.A.R. Dual Track Airport Planning Update � ': �' CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SLxMMAR'Y FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: JUNE l, 1993
AGENDA SECTTON:
AGENDA ITEM: S .O.A.R. / DUAL TRACK AIRPORT DEP�,,�N,I, HEADS REPORT
pI.,ANNING UPDATE
PREPARED BY: STEPHAN JILK, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGEND���n � � �
IYi
APP VE BY'
ATTACI�IEN'rS: TECHNICAL COMM. INFO. , SITE _
SELECTION CRITERIA, SITE SELECTION BOOKLET
his will be the monthly report from S.O.A.R. rspresentatives and city
T Proces
staff on the Airport Dual Track Planning
chnicai Committee is now in the process of applying the selected site
The Te ick one final site.
selection criteria to the three remaining sites to p'
RECOIyII�iENI7ED ACTION:
None.
COUNCIL ACTION: ,
, ,
i� o osevnoun�
�
MAYOR
PHONE (612)423-4477 2875•145th Street West,Rosemou�t.Minnesota Edward B.McMenomy
FAX (612)4235203 Mailing Address: COUNCIIMEMBERS
P.O.Box 510.Rosemount.Minnesota 5506&0510 Sheila Klassen
TO: M3y0Y' E.B. MCM2IlOIIly James{Red)Staats
G'].�]r L'O'll.I1C11. Members Rlassen, Staats, wI.�.1.007C� and De nasWp'permann
w 1pP e I II13IIA ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: Lisa Freese, Director of Planning ���,`"�r."�G� StePhanJilk
DATE: May 27, 1993
SIIBJ: Summary of Recent Airport Meetings
As part of the City' s ongoing efforts to monitor airport related
activities, I have attended two meetings during the week of May 24,
1993 . The foilowing is a summary of the highlights of those
meetings .
MAC Technical Advisory Committee
Tuesday, May 25
The committee accepted the site selection criteria and began the
preliminary analysis of the criteria with regard to the three
candidate sites in Dakota County.
A key question that has been discussed by this committee is what
effect does the presence of Koch Refinery have on the proposed
ai.rport site, especially candidate site 6 (north of the Vermillion
River) , HNTB has been monitoring Koch Refinery with a camera placed
southeast of the refinery on the Rich Valley Golf Course. A video
of the past three months of data was shown to the committee and it
was the consultants opinion that the atmospheric conditions caused
by the processing equipment at the refinery would has a substantial
impact on the main departure runway.
HNTB provided an overview of the airspace study that they have
conducted. This data appears to realistically narrow down the
choice to the two site east of the Vermillion River closer to
Hastings . Candidate site 6 encroaches into airspace for powntown
Saint Paul and Air Lake airports . It would also require that the
South Saint Paul Airport be closed.
Governors Task Force Dua1 Track Air�port Planninq Process
Wednesday, May 26
A task force has been established by the Gavernor to examine the
dual track process and present a preliminary assessment by July 1. to
the Governor. The meeting was the first meeting of this task force.
Their charge is threefold: 1) to examine aviation forecasts in
light of industry changes and deterrnine whether or not they continue
to be appropriate; 2} to examine whether or not the dual track
process can be shorted; and 3) if shortened, whether ar not a
technically sound report can be completed. At their next meeting
they will be looking at the forecast assumptions and examining what
can be done legally to shorten the environmental review process.
�ver���ings �oming �Ul.� �osemount��
MAY-28-1993 02�06 FROM METRO AIRPORTS COMM TO 94235203 P.02
DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNLNG�'ROCESS
SITE SELECTION STLJDY
T`ECHI�TICAL ADVI50RY COMMQTTEE
� Tuesday, April 13, 1993, 1:30 p.m.
MAC Genera3t OfTices
ME�'1.'ritiiG SUMMARY
L. Jam�,c Formnan, Director of Airport Derrel�pment, called the me.eting to arder at 1:30 p.m. `Ihe
following were in attendance:
3.Tocha,D�lceta County; G. Orcutt,F.Bcnson,B, I3ubcr, FAA-AT30; R. Theisen, M. Louis, MnDot;
7, C.c�nnell, �mpire Township; G. Dowuing, EQB; T7. Osberg, City of Hastings; L. Freese, City of
m
RQsemount; D. Wels�h, City af Appie Valley; C. Galler, Ciry of �armington; H. Tresset, Ravenna
Tc�w�ship; J. Huber, FAA-ZMP ARTCG; L. IviCC�be, Mesaba; 7. Fitzpatricl:, Marshan"1'ownship; C.
H�witt, University of Mirusesota; L. Burda, Minn. Air National Guard; T. Peterson, FAA-ATCT; �.
Marnin, Ciry of Eagan; K. Kramer, MPCA, E. Macbeth, Minn.-1Visc. Boundary Area Carnmission; C.
Case, A. �iurlburt,B. Se.nness, M. Filipi,B. Ohm, Met Council; l�i. Anderson, City'of Minnea�olis; P.
Gaodwin,.Goodwin Communications; L.Dallam,J. Naverette,R. Madgwick,E. Futterman, HNTB; M,
Ryan, L. 7. Fartman, 7. Unn�h, Iv1AC
I,arry Da�lam, �INTB, provided the Comrniitee with an overview �f comments received regardi�i„ the
St�ping ]aacumeat/Draft Scoping Decision Document and th.e public meeting hald in Rosemourit on
Iviarch 18. Apprvximately 154 peaple attendeti t�e public meeting with the m�arity of comments
focussiug on opposition to the Dual Track Process and how to stop it. Written comments were received
from the U.S.I�ept.of the Interior,Pcdcra2 Emergency Maiiagem�r►c AgGuc;y, DNR, PCA, MnD�t, State
Histvrical Preservation Offics, Iviinn, D�pt. oP Agriculture, Met Council, Dakota Caunty, and the cities
of Hastu�gs and Inver Grove Heights. These comments reiated to 1) infrastructure improvements and
impacu thereof; 2) induced developm�nt and associated impacts; 3) iznpacts on Hastiags including lost
develapment opportunities; 4) impacts on eagles,wiidlife,recrearional lands, etc.; S)bird strike haaards;
6) description of how community, regional and economic impacts will be included in the pracess; 7)
effects of Koch Refinery on operat�ng efficiency, and 8) expanding farmland analysis. The Scaping
Decision I3ocument has heen modified ia aceordance with comments received and all cflmments have been
� reSpOtxied to in the revised document. EQA comme.nts will be it�cluded prior to final actiqn 4n the
Scoping Decision Docun�ern.
Srian Oh�n, Metropolitan Couneil, prv�ided.the Committee with a haxtdout sun�.mariz.ittg II�G�ruvisiuzt�
of the i�irport Development Act(ADA}. The ADA requires tha Councit to adopt criteria and guidelines
for the regui�ti.on of use and development of the "airport development azea" v�+ithin 120 days aftar a new
in�jur airpurt site selected by MAC is approved. Mr. Tocho questioned ii'the ADA would apply to MSP
ar would n6w legislation be requiretl; Mr. C�hm indicated that the ADA does not apply ta MSP and that
the Cauneil will be laoking at airport protection measures for applicatfon around MSP. The Cauncil is
ci,tnentl� working with MAC and Blc}vmington� ensure the protection of the Nortb-Sauth Runway if
a decision is made to expand IviSP. Mr. Tacho asked for clarxfication regarding the noi�e policy
cantQurs ext�nding beyond the c�evelopment area: Mr. Ohm indicated that the ADA de�neci rhe "airporc
developmern �rea" as aiI or a portion of the property exteuding out three to five miles from the proposed
baun�iaries of the site and requires that the Council develop aircraft noise �ones which could extend
heycmd the airport development area. Mr. Tocha asked whst enforcement mechanisms would be used
MAY-28-1993 08�07 FROM METRO AIRPORTS COMM TO 94235203 P.�3
if the noise wnes go beyond the Al�A. Mr. ohm stated the Council will work wiih the comrnunities, II';
the county, and MAC to estabiish the criteria and guidelines for various land use and 4evelopment cUncr�l
measures. Further discussion of the ADA related to reimbursement of damagcs to property own�rs
��If � m
.res in fm the a
l' II
g pp icat�on a£the development control measures.
Barb Seamess, Metropalitan Couucil, reviewed the Metropolitan I3evelapment Investment Framework I
(MDIF} � it r�et�tas to airport deveIopment options. The C�uncil has been using gopularion and
employment fore�asts to determine what direction future development of the region should take. Ms.
Sennes reviewesi tt�e two opti�ns that are currently being considered. These are Option 1: Responding
tfl�rk,et uends (Couacil wvuld luok at influencing trends with ineentives) and Option 2: Shaping af the
region(rather than incentives there would be more government intervention). Under Option 1,the airport
is i�iiially SP.en as an i5land with development not immediately occurring. Spin-off development would
oeeur in one or two nodes atong transportation eorridors that connec.�t l�ia airpurt to tha developed part
vf th�tegion, dptian 2 considers the airport as an island with development occurring only in urbanized
az'eas. The Councit will be asking for formal cornments from the public regarding the MDIF. Mr.
Tressel asked how it was determined that the airport w�uld be an island. Ms. Sennes indicated that
duriug the process of revising the MI7IF, the Councii held discussions with different gr4ups ta get their
apinians abaur issues facing tba region. It was determined that it would he importani to focus
developrrtent associated with an aispoft back toward the center of the regian rather than allowin� more
urha�sgrawI.
Mark�iI'ipi, Me�ropolitan Council, and Larry Dallam, HNTB, reviewed the work program far ground
trans ortation i
p mgacts for the a3ternarive sites. Activity forecasts will be used to determine capacity
i'�.StTaints for peak h0urs 2:r�d daily trips anti wili also be com arcd with che no build o tion. Diff e ' �'�
p p ar ntial
impacts of addition,al capaeity needed for the alternative sitas will be considered in the sita selection
phase. Impacts wi11 be addressed for each site and include impacts on historiG structures, addi�ional
twise caused by traffc, and resideuces and bus�nesses that require relocation, '
The next agenda item focttssed on the regionaIicommunity impacts tv be considered in the site selection
phase. Mr.Tocho ezpressed his cancerns regarding the regionat/community impacts work program. Roy '
Madgwick, HNTB, asked the Cammit[ea to focus on the criteria to determine wh�re there are signifiCant '
differences between tha sites, and that the level of detail of analy�i� he consistent with avlilable data,
Mr. Futterman reviewed the communitylsocial impacts criteria tharhave been proposed thus far and ask�d
for Cammittee input to determine which impacts need to be considered in selecting a site. Mr, Tacho '
suggestect ihat tttG Cuituuill�t��pravidcd with information rcgarding whcre the 3-S miie AIaA boundary
would be, what tha sigruficant natural resources af the region are, and where the noise contaurs may
extend beyond the deveiapment area to help d�termine what shoutd be included in the analysis. Mr.
Toclto reiterated his concern that regional significant natural resources uevd t�be icleneit'ie�i as tliey reIate
to ttze 3-� avle ADA boundary and the public's perceptivn of this issue.
ivir.Futkerman reviewed an updated handout on the site seiection criteria that will be discussed at the next
C4inmittee meeting, as well as graphics of the three candidate sites. The graphics indicate shit�.s in �I'
runwxy orientation to mitigate im�actc. Mr. �utterman noted that due to these shifts, runways no longer
cross the VermiI}ion River.
The meeting adjaurncd �t 3:15 p.m. ,
Tn-rqt_ P.r�� ,
� GOVERNORS TASK FORCE
*
DUAL TRACK AI�.ZPORT'PL�'�]yNII�tG PRO�ESS
Meeting #1 �
7:30 a.m.
Wednesday, May 26, 1993
Room 10 �
State Office Buiiding
l. Call to Order ' �;� �
2. Organizational Mat�ers
a} Introduction/Background of Members
b} Governor's Charge to Task Force
c) Preliminary Discussion of Public Input Process
3. Overview of Fxisting Legislation
4. Hi.story of Major Airport Planning in Twin Cities Area i
5. C�urrent Schedule for Completion of Dual Track
Planning Process
6. Discussion of July 1 Preliminary Assessment
7: Re-visit Proposed Public Input Process
8. Future Meetings
a) D ate
b) Time
c) Location . .
� � METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport �.
s��S 44y�n .
6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis,MN 55450-2799
�t Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax(612) 726-5296
gg''+;,A,To•.s°°� . � . . .
DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLA.NNING� PROCESS
SITE SELECTION STUD
Technical Advisory Committee Meeting
� Tuesday, May 25, 1993, 1s30 p.m.
North/South Viking Room
MAC General Offices
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Nigel Finney, Chair
AGENDA
. 1, SITE SELECTION CRITERIA
AND PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS
The Meuopolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE• AN�KA COUNTY/BLAINE• CRYSTAL• FLYING CLOUD• LAKE ELMO• SAINT Pt1UL DOWNTOWN
METROP4LITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
,�.,�„N,
Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport
f�' *'. 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis,MN 55450-2799
-*�? Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296
�'��„;�«.s��'
TO: MAC Commisioners
Site Selection Study Technical Advisory Committee
Site Selection Study Task Force
State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning
FROM: Nigel D. Firney, Deputy Executive Director - Pianning and Environment
RE: DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS - FORECAST UPDATE
DATE: May 17, 1993
In 1989, at the direction of the Minnesota Legislature, the Metropolitan Airports Commission and the
Metropolitan Council began a planning process designed to determine whether Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport should be expanded to meet future demand, or whether a new replacement airport
should be developed. As part of the initial work in this study, a forecast of aviation demand for a
prospective 30-yeaz period (to the year 2020) was prepared in 1989. Due to significant changes in the
aviation industry since that time, an update of the forecast is currently being prepared.
In order to complete this update, a series of expert panels have been held to discuss forecasting
methodologies, aviation related inputs and assumptions, and socio-economic inputs and assumptions.
As part of this work it became obvious that an approach ro forecasting that focusses on scenarios
would be the most appropriate procetlure to follow. A series of scenarios have been developed to use
as the basis for the forecasting effort.
An expert panel has been formed to review and discuss these proposed scenarios. 1fie panel is
scheduled to meet on May 27, 1993, at 10:00 a.m. in R�um 303, Terminal Building, Minneapolis-St.
Paul International Airport. Lunch will be served at nuun, and the session is scheduled to end at
approximately 3:00 p.m.
If you are interested in observing this session, pleasz �unta�t Jenn Unruh at 726-8189 by May 21.
The Metropolitan Airports Gommission is an affirmative action employer.
Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE• ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE•CRYSTAL• FLYING CLOUD• LAKE ELMO• SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN
Page 1 Revised: 07—May-93
DUALTRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY
..{;.�,.�,:�:.:::�:>��•>•.
SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS
�����.l��'�::;,:�
** Significant Chan e
F A C T O R S /G R i'T E R !A CHANGES IN CRITEHIA
AIRPORT CHARACTERISTICS
OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY
* Main runways usage with max.allowable crosswind of 13 knots °�):
o;r;•: f xN.:a•toxs+•.x. .�.•..,x.,.••....�•,;.,. �.•,�.v. y,,... +,�,,n. .,r.,�y;•,.x•,�;;,h .
::.*.:.::::>:�i�=.�'��t'i... , ��:�":������srs��;�'":';� c�:z�: �I#�::•+�tiY�1��ii?;.{���:4 No si nificant difference among sites.
��:3�,.�:,�'...,,:,..:.:.,,....>....,,..w...:.::...,:..�....�,�#�,::...:.'�,:.... .,..,.:,�.,...,...<,,.r:�„ 9 �
*���Annuat taxiing cosi: �
* Annuai airs`pace travel cost: ,
:s..:�1; ;,;tt:,f::..�>;o:«•r•r,..;:;,+.:,:�•':5'r:'•S:%5}:y:y,.:,+.�.z'.'`h;.
..r.�Y� '�r .:k{:.�::%.<`;>.r.:�.v...�:;�N<:Y:�:<::�.h,•,;.:,..x..�.::�>��s>�:?� On summa wiii be shown.
:`:;�:;{q�«�;::, ..::.����:;�"':.; .:::f2�'`��.r .•3:� •::.^..�:f.:.«:..::.. ..<,::y;.5.',..c�...:�.. N �Y . ..
:;:;r..J}.:::��:�i+>..s` i.:i:.ti+••r.}:S•F•f::k,+:ti.^a.��r::ti•.;�.5'•:a{r?�u:;}.;,5`;r.;,r;:r,y,•;,.;}.?,7',>;,p•;a i'fi?':�;`>;''�'.��'�.':it�:'e:�t �.
��;:w'"•y<:z,. tvC�+.+;..r:;.,,'�. �.r�,,+..5',�,>"y,,: ",.}�.�...r. . ,.,l,y.:. .
..i«:��"��:.���4J :,•''•„��,'�':.:.�..?:;��;<.•r:�.C^�`:�`��.•��'.' ::;P:rr�r��T�,.�'�,�3�,,:+�.,'y.:g,� : �x'•ri,>
�'?�+sj:•`::«�.,._A•,.,,•.,•>,,Y.�•:�r•.4tG�y,:�F`. :i+.' �i•.r}.�. ,,..t�:.,A�6+�'.��,,+r.rf•..•..•:•���•.,.:»p.r�•:,•`yk. .�.;N�,���3;�r¢.. ^5;� . .
;•t�''.w!'`.z!!Y{�N�:'..'� '����c�� f�����.. � � � dS��3���
'>`,n,..r�r2:;:;.�6x1••LyW".'.t�s ��'���,}� ' ,d.. 1,�.�;i�F3���.;•.�i•y„i.+.�jc, .�;'�/"� �
� '''3:•s:+r:ioi� ':4!. .•,�:�����'��y',��i�, ''.�n;i ` .+9'r::o�r'!�'C` . . .
s2rp:.ix"+.,��.������.�.�,.�.�.�,.�j,��.�.�,,,.,... 9�+::v...;;�A ^f:4..•�.�y . .
�i....,.r,>;e,.'^y, {?...;<•;,:•,%.'v::•':..:..:.:;,•:.• .. t� 6 p �?,:,.:•,Y.;.; � i''x �•r9•.•�;}:;h..}{,� .
�rti:;> ::..,.� . ,.:.::• .: :.:...,�...» nwl,.;..;^.,.W'.•:}•::iy;.viy+;::hh.�'J.�'1••.�.+'�✓�if:�:h.��.#:.�;:.:.:��::�;�.;.:��c:� 'rfi differencesamon sites.
.�':tE,€�I�.�#:�t.#7�t��k�tl��#�;x�t�f�.���.» l '>ss�:�.�::�x:��.v:,s:>.�:::<: �<�.�.�;,;. No sign cant g ,
:......::::..:.. ...... .,..... ...... .
*� Assessment of potential visibiliry impact from Pine Bend Refinery which may
negatively affect airport operations.
AIRSPACE INTERACTION
* Assessment of airspace interaction (including other airports and enroute
structure :
SITE EXPANDABILITY
* Runway expandability potential (additional runways and additional length):
* Terminal area expandability potential:
* Cargo&other facility expandability potential•
-ae>...::oc.•r?..;qy,y,v�:�:•..•>+xa,x.., .,.::.�:,r'<�.•�:•xv.;-:.o..,.,>:Gxo.�;`�#•{,r•, ��+t•''�'+.6'� �:v:•:'.::�::q,9;:;::;.<,•rdj•xj�?
:�:::; �ct� a� ��tt.t y��::�'�..:r:�?�,s4:�>.:�•�.�..•.�,.�.�.;x<.:.>.:r:N:•�.�•^�v�:��.�::w Moved to'Land Use Plans' and modified.
:,.v:::�t:......�:,...,. ,i
:o:r�:�f:++�,4,�„F,XY53::�... �yNi!�is�t�t�..:..� .;f�r�t•r::r...fi:`�...s.�kriv,'..•k�..t:vr::.:',<:i:'a:`•.<•:Cx<3:•,::k..S . .
SITE ACCESSIBILITY
* Differential travel time to airport from --
Minneapoi►s City Ha{L•
Saint Paul City HaIL
Anoka:
Chaska:
Hastings:
Shakopee:
Stiiiwater:
* Differential travel time to airport(in minutes)from major activiry centers
in region(weighted average):
* Differential increase in intra—county travel times(for non—airport users):
* Differential increase in inter—couniy travel times(for non—airport users):
* Total lane—miles nf roads requiring relocatior�,by type:
* Total lane—miles of roads requiring improvement, by type:
* Residential population, businesses, and other facilities displaced due to off—
site impacts, airport aceess road&differentiai roadway irnprovements:
COMMUNITY/SOCIAL IMPACTS
�'����'��� ':.�� { ����'��:���'�x',, � ` ` Im acts that would be addressed under A�A
�.•.:`:� �.'�I�';.;'� ����� �.+�..� " ' p
? ° '"'�:':''`'•...;;.�..', ."`' ``"`�. „�{� ., � '+�±'����%; � are already described and measured under
*'+ � ��)i~ �h • �1� l7n'k{y �
S �'S
r��.w •,ee��{y+��,�:�a•>•�3,.k,'�"u,.•:� :�c•:.::��•��•�,�o. %�'h�'°'.a,>,,n�;'J�i,''..,�..{.'.....�>�`,,,�'.`'!�"i'.��:�f.� other criteria. .
� � ��;,•':w, ..�f;ky���.x.�'�a:y�;..;.j.:r�:•xrt•'�r+;.��e������•.,s�"..,',,.,•.%•„r',•}2.ti.'t;:}� '„}.•••:t�:••;:•.?F••'•"• ��.:?<.r. . .
, ,y S'��� • `
�;.,'. { ,;,p. . . •
��:`.' �.:• �l. F�l f V . . . ♦� ti ii��. � ��n .
M
. ..".+�,�:• �Nr•' a.S h }.�' �,•`i.,�x'+ G9'fRt�.:��i;+,� �'`' 'k':F��,;�;;,'r�v, ,�'f,�•. ��, �.•,;.'r .
ti.. . •••�'�':�'i�;'.:�a���'�k�,� dx�".�:r.;�i,i:r' .• .+y. ' a#".+.��'{.5:'�i��E%.��'i? . . � .
Source: HNTB/Study Team Analysis Metropolitan Airports Commission
age 2 Revised: 07-Ma,y-�3
DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY I��
.. .,:.,::..:-•�:.:�:;::::::
SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS
�?��1�t3l�?';;:,':,:
** Significant Chan e
FACTORS/CRITERIA CHANGES`IN CRITEAIA
DISPLACED COMM
UNITIES/PEOPLE
* Existing municipalities displaced due to airport development:
* No.of people within site boundary relocated dus to airport development(Year
2000 popuiation):.
*�>:>�i�:''�"�:�`�li�°�'`�"K�:1t��':}�.fi. .,.,�.�.. �,. n,. .,..,�.:...,...:. ,.r;,.:.,
.. ..1'►?.:::..f::............:..,.,.,:::..::::.,,.::::.::,:.:::.:....:..::.:::���..�r��.:.��:;i�."t�:>....�.�,��......�..��.�'"'."#�A�::,:..: Counting hausehoids duplicates counting
*���No.of people displaced due to roads and utility construction/relocation{Year peapie eriterion.
..200o population:
,�y ..,.,:.:,. »,...,......., ,
*'::::�ii�i���.��`�.:;.::,..,..��.,[:��` 5�{ <�.�``;��'�n,::,.�Y.:j.',z.,.,:.:�..,..< .,..�:M:.:�y�..::
...................::::•.;`.�F.�.:�,,.,.,�,..,..,'�,.`,•...�,.'..,.r::.•:.v.-;-r:����:n!�:C7.'3v,.,.�,'""„�,.1,�•,,.�,.,i•.,.,.,��,,,.,v':��>:������,..,.�..........1,;T.,?,:• . . .
LAND USE PLANS
* Acres of current residential&commercial/industrial development in site
boundary(from local comprehensive plans):
* Acres of planned residential land within Ldn 60 and Zones A&B (from local
comprehensive pians):
**Distance from site boundary to major industrial facilities Identffies-possible cor�flicts with Pine Bend
**Height and other development contstraints at industrial sites due to Refinery and other industriai uses.
airport:
c nnM
O UN
ITY SERVICES/INFRASTRUCTURE I I�''
?k:.:>��,t ��:�:yrr .;;o»xvrl;x;l:;w.�.::�r.ti;'v^,.;:"+M't,,w.'."..'�'..�r• :�kr�••:c;<+`:"£"v' ;h� . I�.',,
k :�f y ,,e�i�:i. .:r:,.;i;•3.,;..;..;9 c.:x.•:<:':"::t;....r,:;r+.y,`,�,4+;:%:<v';
i'.�<r�.�„�,,,ti::`�+:::t:f4A�.. '44Y��;,.•�.���:o.:..•,;'...� ..{...!,/.,.S,S..,,..,::::+:a.:.:.,.v.�:...,r;..,.,;. ;.;.�'..t��:;•'� 8
:�. ....r.. .�...%� ...... ��exar�t...<•.xss:h�.•ff.cata*.a�„✓,r...•x.r.ac�.�sfn.�r,ri.o-r.•.}:� Ther are no hospitals in the search area. �I
* Number of schools within site boundary: .
* Number of places of worship within site boundary:
* Number of cemeteries within site boundary: II;
* Percentage of 1990 assessed school district tax base eliminated (by district):
* Percentage of 1990 assessed township tax base eliminated (by jurisdiction):
NOIS
E IMPACTS
�.�,.� .... �..n:�.....r:w}�:...;� F . .
�� . ... , �{ .. .;( ... :.+• • �
�Y�7��i7T•. •:n �y.v;...T
�::............. � "'"'r t�"�E't`.�$��1 �::::�;'::::::i::;?<:�:`�::::;`: No need to use 1990 ulation--double I,
:<: 1��.......,...........„�.:::::::•;....:::.:::�.r»::.;�r::.>,;���:<<:.:�•:,::.:::•::<:':.'•::::;.�:..::,.: PoP
...:.....
.::..::. .:::.:::.:::,:..;�.�.....
�.;.::�.:.:
�::;:.:.: . . ..t.::::::.: :. ::•.:., . .. ....; ;z,:�::<:: �
.�;;:{:,:,: countin � 2000 ulation better reflscts
;:::1:...�::}�?Pi��.�;::r..�:�€�#::.:;�ri�:�i::��;.�..�'`..►.'..:��� ''r;��>:.� ,
::..
:::. ,.......� .:n.:. � �� 9 PoP
:;:.:...;..;...:;.;.;..;,... ....�......:....,v hF.. �,+:�':�r;:t;4>.w);.;;;;•,. �
�:.,;. �.,,.i.,;Y .s:+.•:::<:5;.••:•;•?�:i:;::k�::;;::
'��`:::1���,��.1.a�'���'��'1;�;�„�I�,��„$�:;�;;<:;:,,,,k, ;. impacts on decision day.
* Year 2000 population residing within Year 2020 Ldn 65 in Search Area:
* Year 2004 population residing within Year 2020 l.dn 65 outside Search Area: �Ii
* Year 2000 population residing within Year 2020 Ldn 60 (excluding Ldn 65}:
* Year 2000 population within Year 2020 L10 contours for all runway ends
* Number of noise—sensitive land uses within Ldn 65 by rype:
*
Number af noise—sensitive land uses within Ldn 60{excl. Ldn 65) by type:
* Average daily number of arrival and departure overtiights on principal fiightracks
below 5,000 feet(departures);below 2,000 feet(arrivals):
STATE SAFETY ZONES A&B
* Year 2Q00 residentiai population within state safety Zones A&B in Search Area:
* Yr.2000 residential population within state safety zones A&B outside Search Area
w;.,,,.::.. „T.,,,..,.,>..:, .,>:i... �:. , �, ,»,�..:..:.�...: .,.. �.,.,.„ .�,.... �,.�.. '
'"�:'::�ti�����f��R{K�{�!.� " �`�• •'����� •'�"•"•�'<:��;''¢:'�:���^��'�. Countin households du licates countin
.�. ,.,��;�����'�• '�'���'� .��� � 9 P 9
� •f�:�•::::•.�:• :<:.>.,..::,.. <:•.g�..::;:;:;.: �.•,:?cu•;:•..••.;....;. � tr
::.:.;:��t�t'� :�i���.� �:�:: �� >. '>�...`��.>�''�,���.:�.: people criterion. '�
�::�`:: ��+.:...�..:.:..,:.:��„ ..��..��:�..�.�N�����,;,;
*��Year 2a00 employment within state safety zones A&B in Search Area: ,
* Ysar 2000 empioyment withi�state safety zones.A&B�outside Search Area:. {m
'��>�`.�s.��'.�..�`!?�;�`������� l� `�.l.�` �;` Number of em lo ees is referred criterion;
.:::.:..... ..:....::...�.:.......:.,.....:..........,�.,....::,:.,::�.,..::�,.;;�������>:::::��.���. P Y p
:,: .•:.::..:::......,... ..: . <.,.;f..;. . .zw...,..
';�::'���f.:t���! ���tt���.�:ti�t��:�f�� �;�lt#�;��;��� number of businesses wiil be reparted in AED.
.... a...,»,�..�::::..�.M....:...:...,..,.,:.:.,. .�.:..s..�.•...�..,.�, .�� x
'I'
3
ourc •
e. HNTB/Study Team Analysis Metro litan Air rts Commissi n
P� Po �I
Page 3 Revised: 07—May-93
i �
DUAL TRACK AIRPO�tT PLANNING PROCESS
NEW AtRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY
�.::..,:,,.::,.:::,,,>::::.:»:•
SITE S�LECTION ANALYSIS
��:'. }�•�:><:>:
:�::��til�Qi`�:'....:;�:y,:
:?�::'::;•:::.:..
** Significant Chan e
FACTORS/CRITERIA� GHANGES IN GRITERIA
TOTAL POPUI.ATION IMPACTS SUMMARY
* Total on—airport population within site boundary:
* Totai off—airport populatian within state safety zones A&B and Ldn 60 in S.Area:
* Total off—airport population within state safety zones A&B and Ldn 60 outside
Search Area:
HISTORIC/ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
**No. of potential NRHP archaeological sites likely to be affected by airpo Native American and 19th century Euro—Am.
facilities criteria combined.
**Number of potential NRHP individuai standing structures/districts and Standing structures,standing structure districts,
rural historic landscapes likely to be affected by airport facilities and rural historic landscapes combined.
* No.of NRHP standing structures differentialiy impacted by off—airport roadway
Year 2020 traffic and highway improvements:
FAfiM AND NON—FARM BUSINESSES
* Number of 1990 non—farm employees within site boundary relocated due to Number of employees is preferred criterion;
air��/v�rt develoPment: number of businesses will be reported in AED.
{.i;.�,v,:•.x ;{.::M:..w.. ..;{,M:HF.�:{x.. ;;;G:;{�;•..r{.,, r .v,•::FINvr.r.:.y{rrr;;.,v,�•;�i.vq;,m,xe„�.vy�r, �ii.n'F.'v. .. . . .
� �� h % r.;:n�•:
�<;:'.�i�rt�:��::�;�c��:�a�i'•���#�::�:::t�.G�:�� •:`:�:s��:.��`•�`•3•:�:.•.>.�•`�A:�,;:;;:;.:z,;
';�ii,:::fit.;•.xo>x.:>:::+:.•:.::.�:.;x.;;:o::::,>::::.y;:,.;.+.,::•.>•<•>:t;,.;>;;:�.;::.>;:a:;..;;•.•,• ..:•�.;rTa•:•::n:i::::•>:,:.::•:.•:::��..::y..,.:•C;.,w,�/�.,:.::t+.;,.
. a �:t��+.•y,.•,•:,,.•,•:!¢;•,.; 4.•:;'::.8•..a•,:4r�r,•. ;:•,:!.,
ts♦ �� ?•'':�:•,'•.`:::'.�:•�.. • �.�s�^.
;' '`:f:��:'•:•`:2;;`,•:;{:•`::,;::%�":•`:•�'r.t. :..,�.;" ;.;w..,.` . .
..3x ' ;.;�.. . i.t.ki;:;�:a;+<:;?i;+'.':�»... .:,;•. .:':,4}'••'i;}:.�;;i:�:`:�;•:v`:•.. ':�..,, .
•:.Et�..• .:r•'r.�:+:�5•�i:�;.?:�iy.'•.:::;;;:�?i;:•',;;3,!:.,;i#:',t;wf,�i�.,•:e.,•.�,..ya.:x:.»K�.ax`x'f.,• n..a)�r�r'i.:%' �
. .::;���::t.• ::.f.:,.�',•M1,...•:::� ...t::.>:•::+:::...:,,�.,�ti{,..:::v::•v
*������'"'"�����`'�''� • y There are too few dai farms to be inciuded as
.::........::..,::::. . . ....:�...,
.,.............. ..� :,. . ,..
`�;�`#��E;.�#;�:l:�..�...3,f••;�'f�t3°���.��''•t:�;>��:��#��:�:�:��::?�!���1.'�� rY
*Y�Number of farmsteads within site boundary to be relocated due to airport a separate criterion.
development:
FARMLAND
* Number of acres of prime faRnland within site boundary (including
undrained land):
'�����•� "�''""�"''"''��'`'''' ""'"�"�"'} One farmland im act criterion is ade uate to
.:�:.':�':'�3�::#��::��::�tG�:,�,";:,".��,:.:.:���:::��f:�%":': `:'`��:�i....::..�&:;f::<,��:�:>: q
...�;�•;:<.::,•:•:••>,::�#� �. �..:?�,:,.�,�.., P
r<:...........:....:....:,.:..::.:......,..........
:.y . � . ...,,:•....�. •.........>.........>.x•::;t::i�a:t>:'+.••.��:�:r+:•„.r;;:;o:....�,�.,ti!•;�.;:?:::i:x;::=;x.:;r::r,,•..,,,.s....r..} . . .
�!>';'�iJ�"'�:��;��:�#:;"��'���c:�.::�.�r.:��::I�:. . .::b��;;,:.:;�,s>N�,?f:::� com are the three sttes. Other�mpacts wiN be
.;>t€�..>:.::<.;.:.;:::.::_:<.::::.:::...,:.�.>:<:.,. .::.�,: :.:::��;�::��.. ;.:.t:•::,:�.::::.�:.::-::.:.:.�:. p
....:..... ,:,:...::..
..,.:.:�::.... . . :....
�:>:>: � : .. ��;�.�.>:.:�.. .:....: ......�.:;�~~ :<;;<:�:::::::�Y>:;r>��n:,;�:::<�:�:.:.::<:r.:::::;::��: �y�
:.:>.;��ti'��t`. .;� :.��:��::�<�:�;i.���� .'.�::::••>4:.:•:>•:F•:•>�••:w.,:.:..::s.�:.>:., ;.:«:•,::�::�; re rted in AED.
::n.:•:•::{:•r::vl::.�.:::.��..ri:::..;.;.yh..Lw:::ii:i:i::::.'.v�::vw::�,rr.n:•:r:':�v�:+.v:r:y}��.�•..•:::i�'�.�•;:v;�•:,;,r F'.'
..:.. .......; •...�::::•:::.::.::.•::.......{:.:;:.; .
...:..;..,y,'x..:y.},,{,;,, ,: 3 t .
*,:.:... , . . . . . ,; h f'. .,n.,,:' :i{yY';
jn ���,( s� :�;;:•';
� ...Y:�.n•.... . . .���v��i'!!n+.^.. . �� ..�.�.4{y��✓��4{�F+�}niC�..4k�.+I��hl.{. .
.,-:::...
r ........ . .•:4:<
PUBUC PARKS/RECREATION LAND
:•.:::�:.:r�.>:••.•:,••,•,;••::�;r;.:::��•:••:<m+:•»:•;•>:.<,,....;.:.,•.�;.:..,a, ••,.:y,Y<n;;:,,•.,;y;.x:;r.,7r. f. .•v,>»,.�yo:.,.,:..;� t'I t
'"::;�yi:�'(�:•�.<• .��::•�I�::. �;;�. �:;:��:a+�3�:"'� �:�{.>::�::�:>"�.�'r�'�'�`•':�•�� Numberofparks'maybemisieading; be er o
::>.::... �� �! � � �::����+..::,;,�r.`..•.,{�,:.:��.:•...
...,............... :.......... .......... ........,.,........,.,.................:• : . :.....••,�,�,�.r:;�;.,�:....;•,.:•..:.:.
**Number of acres of park/recreation land within site boundary: count acres.
�,,„..:..,•�..:....•..;N..; f�. :::..�::....:. , :..�.w #�y .,•.��;.,;fi<..,.,..,...;;.;�;;y;�
:„;:�'!�f�1;C;1�E`•. ��+; ' ,t �: «>',y�,.�;�.,.��y.,+.}�.,••::�.:s:;�•...
:��� ������..:��i�S��C�'.w���u.CK\S.T'Tu'F.��Y�.Y•'�w'�6CGT6F£S�yw.L �
**Number of acres of park/recreation land outside of the site boundary
and within the Year 2020 Ldn 65 noise contours:
Source: HNTB/Study Team Anaysis Metropolitan Airports Commissior:
_J_ .
flcvtJc.�. v1—rviqy—,7„)
� •
DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS I
NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY '
: ... ..: ,.;.,,,;:�+
SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS ��'
������r� r:::. �
** Signficant Chan e �
F A C T O R S/G'R 1 T E.R I A CHANGES W CRITERIA
OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS
* Number of monthly arrival/departure overtiights occurring over designated rivers
at altitudes of less than 2000 feet.
WETLANDS
* Number of acres of wetlands within site boundary: ,
* Number of acres of wetlands likely to be removed by construction or operation of �
airport facilities I
I
WASTE DISPOSAL SITES ' '
* Number and type of known landfills within airport boundary:
* Number of known contaminatad waste sites within airport boundary:
WATER QUALITY
* Number of acres of Prairie Du ChienJJordan Aquifer within airport II�
boundary class'rfied as
Very Highly Sensitive:
Hi(7h Sensitive: II'
� �,y'�µ .}.;�"' r.1�,,• �y:r.�.iiiF+::.:::pvx:..;.v:rr.ix�.vx . F.'F,.�•7:?rii;'ii:;.:tiii`.:.'•:'+.':.`::jr,.::3�.•'+.•i}'!.^:•i?iiiYhii:i?^i�Yi::.:::4'•: .
����•LI��{{J:RFn•n:�,NiR:f v ,M,i� • F}i::�iii}:{:::•.:i�:•S:i•:i:iYi%{}iiiS}'r:•::ii:}iii}iSiiF:.;•}; I���,�'.
:::.....E�`+...l.t...::�.�;F!'i�; � .�'�.�z:: «:.�•::::::,,.,.:•:::•::.:::..•..•.�.�:::.�::::::::<::•::;:::::::r��::>>:: AII sto —
...��:<�+.�t>:.:.::.�"`;�!`�....r.......... rm water runoff will be treated on site.
::..x:.::::,::::•: ,:;:,:<::,::•;:.;>:;:.:.<.:.r.>:::•
;•:>:<::..:;:•>:.........•:.y;;;.,:> ..::.,.... .....�.:>::::::•..:.,:;.;...,...........
,�::::: ... .......... . : :..;; .:... . .
?:�:�i*���E� .
. •::... :.:.::
... ,. ��� •: . ...; ,,....::•.:o-
•::.:.:::::::;:•.:.:,.::•::::::.:;•: �,
..,.........��:l�1. I��tf.>�i::�::t:�€�::C�E•.:��f3� ..:..:.,:.:.:...,. ;..::.::.<::�::`•<;,:::;::,� Differential
::.
•::.::.;::,....�.�..�.....�.......�..,...�3...::.::,............::::..�..�..?::.:..�::.�:.:..:::::.�::::::.::::::..:�:::::::..:........�.v:�'tlt#,..�.:::::::.�:::: costs associated with treatment i
::........r::::..:::
:::::::>•::.�:::.;::............. ..,.... ..:::::.,::::.:.::._:.>::.::F:::;;::•:�.:�.::::.:.:::...,..:::::.,r..,.,::::::::.:.:.::.::.::.;:.::::::.;;:;:.;;;�:.;>:.>:.:.:<;.;:::.�:::::.�:::.�:::::
:.:::.;..};..v.;:.>�:.:,:.::::::::.�:..�::.�::::>:::.::::.::v....::::::.:.<.:.;>;;:.:;::::::.::,<,: i,
:::::: �: � �� . „ .
:.:,.. .
:':.:.:�.c� . �> ................. . .
::�.d:. . �:>;}<:::::::::,.::;:,:.::>::::.::: .:�:<.;>::<;.::.;::.:<:«::::::.:::::.�::::::::::.�:.�:::::�:::.
.....r..,.:,. .
:::�........::�!:.:...:.:::::..:<::.::.:..r....•:::f•:•::::::<r;r<::<::;.:.:;•>::>::.4,>:<:::::::::;�<:::�::..�::..:...... will be consi
. ...,.,...,....:.......,.,............f.:..:,..... ,...::.:.,.:::::::::::.�:.::.::�:::..::::., dered in Differential Develo ment
:,:;::.�.:..::::.;..;..;,,:...;.:::::.::::;...,:::::.<.:>::.:;:::.>..•:::.:.:.:.�::.:::: .. P �
�x:>.:•:..
.::.,.,:.:::>::::::><^::::>:.'>:>::::::::�>�:::>::<.:;>::<::::::`::::<.::s:<:>:<'>::::»:::::::':::::<:'::><:>:::;>:;:::>
.............. s
. ��:.• •�::��t:�I :��i :''�':':�"' f�::z::.:s:.::.::::::>;••.<:>:;:•:,.:;.�;::.:::::,::•:>;:.:.:.>:�>:•>::;::s:::>::: ��
:::�.�:................ . ..:�:�'�!�>,:�::<:'�::::>::•<.;::.:.:........' CoStS.
..,�:::::::..:............,............. .:,.,�.::�.;.:::..:::::;<:;._::::::<.;;;;:�::;:.;:.>:.>;:;>;>;>:::< i
::<::>s;:.;;;�:.:::::>:<:;>;:;;:::..:.::::........:::::::::::::...............................
y`::.:?���Bf�: �: .• �>:.;:c:................:...,...:..;...;::.:.......:.... ..,,::..�;<::..,:::;.;>:•:::.>:.;:.:,:.::;•>;��;�.;::;::;.:�.:.;:.::>�;;•:<:;:.;:.;:r;:.::.;�?:>?:>::> '
;:.;:.;:.>::.;:.;:;.;:•::t�t.:�r��s��t:�:...:��:..��..;;��>:�:��:���:�r:�t����::�:::>:::
,::::.........::.::.>::.:;:::,�::::.:..;::::.::.:::.�;_:.>:.:.:.:�:.:>:>;<;�.::�...;:;�;:.:�.:;:.;::>.;;:>:;.;�:.;...:::::.::::::..::�.:.::.:;:.;:.;;:,,.;;:>;;;;:,;;;;>::,;:;;:,,::>.; ,
<;:::::��::�r:t��<:�i::�.;:�.. � � ��:� :: :��:: . :: . . ..:...:::.... .....::::�<:>::><::::::::::;:<::::»»�>::>::>:::::::>;:<:<
....................f.....,.....��#��:�c�:�tal::���#::�€�:.;;;>:.;:.:.:>:�>:;::;,:<.;::.;<.>;:.:;;;:>::
AIR QUALITY
* Increase in regional annual CO emmissions from vehicle trips to/from airport: '
* CO concentrations relative to state and federal air quality standards
BIRD STRII�ISSUES
* Acres of undrained wetlands (Cypes 3,4, &5)within 10,000 ft. of rurtway ends:
* No.and type of conditiors potentially conducivs to bird ytrikes with,r,5 m�les of
runway ends:
ENDANGERED(THREATENED&SPECIAL CONCERN SPECIES �,
'k''`•:z,..�..`.,�.�j,.�..-:�:;`•'.:..'>'•:"..�;>:.,.:,�....r..;:..r . .,.,W,...,. ..„, , ,
•�{ '�� •���.�..� °���I�I�>:;>:, There are no Federaily protected s ecies in
.::. p
� �
:.:.
,:::,..�..�....����n�..:. �>... >
:.:::......::::.::. ....:.:r:,.....:.:,.....:..:;.�
.��.'.�+�i,y� i�.}}ti..},�y��{,},r:_S;�t.v. ;,tj,} ,::�.j. .
'::::?'��'�`��d:,�;t'�?����.�:�:: ..�{;., ..,«:::::,,h.�..::,;r.::•>`{::»:>:. the searoh area.
:;: �..:,::.v:... .:. <..:..:....h:..,::.,•a..�,... >'a3cr,a..i::s.:;.;�..:....:...f
*�� Known communities of rare species(flora&fauna) accordi'ng��to State i
desi�nations within site boundary:
�::':......X..�.�.... v�y.. {�..:::.;:.•::..�.s,,�::#�,�,�,{ , ....,:,v;... ,,,�•..y,y�.•....,,,y.v,yay,}k'k;;;�:}E?:.J.:i?:Y P'p, go
i7;Y�.���:,...��.:jFi���,,,,,,;?t:7i�iJ�3:Ql:�,��i'�' i:ii:�lf• ' :.:i:;M:..;:.�::.,:•::::.:::;::::.:. �� �� `. I���',�, .
:....�:::.,.:.�::::::::::::::.:.:.,.::.�::,:::.:,:<;.:,:;�.;:..:,���.�.::..,,..:,,.s;.:.:::;;;,:. There are no naturai areas in any of the sites,
:>:.;:.::::;::::........ . ,..:....:
*�����:�:'��'i.t�:�tp�€3�:�:�i�#�:'.:..::'i��1�<�#:�{'��'
:::�;,;;,.: ;.::�k�ti�:`'��::'���'� ,;##�: based on DNR surve . There are no bald ea le
.fi.:::�:•::::::._.;..,::.:>:::�. ...�.:.. Y 9
.,::�;.::
::,{.r.
.t...
.�:.r.
�p .:•��:
:::.;•. .
�g� `:»::��:;.:<.:::::::;:::::::>��::::;�::>... ,..�.:.::,.... <>;<::�.;:::.>:<::
.::>.. .a.,..�...,....
...:..:. . <�:.::�:•:, .
+::%£:"'' :..v �':'<:+.•:::7••.
.::+> •
..S`:�-•i.?. (�
�:, f• `'
.ti.�;:.••:v». f:•:
.�,t.:r:•:;•.;•::::•:.s,< .t.C. r.
::+.•:: �
:.:•:. � � r'++7•�w•. .............,...
:.::•. �.�^.::�:�:::�:.r:... •�.:»> .•• �.>;y � nests or roostin areas within 10 000 feet of an
•::>:•..�..... ,•.,�:::::•, .'<.•.•::,;ti,.,.,...:�s:z.4J.+.'ivi:v;'2�:n%:'.• ..':�;::i:t: . '
..r.r..:....�:::.. ...r.)fyiY.ti•:k':4%.:R::}.v�:::.•,e,•.ti•i:t r�.�'i•:'F.:v:/.Nffi:LA��•'/.Av:� } v :: .`7 i j �,'�.
runwa s.
.,.....,. ,.. ....;.. ..,,.....,�x:, .. .w �:«..
�¢ .;r:��^:;Y;.�:;,1.�„�,^{;;.��4,a>2r.,> .nr.,>x,.y».;,a�ar.»w�, .aiv�aY"<• �C��S;[{,+�;r;t;S}':;i",.+�.'F,`!:
)iiI•��� .. . ..��.t;?. ...w•:i:r,,::.d:.\.,+Sti+:t,x;.'�;���"••j•r5�'••:>:v��`}fi:G. �."�r�:�'c••,>.;:•::;:;;•'.;x:::...r..•>:::.>.•.� (� G��
,::�.:.�:.•:�:..,..:.:,4:x<�..:�.::•::::::r,.::�:,..:...wr.::��t�:..:�...�.,r,,,,,..,,..,.K x...t•;�::�•,.:.�..::::::>:::,:....v<::<n:,:.;� Finai runwa and li ht stem locations not et
:Y::x.�:•:•• ,.4..{.:•:�v•;y,..;...:•:•:v:• �.ti•;.••..;.•.;l.{:{:y.r,..,,;ti.,f.?,,n.:�y.;,}}Y .� . .: i.ry::v<y::}:i:. . •7 "7 Y '�
Y
�`��r..��...���w��:�;:��•1�.�1���• •,:�...�c:;... .;.>.::<::>:� established. I
.. ,..,..,..,...���,�.��::��3:�::$�<:::::.:.:..:..,,..:
3ource: HNTB/Study Team Analysis Metropolitan AirpUrts Commissio�l
Page 5 Revised: 07-May-93
, , . ,
DUA�TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION STUDY
:x<x:•,ce;:«::y
SITE SELECTION ANALYSIS
k;�}'!;�i
;�<�:��t�>.::':�:�.:;
** Significant Change
F A C T O R S/C R'[T E R(A CHAt�tGES tN CRITERfA.
ENERGY SUPPLY AND NATURAI.RESOURCES
* Differential vehicle fuei consumption for automobile trips to/from site (gallons}:
....,;..,•,..K .,�. ,�,.•r:..:.:.•;.:;..;•.:::;::::•.,..::::,{..�,:.;•.;•.�;;::r;O�!.y,.z.Er�Y�:'%{•':'���ti�:�4'•:�'r.i'R,+:;:•:i,'Jn,':+/,P,^.ti•\}:ti�i3::�:�:i�.'^:•i$::.'+•:S
*�i�:��p?[�Ci�l�#;i�::��t� �:#�il��}:.»:::::<:r:>:•{:•�<,,,:-;.:{:.�,,{4.i.:.::s>;v.;,;<;{;�<>.:.•�:�<�;v:>rf::>:.>.:>;.;<:: No active mineral ener r ur wit in site
,v.,..:::.:�:.::<:�::::r.:::.>:»::•;:.;>:•>�::•::..•�:.�::,�:�. ::•.•Y.?•FI.•::i.r..}:Y.•.•:�:i•i:•iiyni'w,�¢\';+.y,.yrrr:.:i+::}:.;;:ti;:;•;:4:•}.... / 9Y eso ces h s.
......:v.v
•? { !/ . A ..n:r::ti'6i}:::/.;r�:iii::::;{•'•RSti:+:'r}::v.r••,y,}•.x.;..:•r.•x::i..;:/.•;}}{v;ry•r:^:k:::}vi.:?}:�.x V�'+.o:r'
'�,;.�:�`1�:�+�>��`:;�':�1��#1.�::�#1�����;�,��t��1?��;�?l�$`•,:��.!�8:; Considered under cost.
FLOODPIAINS
* No.of acres af floodway within site boundary:
* No.of acres of floodway fringe likeiy eliminated by airport facilities
* Ability to mitigate flood fringe imp3cts�n site:
DIFFERENTIAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS
* Differential land acquisition costs
* Differential�costs to prepare site for airport construction arising from--
Road improvements{relocated roadways, airportaccess):
Utiliry hookup/relocation:
�*Storm water management: Added to account for cost of water managemen
Topography/soil/geology/floodway structures: on site.
* Community relocation costs:
Notes: 1. Approximate size of airport boundary is 10,000 acres.
2. The criteria for comparison of alternative layouts an the preferred site, and for comparisan of MSP/New Aiprort/No Build wilf
be different from the above. This listing is designed salely for selection of the preferred site.
Source: HNTB/Study TeamAnalysis Metropolitan Airports Comrnissior
SITE SCREENING
The site screening process began in the fall • Differential site preparation costs. the fewest people in terms of noise,and has the
of 1992. Each of the seven potential sites for a lowest ground access time. Also,Site 6 was the
new aitpott was exarnined using 56 criteria within The site screening work included extensive best among the four western sites in most screen-
the following broad categories: input from the Site Selection Technical Advisoty ing criteria,and the study groups felt it was
. Committee and the Site Selection Task Force. important to carry forward at least one site from
•A2�oy't churacte�`tstics-including As a result of the screening process,two both the eastern and western clusters so that all
operational efficiency,airport e�cpandability and eastern sites(Sites 2 and 3)and one western site environmental factors could be properly docu-
ground access times. (Site 6)were recommended to the MAC by the mented.
Technical Advisory Committee and the Task A summ of the site screenin anal sis is
• Community/social im jiacts-includ- Force. The MAC adopted Sites 2, 3 and 6 for ub- � g y
ing displaced communities and people,effects on p shown on the next page.
local land use plans,community infrastructure, lic review and comment in Februraty 1993.
noise impacts,state safety zones,historic/archaea Sites 2 and 3 were recommended for further
logical resources,farms,business,and public study because they do not require displacement of
parks/recreation land. either Coates or Vermillion,they have relatively
low noise impacts,good operational and expand-
• Other environmental imjiacts- ability features,few conditions conducive to bird
including wetlands,waste disposal sites,water strikes,and less than five acres of wetlands con-
qualiry,bird strike issues,biotic communities,and tained within their site boundaries.
floodplains. Site 6 was recommended because it impacts
�
8
...-: _ -.,:.�
� .� _;;�_
SUMMARY Of SITE SCREENIN6 ANALYSIS
SITf 1 SITE 4 SITE 6
•Good site e�cpandabiliry • Displaces Vermillion and Coates •Lowest travel time from metro area
• Few businesses relocated • Highest site prepaxation costs �-Fewest off-site noise impacts
•Virtually no wetland impacts • Proximity to encroaching urban development •Lowest population in State Safety Zones
• Relatively low site preparation costs •Only fair tunway expandability •Displaces Coates
•Greatest potential impact on Hastings • Highest potential bird strike hazard • Higher wetland impacts than eastern sites
•Likely displacement of Vermillion •Two landfills and three contaminated waste
•Less than optimal runway orientation sites w.ithin site boundary
S�'�'E 5 • Site constrained by Pine Bend Refinery
SI�2 • Shorter access time than for eastern sites
• No impact on"very highly sensitive"Aquifer S'��
• Good operational characteristics areas
•Does aot displace Vermillion or Coates •Displaces Coates and likely Vermillion •Lower travel time from metro area than eastern
•Minimal natural environmental impacts •Significant potential off-site noise impact sites
•Few siting constraints •Constrained by Pine Bend Refinery and •No impact on"very highly sensitive"Aquifer
•Longer access time than for western sites Vermillion River areas
• Highest population in State Safety Zones • Displaces Coates and likely Vermillion
• High potential bird strike hazard • Greatest potential off-site noise impacts
S�TE 3 •Second highest population in State Safety
Zones
•Goal operational characteristics •Most significant noise impacts on public parks
•Does not displace Vermillion or Coates • High potential bird strike hazard
•Minimal natural environmental impacts • Highest wetland impacts ,
•Longer access time than for western sites • Site expandability complicated by Vermillion
• Potential impacts on Hastings River floodway
9
SITE SELECTION
I'�i The final phase of the site selection process ronmental,geographic,economic and cost aspects Detailed analysis of alternative layouts for
invol es a detailed evaluation of the three candi- of the alternatives. each site will be conducted during the develop-
date�l, Site 2,Site 3 and Site 6. Some refinements were made to each site at ment of the comprehensive plan for the new air-
'�This evaluation has the most extensive crite- the beginning of the site selection phase to mini- port.
ria ir� he overall site selection process,including mize impacts. Other minor adjustments may Identification of a potential new airport is '
speci c factors to measure the operational,envi- occur during the site selection analysis. slated for early 1994.
SITE SELECTION CRITERIA -
'�'The purpose of the site selection criteria is to CommuniiylSocial Impacts Other Enuironme�al Impacts
help hoose the"best"site from among the three .Displaced Communities/People •Wild and Scenic Rivers
cand� ate sites,and to meet environmental analy-
sis re uirements. These criteria were developed •�nd Use Plans •Wetlands
durir� the site screening process,and were supple- •Communiry Services/Infrastructure •Waste Disposal Sites
men'' d by additional,criteria and detail to meet • Noise Impacts •Water Quality
the d' cumentation requirements of the site selec- • State Safety Zones A and B •Air Quality
tion hase. •Tota1 Population Impacts Summary •Bird Strike Issues
• Historic/Archaeological Resources • Endangered/Threatened and Special Concern
�Ir� rt Char�r�rr�$��C$ • Farm and Non—Farm Businesses : Species
• O rational Efficiency • Farmland • Energy Supply and Natural Resources
•Air pace Interaction • Public ParkslRecreation Land • Floodplains
• Sit�E�andability
•sit�A��essibillty . Differential Developmem Costs
•Land Acquisition Costs
' •Site Preparation Costs
', •Community Relocation Costs
; 10
... _ .. _ . _
SITE LOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS - WESIfRN SIIES
SIT II . SITE 5
�
--, d . �
� �.
o. �� _ e. � _ �
,
.. .. �.� � �s,�. , . ._ � � �- .. j - -�-t� ..p � °I � �, s, �._TTJ�. �• � � .
�. � ' ,.,,� „�� � , . ��.:, i .-� s. , " ��,,,•
. • r,
xT ,� � � _. . . Nr �.
�I. '�_ . 1 .,, .... ' f � � ,
. . �„ .._ . �,. . .; ..
�
�.�, . .. � �- } .... ,a, �� : ... ' . �
...— ^T°�� , a .L.
� � . � . . _.... ` .. �_.� xini .. � . �`a � .I''.. I x�o� �. .
� _ v r� , 1 i ; $ ��„�a ; i "` � _ �8
r ,
a
.,
, ;
s
. �, i � < ._� ��� � � . } f'_i ,,.. ��-- �."' e�" . � i� . . .
.. tl .:_�...-�:�.n n � I,��,.
'. ...y' .) .. •�mii , t�. �F � E Olea� —` ' M� � : L..
� r
�*� � i � �} Y � .
•� � r ion � / i!i �
�.'. I f � �y^ �\, a h n
� E� Dirs � ^ � Y . /1 ¢ . �' __/ - . I . . . . .
. �._ i �;��I : � . � �'��; . � .
�g � _ , ,, . ; .. _ ..._ r . -a� � ` � ;. ., / �_ � . .
s� I .t�+°'^ro y � �� . ti.� ww^."`. -�-k-�� wx , �- .
_ �p=,_ "_ .. ' . .
. . _` � �' �.. .. ___-� �- . . . ..
6, > > _� -t�.� - ;� , ��
� .:
. � �
.: �.
,_ _ _ �� � �
��.. �. .� _ «
`� _... Y , ' ' .. . .
. r'. µ=�� . �-1 � _- 4 ' ' � I P__ . _
1 �. ' 'S" .-- �. ._—: � �-.�.. -:
�—t's�'^'_ d! 'tiEW T f Y�+�^`-..... � MEW� � �
•W t of the Vermillion River,near center of Search Area. • West of the Vermillion River,south of Pine Bend.
•No hwest—southeast primary runway orientation •Northwest—southeast primary runway orientation.
���li, ���7
� .. —
� '' _�, , F, :��r �_ ', • 1� \I� �, �, ;� «. � � t �-i, �
� fEM UHT ��� `�� � � � , ��
. � �
=.,1 ' ; '. "'
'�T A+w' ,. i
� s - � . �9E tR - - m .
: .. �� I r ry�1 �� .: . .
�y" � � ' �'� . - � £-. � /`
P°� 7
�.� r,�;� 7 � _
„ �
�� , . < : _ �,n,.
,
4
. COA 'l — _ �`I�} !
4
I � g `
' .1 � ' I �e�: . �� � 1:. .�- . \ � .. '.x . . ' .
� ' i
sor� �-- I ii i n.. "�n� C . 1-�i�.
_ .:� � L)' ; � � ' ' �� � . �'� � � � � .
�
� ��,.�,� �"�
- `p ci -}- . � , I �� ,.�r-- , � r��- � ��� .
� .v s �h.0 i � .
. �; . � i \ : ..^ ' i I u a nin t � . x^ I M� i� w ..n n �
� a� �e oi.. �� � `� ... / � +, "" ' { J EI ni.. ! ..�/ i
: ' � ._ �. : I � � � � �\ ...
C �
.� � M" ..I,... I _ ,...'� � � ,��. p.A..uw*�R"� y'> / '
� {
/ --��
a � . . I
I "c �w
, T :� Ll '. .-� � � � � . . .
b '
. . :' , i �� � . ' � : .
E� �
, Y �.
, 1ll
;, � ' ;...� �� � ` � ' F
- .. . . '" , ,, , ..
�
C�
� ;
� g ; � � � - � � ,
y... _._,
, - _ .-
� " �_ "ew rr� «n � '-- - '� ra" -� �-�-�- .
wEw u
•Wes�of the Vermillion River,south of Pine Bend. •West of the Vermillion River,south of Pine Bend.
•North—south primary tunway orientation. •Northwest—southeast primary runway orientation.
�
APPENDII►
Metropoli�n Airports Site Selection Task Force Site Selec�on Technical Advisory Committee
Commission �ommissioner Tommy Merickel,Chair Metropolitan Airports Commission Marshan Township
Hugh Schilling,Chair Commissioner Alton J.Gaspar, Metropolitan Council Ra�enna Township
Alton Gasper,Vice Chair Vice-Chair FAA Air Traffic Control Tower—MSP Hampton Township
Faye Petron,Treasurer Richard Beens FAA En-Route Control Center— Eureka Township
Mark Brataas John E Bergford,Jr. Farmingeon Douglas Township
Jan Del Ca1zo Scott Bunin FAA Airports District Office Castle Rock Township
Laurel Erickson Colonel Larry Burda Minnesota Dept.of Transportation— Northwest Airlines
Kenneth"Chip"Glaser Joseph M.Finley O�ce of Aeronautics Air Transport Association
John Himle Kathleen Gaylord Minnesota Dept.of Agriculture Mesaba Airlines
Virginia Lanegran Edward G.Gutzmann University of Minnesota UPS
Tim Lovaasen Joe Harris Dakota County Minnesota Air National Guard
Nick Mancini Lawrence McCabe City of Eagan US Air Force Reserve
Thomas Merickel E.Craig Morris City of Burnsville Minnesota Business Aircraft Association
Jack Mogelson Thomas Novak . Ciry of Apple Valley Airline Pilots Association
Patrick O'Neill Gloria Pinke City of Rosemount Aircraft Owners Pilots Association
Paul Rehkamp Tom Rheineck City of Farmington Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Ray Rought City of Hastings Minnesota Dept.of Natural Resources
Stephen P.Tatum,Sr. City of Inver Grove Heights Minnesota State Historical Preservation
Richard Theisen City of Lakeville Office
Ray Waldron City of Vermillion Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
� ,��� �����"������� John D.Williams � City of Cottage Grove � US Fish&Wildlife Service
'� ���
� � � ,�� �,,������� ������������ � �Wendy Wiberg Wustenberg � Ciry of Coates � US Environmental Protection Agency � �
� m � �� ��. ���� � Washington Counry US Army Corps of Engineers � �
� � °�����'����� Goodhue Counry Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Area �
���
�� �����
� °� � ������ � Empire Township Commission
,�� �����a������ .
Vermillion Township
�s
.. . . .
TABLE OF CONTENTS AND OVERVIEW
Dakota Search Area and Conceptual Design Layout................................................................Page 2 OVerV�eW
Schedule for 1989—1996..........................................................:..................................................Page 3 A Dua1 Track Airport Planning Process—
designed to study the region's long—term a�iation
Site Selection Study Approach....................................................................................................Page 4 needs—was established by the Minnesota
Legislature's"1989 Metropolitan Airport
. Site Identification.........................................................................................................................Page 4 Planning Act." The process is being conducted by
the Metropolitan Airports Commission(MAC)
Site Identification Criteria...........................................................................................................Page 5 and the Metropolitan Council.
One track addresses ways to provide the
Three Eastern Sites in Search Area...................................:.........................................................Page 6 needed capacity and facilities at Minneapolis—St.
Paul International Airport(MSP). The other track
Four Western Sites in Search Area.............................................................................................Page 7 provides the needed capacity and facilities at a
Site Screening...................... „ . � new(replacement)airport in the Dakota Search
............................................... ........................... ............................P e 8 Area. A third"no build"option is also being
Summ of Site Screenin Ana1 sis examined,along with other feasible alternatives as
ar3' g y ..........................................................................................Page 9 they are developed.
Site Selection and Criteria........................ ......Page 10 M�C is responsible for site selection in the
............................................................................ Search Area,prepaxing a comprehensive plan for
Site Descriptions...................... ....Page 11 an airport on the selected site,developing the
...............................................................................................
MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan,and prepar-
Site 2..................................................... .........................Page 12 ing the federal and state environmental documen-
...............................................................
tation.
Site 3......................... ................................Page 13 The Airport Planning Act also requires the
....................................................................................
MAC and Metropolitan Council to make a
Site 6.............................................................................................................................................Page 14 recommendation to the Legislature in 1996 on
which approach should be taken for future airport
Agency and Public Involvement...............................................................................................Page 15 development.
Appendix.....................................................................................................................................Page 16
1
DAKOTA SEARCN AREA AND CONCEPTUAL DESI6N LAYOUT
DAKOTA SEARCH AREA
cor�Tuw n�oer � }R�4 '- ....._
uvovr . �~ " �
'' - �a L.�:.�
_ i. � �� '. �
�
� �{;�
. - ;� �� � f- ys�•� �Q E �u�"�'.Y . � .�MINNEAPOUS SAINT PAUL � .
,�: � ,� N
� � ` u �
� � �
_ � � �
. � '- _ ` a _ o >' �H.s
,*h � AL3� � a�"^.I � - i�W •SX�KOPEE 6�X/3TIN43 .
. . �3— s , . . ' ` f M1 — .
, i
� �aRraae �.
� � � � 4 :. _.. ov� � '��
�: 9�i Ao. �
s�sc� ..�.:�,�- __^___ � �
, H��" '
....,w,
es a�ww� ; , .'.
, _;� ,_- � ,, .._ -' �oc�t '.� — ,m _ `a1m e r t _�
- � ,�,' J--=�.- °'_ _ _L�.__�` _;_ _ o- _
a°_.. .e�*'
�- � � $, --
;.
. .� := RN,S L �- I . . _ s .�. - .
�
m
I °`� c e_ 1 :5 z k; t ;"` o � :, qa .,�� �r 8d � _ .
>��� x--� ��' � "i '_ .�a�,�M6UNT ; A •"'� =ra� � .��'`PiB e_c o k t � .
,� t �� � .
„ .;, �-. � �.�s _`. 1
�� } � PlE YALI X � . � .-•� y � ��
I �.
" r
�E� L' �t F` � t i�r : ,� � 1 _ Nirti�t_Qer„ � y �',z,, �
�'i �x a iF; a x;. r r.v� . ;' Q COATE3 i �r �,L�•-...A8TIN��.:. �r,QrL�
s a,�r x �� : � , : ., � o �, -=1_
' F
- -- -iKt � " ,�z -_- , ; - �_"�i,-� - � - T` � .
t '
F
� �,.
.�
r �,;1 - ,'. r � i a'o L � _I � yr � � � . � .
� � t � �.� � x ,. � o� { , ____., . _ . _ -4� .. —_ � . � 1 ; �
;
- '� '. — � '- ^ n�.'n" � , . �i i
. I . ;. � :.. ` -�r..-'", � �' � . e.� � 'i Ysrmilllo.rt _ i Mareh n .. R i enna .r.:: .
_ aTr 7 v
q, `�� #" . = .._{
. . V >- �... �. — .-
� . � j '.�. ti ��,� � .€ P m p i r e ��� i --1 i - = � .
I �� � ��.AKE L�� LARMIN TON � i ._t __...__ 1;-��. � ��-' � �,�' 1 . 11
., -
, �:-`� , __�� �,_ � ���� � �uo ; c�
�. , .
I � ,�� _ � : ... a � �
� f _ ` I _� ,- � _ i � i �
�, . .� - <, -. ,x � z ._ � 1 , I . � .:� .
� �
� � �� � , ,..��; � ` .-__ `'°" , � � �. �_ � �` � __ � � � I
� . 3 _._.. :.. � �
.� ,,. , . __. Q', . ���. . ���. = 1 �� �
, - . � -r— _ , :'`�, , . a"` x8otn ee�e 1 - . .
r �v �� � `
�• ' �, �-� ' . � � .
_" ; �... # ,.� � , �. �� _ _ _._._.;-� . � ......._._ .
� ," ! � ._ ^ . ' ........� .
'. :
i ' ,` � ... �.�¢� 1 NAMPTOt�. i 1
!i !.. �:,:. E u r�e k a �-9 C e„a#E e R n c k �� i �' � .. 7RIE �., i zo ... MIE3�(��.1,�.� _yy e..._ :
�i `� �. r � � ._
i � � � ICh
s+i r �
� I�I, .. � � i. � �, �. -.-_.___. . .-_: . , ., ..... . . i .` H a m p t o n __. � .......... _ _ ' --J ._....-1 .. j . .
-4- � L
. . i " ._�,. ,, ...:. .__ .. 1 - - ,
�.. >:_ .._ ...� sz � � �
( � , _���.-.....--- =.- .__.T.. .�.---._.._,._._�.. .._.._.. .._.. Q.._.._.._..i.._.._.__._Asi_t�D1R.b..'_.._.j_.._.._..�
r` . , -- � —_._....
'In December 1991,the Metropolitan Council designated the Dakota Search Area in Dakota County for the planning and development of a new majar
airp ' . The Dakota Search Area measures 17 miles east to west and eight miles north to south and encompasses about 115 square miles or 74,600 acres.
'The new airport conceptual design layout,developed by MAC,is being used in the site selection process in the Dakota Search Area.
�
.. . . .
AGENCY AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
'Throughout the Dual Track Airport Metropolitan Council and MAC members,local Committee and Task Force,as well as Commission
Plann'ng Process,there has been a major emphasis officials and business representatives. meetings,are open to the public. Formal input is
on p�a lic and agency involvement before,during, . solicited at public hearings. Interested persons can
and er the completion of key study components. • Site Selection Technical Advisory receive copies of published reports and documents
"'. ffected local,state and federal agencies Committee. This committee reviews technical upon request.
have een contacted to determine the type and studies and documents,and provides input into
locat� n of resources within their jurisdiction and the studies. Membership includes representatives
in th�new airport search area,and to identify of affected state/federal transportation,planning
, poter� ial issues and concerns. and environmental agencies,local government
' n addition to these agencies,the following staff and aviation industry representatives. EIIVIPOIIIIIPrIIl11I RPrVIPrW PrOCPrSS
grou' /committees have been involved in the site
selec�on process: • Site Selection Task Force. The Task An environmental review process has been
Force provides policy guidance and advises the initiated along with the Site Selection Study for a
I!�� Stdte Advisory Council, The MAC on policy issues during the new airport stud- new airport in the Dakota Search Area. The
Minn sota Legislature established the Council to ies. The broad—based group includes community process,which was approved by the Minnesota
provi' e a forum for education and discussion on officials from the Dakota Search Area vicinity, Environmental Quality Board,is being co—spon-
metr' olitan airport planning. The Council along with representatives from the metropolitan sored by the Federal Aviation Administration and
revie' s and advises the legislature on the Dua1 area,the business community,current airport MAC.
Tracl¢planning activities of the Metropolitan users,MAC,Metropolitan Council and Minnesota The environmental documentation associat-
Airpcb s Commission and the Metropolitan Department of Transportation. ed with the Site Selection Study provides a record
Cour� il. Council members include House and of analysis and of community and agency partici-
Sena� legislators,federal,state and metropolitan A public involvement progra.m provides pation in the process. While the environmental
agen�'es,representatives of the aviation industry eaxly and continuing opportunities for the public documentation is separate from technical reports
and ' embers of the public residing within and to be informed and to review and comment on the on the Site Selection study,the work and tiining of
outsi'e the metropolitan area. technical and environmental studies prior to deci- tasks on the two processes are necessarily inter-
sions and selection of preferred alternatives. This twined.
• Contingency Planning Group. program includes public information meetings, A document,entitled"Environmental `
This roup monitors trends in technology,tra.vel public hearings,news conferences and news releas- Review Procedures"for the Dual Track Airport
habi ' and the economy and makes an annual es,informational brochures and newsletters. Planning Process,was published by MAC in
assessA`nent of any changes or modifications that The public has opportunities throughout the March 1993. This booklet details the environ-
may be ncecessaty for the Dua1 Track Airport process to comment both informally and formally. mental procedures and is available to the public by
Plann'rng Process. The group is cornprised of In addition,meetings of the Technical Advisory calling the MAC.
' 15
SITE 6
- State Safety Zones and � Terminal Building and Runways
Runway Protection Zones - Airport Boundary
, , ` , "' + ;
I ' � �-
_ 4� �
r �
X
��� � �-> ��� `. � � � �rz ~��"� ` v ' �\
-�-1 _-,� , }-, , � I { �` �'�, ss
�
� �, `� � �. _ , Wa as�i��i Iltvve'� � �
�, �� � n a� ` �
� , � � � ��
i t �
� � � —...—�--� rPINE 6 d . r' )
� � .
j� J'�TM' X�'yd6�� ��... Y � ` � �
�
_,�
� T� 9. A'TE C. � � � �
"�`.;��.� � � ��� Nag B �--� 4 55 }� � �
; �. � , I --�, zss
,
� .:� I B � � ' �,.. � .
�, y ,; i �. 56 � �,. � i I I� I �°1 Y - 'T'cL �;
� �- , ' ..... �2 �''y/� �! . r- ._..- � .. _._.._... � , . .
�� t '� `l� — `yl ♦ ���1�8'� �Y:� � , � � � `-'?"-,---:_-.
' ,
�
i � � �
� � � ! �� I i
I � � � � ���
` � � � / �� 4H � �
L a ' �
' �
�.
� �
��Ti UAady�R�t�Y� H I � ' � `J� 47
A � ; -+
� � r '
�� _ i � n 1..•� I 316
r
� r..
\��� B A f ^� � � _ .... _... � �
4 � I I � ��_-- ' �
_� � __..._ , �-,t;- I .---- � �
� I � �
��.. � - / �
e��,�� , �I. � ,►- � ���r � � � �� ,
r�` \ � I
�{c�'� ' � \"11 � i � _J9�.- A B
���, ; ��� I_� � � " �, f �1 tt
. � __ __ _ � �
f� 0 � _...—...__.._—
�
kOL � � 111 i � ' 6 6� � i g _A � ',. � I . �� . � .
4 � � I
.���� � � ' � �" ( 1_� -I � 62 ti
�z� ► , � ,�, �}
; � i �
�.T __g.
a.�q ` , ' , t�-
� �,�� � ��' i ;n �i ;� � � � � � 6� �
�� e��„i��°"�, � _ �,n; ; � �,�� ,' 9� � �
: .� � � ��- T-�-
} _
�—.
� � �� I � � �
� . ►
�
�
; ,�,
- A I _ —1�� � ��-- � � �
�` . 1 �..� A � l �J .
{ i
�
.. .�._, �y � J; � � : f' � I , .. � _I i
. �,.� � ....�_._.... � �
� - � . _.— ._. .._-_.._ .... . .
~ . i B � s2
, ___ _ I �- ,. ! I
�``�' �7 � 'Ch �t E � I � �
; ;+ ,
�
�
f i t`
. , _...
-� � `� � � ��C � �--�..._� �
�� __ ,e? r.._ � ,� i
� � � �
. a� �n���r� � � ,
�
14
... . .. .
SCNEDULE FOR 1989 - 1996
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
Search Area Study Site Selection
' ' ' ' ' New Airport ' '
Comprehensive Plan
Federal/State Environmental Documents
Community/Economic Studies
MSP LTCP MSP LTCP
Update
;
; <
' Decision Document
Public/Agency Coordination
Dual Track Planning Process
MAC has developed this schedule,consisting of eight major elements,in order to meet the requirements set forth by the"1989 Metropolitan Airport
Planning Act." The Act requires the MAC and Metropolitan Council to make a recommendation to the Minnesota Legislature in 1996 on which approach
should be taken for future airport development.
3
SITE SELECTION STUDY APPROACN
' he Metropolitan Airports Commission To select a site in the Search Area,a impacts,environmental impacts,and development
(MA� began the new airport site selection study three—step approach was developed by the MAC, costs.
in Jan 1992. This work was initiated after the as follows: 3) Site Selection—to analyze the final candi-
Metrq olitan Council designated the Dakota 1) Site Identification—to identify all possi- date sites and recommend a"preferred"site.
Searc �rea as the general area within which a ble locations for a new airport based on a limited Analysis during this final phase will include the
poten ial new airpott would be located. number of general criteria. factors addressed during site screening at a more
�� he Dakota Search Area is 115 square miles 2) Site Screening—to reduce the number of comprehensive level,and additional factors that
in siz� It includes the cities of Coates and potential sites to the three or four best sites using a will be required to distinguish among the sites
Verm�lion,and Empire and Vermillion Town- set of detailed criteria to assess physical character- and to meet Alternative Environmental Document
ships� well as parts of the city of Rosemount, istics,operational efficiency,community/social (AED)requirements.
Ninir� er and Marshan Townships.
SITE IDENTIFICATION
1 he first phase of the process included iden- beyond the Seatch Area boundary. During the site identification phase,a
tifica�on of all possible locations for the new air- •State Safety Zones A and B and the LDN potential site included a specific land area within a
port ' ithin the Dakota Search Area. This phase 65 noise contour may not impact,urbanized areas site boundary and a specific runway configuration.
bega�}in January 1992. The MAC,working with of population centers outside the Search Area. A conceptual airport layout,which was developed
its Sid Selection Technical Advisory Committee •The runway layout must maintain the full by the MAC in the New Airport Conceptual
and S� e Selection Task Force,developed six site operational capabiliry of the Conceptual Layout Design Study in 1991,was used in the identifica-
ident�ication criteria to identify potential sites,as design. tion process.
follo ' : • No site would be considered which places In June 1992,a number of potential sites
Airport runways,taYiways and other facili- airport facilities in areas of extensive wetlands. were identified by the Site Selection Technical
ties mµst be contained within the Search Area. It • No site may be considered which would Advisory Committee during a series of workshops.
was al�o assumed that Federal Aviation result in major ground facilities located in flood- After eliminating duplicate and/or overlapping
Administra.tion(FAA)Runway Protection Zones ways. sites,seven potential sites were identified. Three
and lapd within the FAA Building Restriction • Physical features not compatible with low sites were east of the Vermillion River,southwest
Lines; hould also be contained within the Search altitude aircraft overflight must be avoided(specif. of Hastings. Four sites were west of the
Area,' cause the FAA requires these areas to be ically avoiding overflights of the Pine Bend Vermillion River,near the center of the Search
airpo' property. State Safety Zones may extend Refinery). Area.
4
�', �/" .i N. •
SITE 3
� State Safety Zones and � Terminal Building and Runways
Runway Protection Zones - Airport Boundary
, � �
,
� I ��; c� � �
� , � � ,� � T � � z'ssi ve�, i -
' '� s y�� u N TX,�� � �',''� z7�7�z Rti I
,� I''i n Q
�
f � �� , - �s +�Re � o $ � ) `� ��•
-L \ v�/E - U.S.PA�TE C. an
r N�R}'t� L �
iy:.���
. �
R-` /. G� � 4 SS i . �-�-----
P �I 2SS
� 56 � �N � n � Fjl e r Z
(
— 52 i ! �
� \
� _ �
- ' � �--- ` Ct'�ATES �' j .
t� � �
�---, - 1 , �, A riN
,
�� x ; I �_ '' 4e ' I I .
r
, UNlV�£FStF�Y i � B +�� 47 ��
B � o
* � !!y'N£SOTA� �� � A � 316 1
� �G� � �I \\ �� I i' i I� � � . �
i
���� �t� . . : i : :� _ 'i -..... _ . '� . .
..—�—... � y� I . /i � �
Yr� �\ i, � � ♦� ( i _ � ! A r
��`�� � ; , d e r �m i 1 � i o n, , ..--" _� '. A '
, -
,
, ,�`� ' � _ _.... - -. �
�� � ��--, �
„ E p I r@! ' ` � � `�
� � �
o ` �
I A `
, kZ � .
I �� �. � `
R�,� - � :� � 6� ' �
��
�
� �i er'+�`�,itti�'�'` -�) L��, � � ' sl
� ' , - �
� ; �' ,�
� ; . .
6� . , �
�;
� � �-
�
� B
�-- Cl/ � . B � --�----
A •1 ,
. ' . � �� Sz � � i � � . .
j ��\ B
� ♦ �
�
I .:I i I Q,�, '� a �st E
t � '� ��I� � I $ A � I
�;� --1 , �
�� : �.��� AM oN --._;-- B
18
SITE 2
� State Safety Zones and � Terminal Building and Runways
Runway Protection Zones - pirport Boundary
� � j t _ , ' I. ` ,�.�
_ < �-r—�f � n + . .,` � I � �
�� 4 � :� l%�_ �,
%—� �, �� � I � � 1.t"` �assa �r � �,
� ` � � %. � � �
� ip ,� Ri,� , I �
�,`'� -
� �� � n � � ' > ;
__
( � ' _..— ' T 'PINE B D � r �. ) ,e"
- �-r� tNgS h�REFiN Y U.S.P. I �-`' �
* NpR7 A�TE C. � �.
�'�; ��d�� � p 55 _�a
A �❑
� ' . � � � � j . � � — " . . .
� �8 e �y = ' //}+++���
'` � � ,;� : � i S6 i 'PY � Y�� .-fa •E�-:� �, �, .
� Zs�'
�
s2 � .... ' _ �11 @ t" I i r, '�_
� ��� F` x ~�\ � i
� , � � �.. j i
,-. . � ; -�--7 .._..... I! � A�Tll�l�a
� , 1 � i ' I ,�`� `
,
� � ` ' ��} �� B ' �-�
� urve�e�srr�r i < U
�` ❑ �a ' o� I ( � 4 ` A a7
�` ��-"�91 A+E50TA �
, j �� , 376
���'� � ;:.I � '; I �! ', �I ` H
— _..._ —,� a_t_�. — J�....._.... . . �.
+ �.T....._ � � i
QP�� � �—.� ��� I �- ; j �,�,�,,•(Yt� � v �; � �
qg /i
. ��`t.y�� I . I �� � � Y � : � � . I � � � �i S p �� i��/i . . .
� f��v : �� �'� . . . �! .. � a � h �i i
.. T '�. a �� \._. .—... —... ..—..... L .— ' —_.—. B _. ' Q ,, , 'I
_ � I ^, i, i
�o t r � � $ °�� � ` � � � i
3�a I I ' � � ! � , . $
�`�6 I � i ! � �
� � ;
��� �—._..� �. , „ � Q
>� ,�tZ ; i � A
;,X� R;� 4 ;. � $ �
�; f �rm2lt�,�`r'' i - F � %J 'Q B sx
� � . . ��
+ � � , �' �. ,,; .../ .. , r.
66 i i . i
v r-F-' � �"� ♦ — � L`"
� � ` ��
� � ,� f G,�, � ,�
! /� ' �
. .- . : . j� ,�� \ .�.`�h � L� .
�-� ....�-- � _... ...__...�. ..._.. i ♦ � ♦ . . . �i ..._—.—.... _..
� �. ♦
♦ ♦
� I � ' (�� 52 B I �� I � A ��1 ;�, �
i
V \_._._.�......__ 47 I ��_� ��� ; I ♦
I.. ti � 2 1`h �t � H � � �
� ��: �J ' � —.. ...—.
.. �� _ ._..A_ � I ry��� ...�/ �I .. ...�_— i . q I .
e . •a'�� ,— d�1� ��! � I � _
�-
12
_ _ - .
SITE IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA
— WETLANDS — PINE BEND ARC
FLOODWAY (Runway within this arc may not point directly to
— the Koch Refinery.)
. . ��—T-..--"��� _ /� �':r. -,. . • � � .
. � i j . i . . + .'. '-L_: � 4 •���.�� 1-_
— `r �q ' 1
. � � ;} ` , 1 � ,� # } M ill � '�\� � � �
� � �'la � � \
:� I I.
��� ���✓ � ��00 i
� � 1�1 �
r. X �
. i .� -_.I.-,��N— PINE B � �� . ..., . _ . .
� 'v-ti�t- .Y^ . \ . ytlE� _ �.� Y G.S.P. . .
. _5„ , . ' (o, , . ,��RS ^, e A TE �C � ..(_� � - .
o . . ' �...� �, .
� � i�Y>;t'�'_` �''- , . _ ..
�,•e.f..� e e ��0`$e �' � � SS � � .. �
Q � ^ ..� . :. .
i - o
, � fl �� � ..,. . . �� �t� init��er:
.e e 5�
� ;� ' � , �'spryp � �
, -
+' VO.dl1��� � I I 9 ' .
/ ° '— � � ' ' _ A TIP1���
� ° �_ �'Y e= , e � r . .� � a � as �'r; � I 4 _
��.. � ' i
�
,• q :. � UMIVER5f Y I ' ' ... _ . . � � � .
..0 :� Df�� � � . . . ,�Q� 47 �.
� �r �.. �.. t sorei, o � — __ ....
a i
� 4\' \\T�--�G� � _�J r —.... a� � � ❑�I—
37 6
ep � � I �
� �r&� i � �, � � ;
�'�a� ��1-{�� ✓ 1/ � r o 6 1 Aa�g �` °D I
� t�,�� �, `� � hlla ;rsh n
• � , �. --
. , , t_..__.._.. —r
+_' , i -�.
_ �� .:. � � � �
° � o � i
�i'.�� - � I� 6Z i . . .
� � �� �u _ __ _ ! a ___ i ; /� : 61 I � . .. .
_ �
�p � . � :? .�� -- - - __ -- ��� I � j � � 91 � .� . .
. o � ry q�. �- - s —�- � .—�--� .i �
. �' _ ,, "56 • � .'�� � . .�_�. � � . . . �� �I . � .
ra- . o� ' I ! I - -� --- -r. ._ f .
" �� � ' � o �Y"I —
; o
_ /
o � , t
;, _�;�,`r _...._ —. ° _....._
— _ r-� i d7 sz � � ;' �
, . , i —
_... + ' � '� i � '� .—..._..__.. I i- �
i a�
�� I ° � � 2 Th 3t E � , I
0 0
::: . � (�{I �� i ::' ��,. �', � � �...1 , . I � �
' __
. � � � g�a ......._:/�� . ' :.
�f i A /y�.p r--
. .'¢?" . o'r' � ,_ . � P4��0.l1tl : � ��� ._...�.. _L—..—_ .
�� ..—.._ ..__—_—..�ti. � \� � .°—r....__..l— � . .
� �Q'' j '— .�' � ; j ! J IE�9t LLE
5
SITE lOCATIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS - fASIfRN SIIES
si ' t s�� t
, ,� •. ----, .. �
.. , � . 4
, . � _ _. t �J� �.—i � �.;� �L.. t
�'�� E M 7 '>""M+� � ,., I_. ' . .. Ni ��m`m.s' r{ -\I.... '
� �� _ .. ' �. .\ / . . � .. �I � . � � .
, ,2s y ,� � � \ . �
� ;u.•'"R� _. f„'.,awe' � „we� -::-'t- .. � . : >"tl� � P �e.�y � . � .
x� o ' ' : ._.. .... In���.a _ .
l � ` cwx�.a� �- � . Mcairzs � .
� i "s .a:� : --. , .
s � a
�
:
_.. i
`�.. I � � _I . ! _-y€ ' C __ -''� _.. l.� 4' I��� — �
w . <
t �
� �;�� �7 \�� .?� vs� iiiio� I. ,� F � �M`` � ` � �i v. m3ii�i .. i M. .n � . . .
— --- —
t� E�Yire �I, � —.-�5�... / I rY a� � E� i e I ( �/ .. . .. .
� � — � T� . :... _ ">.�.� � ..�_ ��w � ....� 1
r� $ .. � ,.
� !" �,,,,;x � ,,. ...- neai�wxc �� � ��.. ^.� �,._w.o..ae'"` 4 � EaM� <^ / �`.
�
. �
� -i::��. � . '_, _...i ` � _ , . .
_� � � , ; i _ - _
; , , � �,.: �. r
�
. . ' �
, r
,
.s
. _ �. .
"E �',
��•.•-
1
, : � ;
,�,4.: ' � ' ... ..... �. A_.� � � _ "
: _. l _.... ..a.
:.". -�I—\._y��' �� . � _ MEW � . . M ` ���YN'S�. -� . NEW r_. � Y �
• Ea�t of the Vermillion River,south of Hastings. • East of the Vermillion River,south of Hastings.
• E '�t-west primary runway orientation. • Northwest-southeast primary runway orientation.
SITE 3
-� � ,� ,� ..s � \
. _ NT � �� ! ..L. � ..
i
I v '
y _
. :>�
�
�� ' � H��� ..
u e
caa€s
� - -
�
, y ."-� o`�" ..i- _.. . : c� : �.,� C_I . ..
� -7 - -- �,�,:�,� {
. . . � �.� v mniio� � .n �
+
� -
f' ' �' `
, � - ..._.... .. ..._.. _. ....... "
� u' � o�ra � � . .
, } 1. j S' �
;. ... ..
.a �� _ /
, : � '
"� „..u�w,^..�...�` ,, i . 'ueqr.e� � � >;��..: . .
_. ... ,.. ....� ..
. ., _., . -�_.. . . - : "._ . .
.., �T� .i �/ _ �
-...[ � Y_.. `:', (�� � I _.. .... '
tl,�0:; ,,
I u
. �� �
—. i , ._..��
P ; _.L.
� 1 - 1� V "NEYI r_Y` Y� . .
1
• East of the Vermillion River,along Seaxch Area southern edge.
• Northwest—southeast primary runway orientation.
6
' ,r ,, ,.: .�.._. _ . .. .
SITE DESCRIPTIONS
',Two eastern sites(Sites 2 and 3)and one western site(Site 6)have_been selected for detailed analysis
in or'er to identify a preferred site for a potential new airport. Descriptions of the three candidate sites
appe� on this page,followed by illustrations of the areas on the next three pages.
Can ida� Site 2 Candidate Si� 3 Candidate Site 6
II Site 2 is located east of the Vermillion River Site 3 is also located east of the Vermillion Site 6 is located northwest of the Vermillion
in th eastern third of the Search Area. The four River within the eastern third of the Search Area. River in the central third of the Search Area. It is
mainl arallel runways are oriented in a northwest- The four main parallel runways are oriented in a about 6 miles west of Sites 2 and 3. The four
soutl� t direction. The crosswind runways are north northwesterly-south southeasterly direction. main parallel runways are oriented in a notth-
perp@ dicular to the main runwa�s. The two crosswind runways are in opposite corners south direction. The two crosswind runways are
'�Two refinements to the site were made dur- of the site relative to Site 2. perpendicular to the main runways.
ing t, e early phase of the site selection process. Three refinements were made to Site 3 at the Two refinements were made to Site 6 as the
First� he site was rotated 10 degrees clockwise to outset of the site selection process. The entire site final phase of site selection began. The entire site
reduQ noise impacts in Hastings and Prescott, was shifted approximately 1,000 feet southeast, was shifted appro�mately 1,500 feet south and
Wis '' nsin. Also,the northern inboard parallel the crosswind runways were canted 10 degrees, rotated 1 degree to move the runways farther away
runv� y was shifted to the southeast to move it off and the longest runway was moved to the west from the Koch Refinery at Pine Bend,and the
the� rmillion River floodway. outboard position. These refinements result in longest runway was moved to the west outboard
reduced noise impacts in Hastings and Prescott, location. These two refinements resulted in better
Wisconsin,and no runway crosses the Vermillion clearance of the tall stacks at the refinery and also
River floodway. eliminated any runway crossings of the Vermillion
River floodway.
- 11