Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.f. Airport Planning Process - Decision Documentr CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETIN DATE: September 15th, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Airp rt Dual Track Planning AGENDA SECTION: Process - Decision Document Old Business PREPARED BY: Step an Jilk AGENDITEM # OF ATTACHMENTS: Dra..,t Document AP Y: The Decision Document drafted by the Metropolitan Council will be the document used to guide the final decision making proces for the relocation of the current airport or the maintainance of the current location and the expansion thereof. The Metopolitan Council will be holding hearings to take puclic comment on this document. I would recommend that the City provide comment to this hearing process`. Prior to making any suggestions on a position on the document I am recommending that w' take into consideration the comments to be provided by SOAR. SOAR will be meeting on Saturday to develop these comments. Following the outcome of that meeting city staff will work up comments for your consideration Tuesday ,evening. RECOMMENDED ACTIO :Motion to approve comments on the DRAFT DECISION DOCUMENT and direct that these comments be sent on to the Metropolitan Council for their consideration COUNCIL ACTION: Metro NOTICE OF titan Council/Metropolitan Airports Commission PUBLIC HEARINGS to receive comments on the draft report, Twin Cities Aviation Strategy An Outline of a Decision Document for the Dual -Track Major Airport Strategy Port si Ath yo -over- PUBLIC When/Where: When/Where: How to Copies: Questions: INFORMATION Tuesday, Sept. 22, 7 pm Rosemount High School Student Center 3335 142nd St. W. Rosemount Wednesday, Sept. 23, 7 pm Richfield High School Auditorium 7001 Harriet Av. S. Richfield 1. You may attend one or both of the hearings and offer comments. To register in advance to speak, please call Jean Unruh at the Metropolitan Airports Commission at 726-8189. 2. You may send a letter with comments, which must be received no later than 5 p.m., Oct. 7, 1992, to: Nigel Finney, deputy executive director - planning and environment Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 - 28th Av. S. Minneapolis, MN 55450 or John Kari, senior planner Metropolitan Council 230 E. 5th St. St. Paul, MN 55101 Free copies of the public hearing draft may be obtained from the Metropolitan Council's Data Center by calling 291-8140 or from the Metropolitan Airports Commission by calling Jenn Unruh at 726-8189. Call Jenn Unruh at the Metropolitan Airports Commission (726-8189) or Donna Mattson at the Metropolitan Council (291-6493). METROPOLITAN 6040 - 28th Av Minneapolis, 1� MEMOPOLTTAN Mears Park Ce: St. Paul, MN 5: 612 291-6359 Metropolitan July 1992 JRPORTS COMMISSION we South 455450 .tre, 230 E Fifth St. 101 Publication No. 559-92-044 Preface ......... I. DUAL - U. w CONTENTS ............................... ......................ii AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS ................................ 1 CHOOSING At AVIATION STRATEGY FOR THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA ... 3 DECISION ] Outline of Decision F .....6 CUMENT.................................... 6 cision Document ...:...................................... 7 c ors & Data and Analysis ...................................... 7 is'on Factor: Investment Assessment .............................. i ion Factor: Air Service Quality ..... • . • • • • • • • • • . • • . • • ' ` ' ' ' . 8 :iqs ion Factor: Regional Economic Impacts ................ • • . • • • • • • . 9 .' ion Factor: Regional and Community Impacts ..................... 10 ,ision Factor: Environmental Effects .............................. 11 12 ionFactor: Financial Issues ............................... . 13 ;i nal Strategic Concerns ....................................... This public hearing development report Airports Commissio process in 1995 or l The DECISION Development I MII l t A M? NEW THE REC( MAK IMPR METE CHAT OF T Preface draft document suggests the outline for a joint final airport planning and "DECISION DOCUMENT") of Metropolitan Council (Council) and Metropolitan (MAC) to the Minnesota Legislature on the "dual -track" major airport planning UMENT report is required by state law (MS473.618 Airport Planning and IN 180 DAYS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE ACTIONS REQUIRED BY SECTION 473.616, IISION 3, THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE AIRPORTS COMMISSION SHALL .T TO THE LEGISLATURE ON THE LONG-RANGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF . AIRPORT FACILITIES IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA. THE REPORT MUST INCLUDE THE IMENDATIONS OF THE AGENCIES ON MAJOR AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT IN THE )POLITAN AREA FOR A PROSPECTIVE 30 -YEAR PERIOD AND ON ACQUIRING A SITE FOR JR NEW AIRPORT. THE REPORT MUST INCLUDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF A IRPORT ON PRESENT AND PROPOSED FACILITIES AT THE EXISTING AIRPORT AND ON OCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATE ECONOMIES. THE REPORT MUST CONTAIN THE IMENDATIONS OF THE AGENCIES ON FINANCIAL PLANNING AND FINANCING FOR A . NEW AIRPORT, INCLUDING: COST, COST ALLOCATION; AMORTIZATION OF MAJOR VEMENTS AT THE EXISTING AIRPORT BEFORE A TRANSFER OF OPERATIONS; FINANCING )DS AND SOURCES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS; LEASE AGREEMENTS AND USER iES AT A NEW AIRPORT, AND A METHOD OF CAPTURING FOR PUBLIC USES A PORTION REVENUE FROM DEVELOPMENT AROUND A NEW AIRPORT." The DECISION DOCUMENT will recommend a long-term aviation strategy for the Twin Cities, and lay out the key data, and analysis and reasons for the recommendations. This public hearing draft document fulfills two purposes for the Council and MAC: • The Irst is to identify the questions and key issues that will need to be addressed in the Decision Document so the research and studies undertaken during the next phase of the dual -track planning process yield information helpful in making the key recommendations in the DECISION DOCUMENT. • The econd purpose is to make sure that all the key factors in recommending a strategy are, in fact, addressed and all relevant information is summarized and extracted in one document for public review and debate. This outline identifies and describes seven important factors. People are encouraged to review them and suggest H DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS Under the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of 1989 (MS 473.155 and 473.616-619), the Metropolitan Council (Council) and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) are required to make recommendations to the legislature about how to meet the long-term aviation needs of the Twin Cities Area. A six-year time frame was established to complete the dual -track airport planning effort. The tracks are on a parallel timeline. Under one track, the MAC was to prepare a plan for the possible expansion of Minneapolis -St. Paul (MSP) International Airport. A concept plan, MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan, was adopted by the MAC in November 1991. Under the second track, the Council was to designate a "search area" for a possible replacement airport. A search area in east -central Dakota County was selected by the Council in December 1991. The next steps in the planning involves environmental, economic, community impact and other studies for both tracks (see Figure 1). An update of the MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan is expected to be completed in 1S94. In 1994 the MAC will have selected a site within the much larger search area for a new airport and will have a development plan for a new airport. The MAC will lead the new airport planning effort, though the Council will conduct some of the land use and economic impact studies. In addition, by the end of 1992 the Council must prepare a plan for how MSP can be re -used if a replac ment airport is constructed. The overall purpose of the dual -track approach is to conduct studies that will give the region -- and the Minnesota Legislature -- information to compare the option of expanding the current airport with the option of building a new airport in a new location. The major planning activities for 1992 to 1995/1996 period are shown in Figure 1. In addition, the Coui monitoring trends in and changes in the ai to the dual -track ap current information the MAC and a 15 -member Contingency Planning Committee are annually growth in airport passengers and freight travel, the economy of the region, ie industry, among others, to see if the trends mean changes should be made )ach. The annual monitoring will also give the region the best and most which to base the decisions which will be made in 1995 or 1996. FIGURE I DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SUMMARY I I NEW AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT I I srrutnrouT r IOENOfY SCREEN. Scof9 DRAfT FINAL 90 OPTIMIZE C07AP. PlA7T5 COFP."s FIINIAID. 2_1EtAY01 REPORT POfE7mAl SIITSf NRl1C PllBl� STTTSM1ATOUiS LAYOUTS SELECT ATTMTOUT UYOUf/ COMP. PINS SCORNG RPi, S00 OPARAID SELECT NEW NRI'OR17ikb MTGS µAC' BANS ftIPIIC MIGS N[0.1CMTGS FVC ROUGIRUA:. COMP. f`UN APM, 1999 M' APPJL 1907 FM MAC, 141 1471 EtSSCOPING Isl PHASE, NRUC FrtGS AML 1992 MSP DEVELOPMENT LIPOATE A1SP Ur`O SCOFING MSP DR1Pf fwAl AEO. 2070 II. CONCfPf REPORT, ALD, Sb0 NRUC SELILT FSP 2(170 COMP. IORECASTS BANS ftIPIIC MIGS ANC NRNG PLAN APM, 1999 MNt FM fM o UGt MME ANC. JAN 1991 AED • ARerratk Emirormertal Docunent SD.ScooinpOaclment DSOO. DrartScoping Decision Doa7mmt SOO. Scoping DecistonDocwwA MAC. Mdr000lilanAiipons Commission MC. Metropol ilan Courcil FM. Federal Aviation AdminislrAion EIS EVAL1uff f5SC01'1nGT STATE 00101 SD 6 05D0. 500 N UC AL FIN KTEA­­SH A S NOUG M1GS kw NR1G OS MACH, 1*4 JN.Ims NRNRf SELECT FIDERAL IIDER4 OEC130N PRUp fINA1 RECORD Cf OOCUMEM NWVRT EIS DEC1S1Ein FAC. MC MNt FM fM MMICIL 1915 UGt MME :OOSING AN AVIATION STRATEGY FOR THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA By 1996, the Minnesota State Legislature will select a long-term aviation strategy for the Twin Cities Area and for the state. The MAC and Council are following an accelerated planning schedule which will result in a final report for legislative consideration in 1995. This ambitious schedule represents a goal of the agencies to address concerns raised because of the uncertainty that exists for persons potentially impacted by the development of MSP or a new airport. Overall, the legislatua and the citizens of the Twin Cities and the state, need to be in a position to respond to two ques ions: • First, will the region need to make significant investmerrt for additional runway(s) and terminal capacity (concourses, gates) during the next 25-30 years (2020) or can the regiori meet expected demand for air service with only modest investments and improvements to facilities at MSP? • Second, if significant investment and additional capacity is needed, where should the region make those investments -- at MSP or at a new commercial airport in Dakota Cou tv? The MAC and Council 1989 forecasts show that demand will probably outpace existing capacity by early in the next century requiring significant investment for capacity improvements. The long term forecasts for 2020 will be updated in 1993 and used to determine facility requirements. These facility requirements will be the basis for comparable master plans for both MSP and potential new airport. The decisions on where and how best to meet future air transportation demand in the region will take into account how each option will provide air service in terms of physical facilities, operational efficiency and flexibility, and safety. In addition, the comparison of the options will need to include cost, economic, community, regional development and environmental impacts. The DECISION DOCUMENT should extract the information and analysis of the dual -track studies in a manner so that the; differences, similarities and contrasts between the potential public policy options can be more readily seen and highlighted. To date seven factors have been identified in the 1991 annual contingency planning assessment report as important for making choices among the options - - expand MSP, bui a new airport, and do nothing. These factors are as follows: • Investment Assessment • Air Service Quality • Regional Economic Impacts 3 • Regi nal and Community Impacts • Envir nmental Effects • Fina ncialIssues • Regional Strategic Concerns The information in t e DECISION DOCUMENT will be organized like a scorecard (Figure 2). Each option will be evalua ed and graded for a series of analysis topics for each of the factors. There will be a concise write-up for each topic and an overall summary for each topic by policy option. At this time the focus should be on whether or not more factors should be added or if some should be eliminated and comb ned with others. A similar critique should also be done concerning the analysis topics. It should be expected, however, that as the dual -track studies are completed additional analysis topics may be added and existing ones dropped. The focus should be on making an evaluation of the policy options and highlighting those topics and factors that will help move the public debate to a decision. Are any important areas missing? An open question at this time is how the comparison will be made. Should an overall average be the yardstick? Should some factors be weighted more highly than others? 4 FIGURE 2 DRAFT SCORI CARD FOR EVALUATING DUAL -TRACK POLICY OPTIONS The scorecard a most suitable a` data needed fol cost/benefit ane and/or consider analysis. THE SCORECARD bove summarizes the kind of information needed to evaluate the aviation options and to select the iation strategy. This scorecard, or one like it, serves two purposes. It helps explicitly identify the an informed decision. Much of this data can be distilled into one summary statistic in the social lysis. However, the scorecard can also help evaluate single factors that are especially important factors that may be impossible to put a dollar figure on for inclusion in the summary cost/benefit 5 DECISION FACTORS INVESTMENT ASSESSMENT Net Capacity Cost Effectiveness Costs/Benefits Risk of Low Re urn Social Cost/Benefit AIR SERVICE Level of Service Fares Hubbing International System Integration ECONOMIC IMPACTS Short Tette Long Term Improved Econ mic Structure REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS Airport Environs Infrastructure Implications Accessibility ENVIRONMENTAL Natural Noise/Overflight Indirect (air quality, etc.) Ability to Mitigate FINANCIAL ISSUES Feasibility Effect on Regi nal Finance Effect on Airlines Effect on Region STRATEGIC CONCERNS Technical Flex bility Economic Flexibility Vision of the Region Technology Political/Instit tional The scorecard a most suitable a` data needed fol cost/benefit ane and/or consider analysis. THE SCORECARD bove summarizes the kind of information needed to evaluate the aviation options and to select the iation strategy. This scorecard, or one like it, serves two purposes. It helps explicitly identify the an informed decision. Much of this data can be distilled into one summary statistic in the social lysis. However, the scorecard can also help evaluate single factors that are especially important factors that may be impossible to put a dollar figure on for inclusion in the summary cost/benefit 5 A proposed outlin will highlight the i The second sectioi to 1995/1996. The of aviation activity of this section will be organized unde and analysis is di: recommendations. Part I Part II Part III Part IV Part V Part VI DECISION DOCUMENT for the Decision Document is shown in the Figure 3. The executive summary ajor findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Council and the MAC. will summarize the dual -track metropolitan airport planning process from 1989 hird and largest section will summarize data and analysis. The long-term forecasts .nd the major underlying assumptions will begin this section. The remaining part ummarize the data and analysis of the dual track studies. This information will the seven decision factors. An initial set of questions to be addressed by the data ussed below. The final three sections will include findings, conclusions and DUAL•TRACK DECISION DOCUMENT • Major Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations AL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS AL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING -- SUMMARY OF DATA & ANALYSIS A Long -Range Forecasts of Aviation Activity B. Decision Factors & Data and Analysis • Investment Assessment • Air Service Quality • Regional Economic Impacts • Regional and Community Impacts • Environmental Effects • Financial Issues • Regional Strategic Concerns C. Decision Scorecard INGS IONS TIONS TO THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE Z The primary policy c existence of a full ra. of the Metropolitan have Iong lead time situation requires la airport investment e capacity objectives, investments too soo Analysis Topic: • How much the option. • What are capacity? Analysis Topic: DECISION FACTOR: INVESTMENT ASSESSMENT ncern is to have adequate capacity to meet the air transportation needs. The ;e of aviation services is central to the long-term economic and social well-being sea. In the planning and development of airport facilities, it is not unusual to between project identification and project construction and operation. This :.ing out long-term and recognizing the potential risks. The key issues for major cisions involve how effective and flexible an option is in meeting the future e relationship between costs and benefits and what the relative risks of making or too late. Net Capacity acity and flexibility for expansion in relationship to the forecasted demand does ide? assumptions regarding technology for each option and their impact on net Cost Effectiveness • Does the option provide capacity at a reasonable cost per passenger or per flight --that is, is it cost-effective.. • What it the c st per operation of each option at different levels of activity/demand? What is the cost in future years if demand and airport use increase? Analysis Topic: I CostsBenerits • Do the benefits of the option justify the costs of the project? Analysis Topic: I Risk of Low Return • What is the r�sk of low return for each option? Is this acceptable or not? • _ What is, the r sk of being wrong, of having too much or too little capacity? • What will it cost if the region guesses high or low -- what are the financial and economic penalties if there is not enough activity to cover operating costs and debt service and what if there is not enough capacity that leads to unacceptable delays, perhaps even a limit on air traffic? Analysis Topic. • What are • Do the sc Social Cost/Benefits costs of aircraft noise and traffic on the well being of nearby residents? I benefits and costs of the option justify the costs of the project? 7 DECISION FACTOR: AIR SERVICE QUALITY How good should th quality of air service be for the Twin Cities Region and the State of Minnesota as provided by the major commercial airport? Aviation goals call for the major airport to provide a high level air service for the residents and businesses in the Twin Cities Area, the state and the upper midwest region it serves. The airport facilities and services should enhance and maintain the Twin Cities as a ma'or hub airport in the national system, maintain and increase the frequency of service and nonstop access to major national and regional markets, promote and facilitate the expansion of direct international service, promote air cargo goods movement to regional, national and international marks s. Analysis Topic: I Level of Service • What is the �ange of choices available to passengers under each option -- scheduling and cities served by nonstop and direct flights. • How will cao demand be affected by the airport option's capacity, distance from regional business cera ers or by passenger services? • What impacts will technological advances and substitutions for air travel have? Analysis Topic: Fares • What is the range of choices available to passengers under each option -- fare levels? Analysis Topic: Hubbing • How well wi�l the options maintain and enhance the Twin Cities area as an airline hub? Analysis Topic: International • What is th range of choices available to passengers under each option -- breadth of internationa service? Analysis Topic: System Integration • What facilities and improvements are committed and/or planned at competitive airports (such as Detroit; Chicago, St. Louis, Denver)? • What are th potential changes in the airline industry and what are their likely impacts on the Twin Cities. 0 What is the role and what future role could the regional reliever airports play? N. E ON FACTOR: REGIONAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS Air service plays ani portant role in fostering regional economic prosperity. The aviation industry provides the region with accessibility to and from other parts of the United States and the world. It is a major force in the regional economy. The key economic questions involve what airport investments will do in the short term, over the long-term and how will they affect regional economic growth and develop ent patterns. Analysis Topic: Short Term • How do the options differ in their short-term relocation and employment effects? Do they differ in their long-term impact on regional growth and stability? Analysis Topica,, Long Term • What kind of changes are likely in the level and character of economic activity fostered by each option for region and state. • Where within the region will new businesses be likely to locate under each option.? Analysis Topic: Improved Economic Structure • What kinds o businesses will be attracted and how will they affect local employment, residential patterns, income, character and quality of life? • Who benefits and who is burdened by each option? • Overall, how well do these economic changes support the long-term goals of the Twin Cities region and th state? D DECISION FACTOR: REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS How will the airport options impact people, communities and regional land use and development patterns? Although it may be difficult to attach dollar values to these types of impacts, the influence that airport operati ns (on-site employment, aircraft operations, passengers, freight, etc.) and related infrastructure (highways, public utilities, etc.) have investment they must be considered in evaluating the options. Analysis Topic: Airport Environs • What changes would be set in motion by each option and how would the options affect the surrounding community and the region as a whole in terms if land use and development patterns? • What are t e,_land-use implications of these effects on various parts of the region? What happens to business activity if only modest changes are made at MSP? • How will the provision of air cargo affect future land use patterns, the mix of cargo and passenger demand and, ultimately, air service quality? • What is the current and anticipated use of land adjacent to the airport --agricultural, residentia4 commercia industrial? • How will th Analysis Topic: • What is the • Will more stimulated Analysis Topic: • What are th in the Twin land area needed for expansion be acquired and who would be affected? Infrastructure Implications adequacy of the infrastructure for projected land uses. nent in local transportation infrastructure be needed to satisfy aviation - Accessibility travel distances and travel times for the options from various major activity centers Cities Metropolitan Area and cities in Greater Minnesota? 10 N FACTOR: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS Airport development and operation, whether at the existing airport or at a new site, will involve have environmental impact, which will need to be addressed. These impacts will be both on- and off-site and will effect the nE tural and man-made environments. What are the type and magnitude of environmental impac and can identified adverse impacts be mitigated? Analysis Topic: Natural • What, and how critica4 are the environmental implications of each option? What is the &n act on the natural environment --wildlife, wetlands, river and groundwater quality. How does the'community evaluate these effects? Analysis Topic: Noise/Overflight s What are the oise and overflight effects. How do residents feel about these annoyances? Analysis Topic: s Will airs Analysis Topic: • Is mitigation 1 Indirect (air quality, etc.) ed and induced ground transportation significantly affect air quality? Ability to Mitigate ,ssible? How much will it cost? 11 DECISION FACTOR: FINANCIAL ISSUES Is financing likely o be a constraint in the ability to generate sufficient funds to implement the desired aviation strategy? The key financial issues need to address basic project feasibility and the ability of the public and the airlines/airport users to cover annual debt and operating costs. Major airport improvements will be staged over time and supported by a combination sources (federal grants, user fees and charges, revenue bonds and general obligation revenue bonds). Analysis Topic: Feasibility • What is the nancial feasibility of the options? • What are th costs and cost allocation requirements of the options? • What are th potential financing methods and sources of public and private funds? Analysis Topic: Effect on Regional Finance • What will th� financial impact be on the region? • What revenue sources are available to fund each option? • What will th effect of airport financing on regional or community bond ratings? • How do the options compare in their impacts on regional/local government finances? • What method for capturing revenue from development around a new airport could be used for public purposes? What role should fiscal disparities play? Analysis Topic: I Effect on Airlines • What will the financial effect be on airlines with each option (lease agreements, user charges and fees) ? Analysis Topic: Effect on the Region • What will business? the financial impact on the typical resident of the Twin Cities and the typical 12 No matter how well it if it is implemented ir predict the future wit introduced, aviation ai socio-political forces i against uncertainty. The viability of the a unforeseen events. Fi At the same time, the project fits in well wit those objectives, it is i are potential impleme affects different pope differently. Analysis Topic: DECISION FACTOR: STRATEGIC CONCERNS ppears to satisfy currently estimated needs, the aviation plan will succeed only a form that satisfies future needs. No one evaluating the options now can i precision. Circumstances are bound to change. New technology may be d economic development in general may take a slightly different path, or new iay emerge. The flexibility of each option may provide an important hedge iation strategy may critically depend on its ability to adapt to change and ancial flexibility fosters greater efficiency and helps keeps costs to a minimum. :hosen option must be able to fit in with regional plans and objectives. If the public objectives -- the vision of the region -- or is easily adapted to support ore likely to garner the support needed for successful implementation. There tation roadblocks facing each option and they may differ because each option ations, interests groups and economic interests, or affects a given interests Technical Flexibility • Can engineeg design be altered during the construction phase to fit changed circumstances? Is it possibletstage development differently or shift development schedules? • Can the finished airport be adapted to respond to shifts in the composition of aviation demand (for example, shift from regional to cargo air service)? -- Analysis Topic: Economic Flexibility • Can financial arrangements can be adapted to changes in financial markets, local debt situations, or cash outflow. Analysis Topic: Vision of the Region • How well doey each option fit into the overall development strategy for the region as articulated in the Council's policy plans? Analysis Topic. Technology • What technological improvements and changes are expected? • How might they impact the need for air transportation or improve the capability of existing air transportation investments? Analysis Topic: Political/Institutional • What are political and institutional issues faced by each option? 13