Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.a.Dual Track Airport Planning Processr CITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: APRIL 7, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: AGENDA SECTION: DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS DEPARTMENT HEAD'S REPORT PREPARED BY: AGENDA NO. STEPHAN JILK, CITY ADMINISTRATOR I EM ATTACHMENTS: TECHNICAL COMMITTEE LETTER, AP OVE BY: MAC DOCUMENTS, EIS SCOPING DOCUMENT On Tuesday evening I would offer several items for discussion on the Dual Track Airport Planning Process. 1. S.O.A.R. representatives will be present to update the council on that groups activities. 2. The city has received the proceeds from our application for the planning assistance loan for airport planning. We will update you on that matter. 3. I have received a formal invitation t0ion n the Technical Committee for the Metropolitan Airports Commisshis Committee will provide input and review work done on the selof the final airport site, the preparation of a detailed development plan for the proposed airport and preparation and review of the environmental documentation necessary for the continued use of the existing airport or the location of the airport in Dakota County. I will provide additional information, as I can, on that committee and its charge. 4. The initial step in the environmental process related to the Dual Track Airport Planning Process is also beginning. The Metropolitan Airports Commission has prepared a Draft Scoping Document to identify the process and evaluate factors to be used in preparation of the State and Federal environmental documentation. This document is available for review by the public and in preparation for two public hearings. One of these hearings is set for Rosemount on April 22, 1992. We will provide a brief overview of this document for you on Tuesday. RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action necessary. COUNCIL ACTION: METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION �,,0i5 S4,,�, Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport r t 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450-2799 f ` Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 z �t o A t N a aT 11v 41RPo F0 March 24, 1992 Stephan Jilk City Administrator City of Rosemount P.O. Box 510 Rosemount, MN 55068 Dear Mr. Jilk: The Metropolitan Airports Commission is forming a Technical Committee to provide input and to review work done on the remaining elements of the Dual Track Airport Planning Process. These elements include selection of a site for a new airport, preparation of a detailed development plan for the proposed airport, and preparation of the environmental documentation necessary for either continued development at MSP or development of a new airport in the Dakota Search Area. Membership on the Technical Committee is expected to consist of representatives from local, state, and federal agencies, as well as airline and other airport users. You, or your designee, are invited to participate in the Technical Committee. We expect to have monthly meetings of the committee, with meetings scheduled to coincide with key points in the study. The meetings will be held in the MASAC room of the MAC General Offices, 6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis. Our first meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, April 8, 1992, at 1:30 p.m. to discuss the site selection process, the overall Dual Track Planning Process, and organizational matters. Please provide written confirmation of your participation in the Committee prior to that time. A second meeting will be held a few weeks later to begin to address the specifics of the site selection study. If you have any questions, please call Jenn Unruh at the MAC at (612) 726-8189. Sincerely, EMS Nigel D. Finney Deputy Executive Director Planning & Environment izM10.1w The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE• ANOKA COUNTY/BLAINE• CRYSTAL• FLYING CLOUDS LAKE ELMO• SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SITE SELECTION STUDY Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, April 8, 1992, 1:30 p.m. MASAC ROOM MAC General Offices 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota AGENDA 1. Introductions 2. Committee Organizational Issues 3. Presentation and Discussion of Dual Track Airport Planning Process 1992-1996 4. Agenda for Next Meeting 5. Adjourn TECH.AGE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION �.V * iS SA"', Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport r t 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Mini eapolis, MN 55450-2799 1 vL t Z Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 -t o a t N O al o F O C + s� TO: All Interested Persons FROM: Nigel D. Finney Deputy Executive Director - Planning & Environment RE: Dual -Track Airport Planning Process DATE: , March 27, 1992 As an initial step in the environmental process related to the Dual -Track Airport Planning Process, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has prepared a Draft Scoping Document to identify the process and evaluation factors to be used in preparation of the State and Federal environmental documentation. The Draft Scoping Document will be available for review prior to two Scoping Meetings to be held during mid-April. These meetings will be held in Rosemount and Minneapolis since the process will focus on development of both the existing airport as well as selection of a site for a replacement airport. Attached for your information is the notice of the Scoping Meetings, including the date, time, and location of the meeting. A copy of the Draft Scoping Document can be obtained by calling Jenn Unruh (726-8189) after March 31, 1992. 15' C The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE• ANOKA COUNTY BLAINE* CRYSTAL* FLYING CLOUD* LAKE ELMO• SAINT PAUL. DOWNTOWN NOTIFICATION FOR EQB MONITOR NAlipffe-161, • aL FEDERAL EIS — COMMENTS DUE ON MAY 1ST Project Title: Dual -Track Major Airport Planning Process Description: An EIS will be prepared on the impacts of alternatives -for accommodating the long-term air transportation needs of the Minneapolis -St. Paul region. The alternatives will include the upgrade of the existing MSP International Airport, a new major airport in the Dakota County Search Area, and No -Action. Scoping Meetings: Scoping meetings for the public will be held April 21, 1992 at 7:00 p.m. at the Ramsey Jr. High School Auditorium, 1 West 49th Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and again at 7:00 p.m. on April 22, 1992 at the Rosemount High School Student Center, 3335 142nd Street West, Rosemount, Minnesota. A scoping meeting for federal, state and local agencies will be held April 21, 1992 at 2:00 p.m. at the Metropolitan Airports Commission general offices, 6040 28th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Document Availability: Scoping reports are available for review at the following locations: Minneapolis -Washburn Library, 5244 Lyndale Avenue, South; Hennepin County-Oxboro Library, 8801 Portland Avenue South; St. Paul -Highland Park Library, 1974 Ford Parkway; Dakota County -Hastings - Library, 830 Vermillion; Dakota County -Farmington Library, Farmington; City Halls of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington, Richfield, Eagan, Mendota Heights, Inver Grove Heights, Hastings, Rosemount, Cottage Grove, Burnsville, Apple Valley, Farmington, and Lakeville. Copies are available upon request. Contact Person: Jenn Unruh Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota (612) 726-8189 15252/PubNot.LND METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION Minneapolis -Saint PaulInternational Airport a� + °� 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450 o Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 � n F Office of Executive Director V L 4'RPOAt> L March 26, 1992 Enclosed is a copy of the First Phase Scoping Report for the study of major. airport alternatives to meet the future air transportation needs of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. Please make this Scoping Report available to the general public. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Nigel Finney Deputy Executive Director - Planning & Environment Scoping The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. Ilrli�•cvr Ain -H,• AIRI A10: • A\I(W A CtIIWTV M .\In±r. . r'VVQ'T'%1 . c, rn r• "I'll n . • 1 yr . •n " • •,..... •, • •.. ....' DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS FIRST PHASE SCOPING REPORT FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMIVIISSION Prepared By Howard Needles Tammen & Bergendoff The dual -track airport planning process mandated by the 1989 Minnesota Legislature is designed to preserve the future major airport development options in the region. One track addresses ways to provide the needed capacity and facilities at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The other track provides the needed capacity and facilities at a potential replacement airport in a designated search area (Dakota County). CERTIFICATION BY RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENTAL UNIT 3 - __1a. - 4zd::Iazca�, Date Approved Nigel Fin ey, Deputy Execut' ector, Planning and Environment For additional information, contact the following persons: Mr. Nigel Finney Metropolitan Airports Commission 6040 -28th Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnnesota 55450 Telephone: (612) 726-8187 Mr. Glen Orcutt Federal Aviation Administration 6020 -28th Avenue South, Suite 102 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55450 Telephone: (612) 725-4367 s FIRST PHASE SCOPING REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1 A. PURPOSE OF REPORT................................1 B. METROPOLITAN AIRPORT PLANNING ACT OF 1989 .......... 1 C. COMPLETED AIRPORT PLANNING ACTIVITIES .............. 2 II. DUAL -TRACK PLANNING AND ENviRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS ................................... 5 A. NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION ........................ 5 B. NEW AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ................... 7 C. MSP LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ................ 8 D. STATE/FEDERAL EIS ................................ 9 III. ISSUES AND CONCERNS ............................. 11 A. NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION ....................... 11 B. MSP LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ............... 12 C. OVERALL DUAL -TRACK PROCESS ...................... 13 IV. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT ................ 14 A. AGENCIES.......................................14 B. ADVISORY GROUPS................................14 C. PUBLIC .............. ................... .... .15 LIST OF FIGURES 4 FIGURE 1 - DAKOTA SEARCH AREA ........................ 3 FIGURE 2 - MSP LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ............ 4 FIGURE 3 - DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SUMMARY . 16 I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose of Report The purpose of the First Phase Scoping Report is two -fold: 1. to describe the dual -track planning process for the development of major airport alternatives to accommodate the long-term air transportation needs of the region, and 2. to identify the issues and concerns that should be addressed during the process. B. Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of 1989 In 1989 the Minnesota Legislature enacted an airport planning law which includes the following provisions: • AVIATION PLAN. By February 1, 1990, the Metropolitan Council shall amend its aviation plan to include alternatives for major airport development in the metropolitan area for the next 30 years. The alternatives must include both airport improvements and enhancements of capacity at the existing airport Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport (MSP) and the location and development of a new major airport. • SEARCH AREA. By January 1, 1992, the Metropolitan Council shall designate a search area for a new major airport. • MSP PLAN. By January 1, 1992 (as amended), the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) shall adopt a long-term comprehensive plan (LTCP) for MSP International Airport at its existing location to satisfy the air transportation needs for a 30 -year planning period. • NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION & COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Within four years after the designation of the search area, the MAC shall: - select a site for a new major airport within the search area, prepare a comprehensive plan for the development of a new major airport at the selected site to satisfy the air transportation needs for a 30 -year period, and prepare and submit for administrative review the environmental documents required for site acquisition. -1- • AIRPORT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORT (Airport Decision Document). Within 180 days following completion of the comprehensive plans for MSP and a new major airport, the Metropolitan Council and MAC shall report to the legislature on the long-range planning and development of major airport facilities in the metropolitan area. The report must include recommendations of the agencies on major airport development for the 30 -year period and on acquiring a site for a new major airport, including financing. The report must be completed by July, 1996. C. Completed Airport Planning Activities • AVIATION PLAN. In January, 1990, the Metropolitan Council amended its Aviation Development Guide to include the air transportation needs to the year 2020 and the Dual -Track Major Airport Planning Strategy to meet those needs. • SEARCH AREA DESIGNATION. In December, 1991, the Metropolitan Council designated the Dakota Search Area in Dakota County for the planning and development of a new major airport. 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. It includes the cities of Coates, Vermillion and part of Rosemount, and the townships of Empire, Vermillion, part of Nininger and most of Marshan (see Figure 1). The process utilized by the Council in designating the search area was approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board on October 18, 1990 as an alternative environmental review process -- and was reviewed by the FAA and determined consistent with FAA policies and regulations on December 26, 1990. • MSP LONG-TERM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. In November, 1991, the Commission adopted a long-term comprehensive plan for Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport, incorporating a new 8,000 -foot north -south runway on the west side of the airport and a new replacement west terminal (see Figure 2). N : ,tet110 • o .,' cc CD CD L I I. .., I CD .��a3 _ a _ - =r a E c I • c .04 Z .. .. ..._....._ __ E C C W -4- H. DUAL -TRACK PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS The planning and environmental review process proposed to carry out the mandate of the legislature is described in this section. This alternative environmental review process was approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on March 19, 1992. The process will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) orders, and all applicable Federal and State regulations and local ordinances. The following planning and environmental review process is summarized in Figure 3, page 16. A. New Airport Site Selection Site selection within the Dakota Search Area will be accomplished in three phases: 1) Site Identification, 2) Site Screening, and 3) Site Selection. The following set of criteria will be used to identify potential sites: • Runways, taxiways and other airport facilities must be contained within the Search Area boundary; • State safety zones and the 65 Ldn noise contour must not impact urban areas outside of the search area; • The 60 Ldn noise contour should not penetrate current or anticipated urban areas outside the search area; • Runway layouts must maintain the full operational capability of the Conceptual Design Study layout; • No airport facilities, excluding runways and taxiways should be developed over the Vermillion River; • Avoid flood plain areas where possible; • Avoid siting the airport such that substantial portions of the airport cover areas of extensive wetlands; • U.S. Highway 52 realignment should be minimized; • Avoid overflights of obstructions or other hazards (e.g. the Pine Bend Refinery); -5- • Align runways with the prevailing winds. Some of these criteria will be used as minimum requirements for any site, while others will be used as considerations in placing the Conceptual Design Study layout within the Search Area. During the site identification phase, a potential site will include a specific land area within a site boundary and a general airport layout. Once the potential sites have been identified, they will be screened using a series of criteria that could include the following, as applicable: • Physical Geography (Topography, Soils, Geology, Hydrology, Meteorology) • Adjustments to Conceptual Layout • Airspace Interaction • Operational Requirements/Airfield Delay • Existing Roadway Infrastructure • Noise Impacts/Compatible Land Use • Section 4(f) Lands • Historical/Archaeological/Architectural/Cultural Impacts • Biotic Communities • Wetlands • Wild and Scenic Rivers • Prime Farmland • Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites • Water Quality • Air Quality • Threatened and Endangered Species Additional screening criteria could be added as required. After applying the screening criteria, three or four candidate sites will remain. To evaluate these remaining candidate sites, a final set of criteria will be used. These criteria will likely include all of the preceding listed criteria as well as costs, financial feasibility, and ground access travel times. • A scoping report will be prepared by the MAC that describes the identification of potential sites and the screening of the potential sites and airport layouts. The screening will result in the selection of three or four candidate sites proposed for detailed impact analysis in a subsequent environmental document. The scoping report will also identify the issues and impacts proposed for evaluation in the environmental document. The scoping report will be presented at public meetings and will be available for public and agency review and comment. in • Based on the comments to the Site/Layout Scoping Report, the Commission will prepare a Scoping Decision Document (SDD) which will specify the alternatives, issues and impact areas to be addressed in the environmental document. The SDD will also include responses to all timely and substantive comments on the scoping report. • The Commission will prepare an Alternative Environmental Document (AED) for the new airport candidate site alternatives. The AED will be equivalent to a federal environmental impact statement (EIS) in level of analysis in that it will discuss the social, economic and environmental impacts including regional and community impacts, of the three or four candidate sites and layouts that remain after screening in the scoping process. It will also discuss measures to mitigate significant adverse impacts. The AED differs from an EIS in that it will not discuss the impacts of the "no action" alternative and other alternatives to the development of a new airport. (The impacts of these alternatives will be presented in the final EIS that will be prepared later.) The purpose of the AED is to select the most appropriate site for a new airport (in the designated search area) based on environmental, operational, and cost considerations. • The AED will be distributed to interested parties and made available to the public, and a public hearing(s) will be held. Prior to the public hearing(s), the site/layout preferred by the Commission will be identified for the purpose of public review and comment. • Following the public hearing(s) and comment period, the Commission will respond to all timely and substantive comments, determine the adequacy of the AED, and select the new airport site/layout for further study and analysis. B. New Airport Comprehensive Plan • The Commission will study the selected site/layout in detail and prepare alternative development plans for the selected site/layout. The plans will address the needed facilities (terminal, taxiways, parking, ground transportation, etc.), costs, and financial plan for the 30 -year planning period. If in detailing the selected site/layout it is determined that a major shift of the airport layout is required outside of the site boundary, then the Commission will re-evaluate its decision and the revised site/layout will be used. • A scoping process identical to the site selection process will be followed, including a scoping report, public meetings and an SDD. -7- • The Commission will prepare an AED for the alternative development plans. The AED will be similar in scope to the Site/Layout AED with more detailed analysis of layout -specific impacts. • The AED will be distributed to interested parties and made available to the public, and a public hearing(s) will be held. Prior to the public hearing(s), the concept and financial plan preferred by the Commission will be determined for the purpose of public review and comment. • Following the public hearing(s) and comment period, the Commission will respond to all timely and substantive comments, determine the adequacy of the AED, and select the new airport comprehensive plan for inclusion in the Draft EIS as one alternative for meeting the air transportation needs of the region in the future. C. MSP Long -Term Comprehensive Plan • Because of the dynamic nature of the airline industry and the national/regional economy, the economic and air service assumptions and forecasts utilized in the preparation of the MSP Long -Term Comprehensive Plan (LTCP) will be reviewed and revised as necessary for the year 2020. The updated 2020 forecasts will be used for both the New Airport Comprehensive Plan and the MSP LTCP so that these alternatives are directly comparable. • The six alternative concepts previously analyzed will be updated and reassessed based on the following considerations: - aviation demand and air transportation needs - airport capacity limits and potential - facilities requirements - a plan for physical development, including financial estimates and a tentative development schedule airport operational characteristics - compatibility with metropolitan and local physical facility systems - environmental effects - safety - effects on neighboring communities • A scoping report will be prepared by the Commission that describes the updated evaluation of the concepts and those concepts and issues/concerns proposed for detailed impact analysis in the AED. The scoping report will be presented at public meetings and will be available for public and agency review and comment. IM • An SDD will be prepared, including responses to substantive comments on the scoping report. • MAC will prepare an AED for the MSP LTCP that is comparable to the New Airport Comprehensive Plan AED. • The AED will be distributed to interested parties and a public hearing(s) held. Prior to the public hearing(s) the concept and financial plan preferred by the Commission will be determined for the purpose of public review and comment. • Following the public hearing(s) and comment period, the commission will respond to all timely and substantive comments, determine the adequacy of the AED, and select the concept to be included in the Draft EIS as one alternative for meeting the air transportation needs of the region in the future. D. State/Federal EIS • Alternatives in addition to the new airport and MSP LTCP will be identified and evaluated for feasibility based on criteria similar to those used in the new airport and MSP scoping. • A Scoping Document (SD) and Draft Scoping Decision Document (DSDD) for the EIS will be prepared. The DSDD will include the alternatives, issues and impact areas to be addressed in the EIS. The alternatives will include the No Action (which will be defined at this point in the process), New Airport Comprehensive Plan, and MSP LTCP. The SD and DSDD will be presented at public meetings and will be available for public/agency review and comment. • A Scoping Decision Document (SDD) will be prepared and will include responses to the substantive comments received during the specified comment period. • Based on the SDD, the Commission and FAA will prepare a State/Federal Draft EIS in accordance with State and Federal law, rule, regulation and order. • The Draft EIS will be distributed to interested parties, made available to the public, and presented at a public hearing(s). A preferred alternative will not be determined at this time. • A State Final EIS will be prepared and will include responses to the substantive comments received during the specified comment period. The State Final EIS will be submitted to the EQB for'review. 0 • The MAC and Metropolitan Council (MC) will prepare a joint report to the legislature with recommendations on the long-range planning and development of major airport facilities in the metropolitan area, including financing and site acquisition, if appropriate, for a new airport. • The MAC/MC report will be reviewed and acted upon by the Minnesota legislature. • Based on the decision by the legislature on the preferred alternative and the EQB review of the State Final EIS, the Federal Final EIS will be prepared by the Commission and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration in the Record of Decision. -10- III. ISSUES AND CONCERNS The following issues and concerns have thus far been identified. They are culled from public meetings and hearings from the Metropolitan Council Search Area Study, MAC public meetings and hearings from the MSP Long -Term Comprehensive Plan, and from other public forums on the Dual -Track Process. A. New Airport Site Selection 1. The runway and facilities (terminal, taxiways, parking, military, etc.) requirements, and the major assumptions and forecasts that determine those requirements. 2. Impact on the regional airspace system. 3. Impact on natural habitat and wildlife (including bird strikes). 4. Impact on surface water and groundwater (aquifers). 5. Impact on wetlands and floodplains. 6. Impact on agricultural land. 7. Noise impact. 8. Impact on solid and hazardous waste disposal. 9. Impact on historic, architectural, archaeological, and cultural resources. 10. Impact on induced/spin-off development. 11. Cost of land acquisition. 12. Land use compatibility. 13. Impact on public park and recreation land.. 14. Impact on threatened and endangered species. 15. Social impacts. 16. Visual impacts (including light emissions). -11- 17. Impact on wild and scenic rivers. 18. Air quality impacts. 19. Uncertainty of new airport development for residents in and around the search area. 20. Provisions for utility and access infrastructures to service the airport and secondary development areas. 21. Effect on regional development. 22. Effect on property values in the site area and adjacent areas. 23. Effect on lifestyle of Dakota County residents. B. MSP Long -Term Comprehensive Plan 1. The airport capacity needs and potential, facilities (terminal, taxiways, parking, etc.) required to meet 2020 aviation needs, and the major assumptions and forecasts that determine these needs and requirements. 2. Noise impact. 3. Impact on local and metropolitan transportation systems. 4. Impact on cities and neighborhoods surrounding MSP. 5. Safety concerns. 6. Air quality impact. 7. Impact on Fort Snelling historic district and resources. 8. Impact on Minnesota River and Fort Snelling State Park. 9. Impact on Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and environs. 10. Impact on threatened and endangered species. 11. Impact on migratory birds. 12. Water quality impact. -12- 13. Impact on public park and recreation lands. C. Overall Dual -Track Process 1. The impact on long-range growth and the orderly and economic development of the region. 2. Comparison of costs and financing of new airport and MSP expansion, including costs of off-site infrastructure (e.g. transportation) to support the airport. 3. Airport user impact (e.g. accessibility to airport). 4. Air quality impact on the region. 5. Energy impact on the region. -13- IV. PUBLIC AND AGENCY INVOLVEMENT This section focuses on public and agency involvement in the planning process for the new major airport alternative. A. Agencies All affected local, state and federal agencies will be contacted to determine the type and location of resources within their jurisdiction in the search area, and potential impacts and concerns about siting a new major airport. Direct coordination with the agencies will be maintained throughout the process to ensure that the impacts and concerns are adequately addressed. B. Advisory Groups The following groups/committees will be involved in the process: 1. State Advisory Council. The State Advisory Council (SAC) was established by the legislature to provide a forum at the state level for education, discussion and advice to the legislature on metropolitan airport planning. The SAC will receive interim briefings throughout the process on work in progress and on major decisions, and will review and comment to the legislature on the joint MAC/MC report to the legislature. The SAC has 23 members consisting of House and Senate legislators, federal, state and metropolitan agencies, representatives of the aviation industry and members of the public residing within and outside the metropolitan area. 2. Contingency Planning Group. This group monitors trends in technology, travel habits and the economy, and makes an annual assessment of the need to proceed with any major improvements at the current airport or to acquire or develop a new major airport. The Contingency Planning Group comprises Metropolitan Council and MAC members, local officials and business representatives. 3. Interagency Committee. This is a joint committee of board members of MAC and MC mandated by the legislature to oversee the dual -track planning process. 4. Site Selection Task Force. This committee will advise the MAC on the planning process and issues of policy that are raised. Membership will include representatives of federal, state and local agencies, elected officials, and representatives of the business community and airport users. -14- 5. Site Selection Technical Advisory Committee. This committee will review the accuracy and appropriateness of the technical studies and documents. Membership will include representatives of affected state/federal transportation, planning and environmental agencies, local government staff and aviation industry representatives. C. Public The general public will be kept informed through a series of public information meetings, newsletters, press conferences and news releases, as appropriate. They will have opportunities to comment both informally and formally. Formal input will be solicited at public hearings for the new airport site selection AED, the new airport comprehensive plan AED, the MSP Long - Term Comprehensive Plan AED, and the final Federal/State EIS. Informal input from the public can be provided at the scoping public meeting(s), meetings of the advisory groups, and at public meetings which will be scheduled throughout the process, including meetings before each hearing, and at key points in the process. Contact persons at the MAC and/or its consultant will be identified to provide information and receive input throughout the process. 15252/DualTrak.Rap -15- FIGURE 3 DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SUMMARY .. I NEW AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT SELECT FY IPODiEENNTIAl BEEN SIST NST ST LAYOUT FlNALAED. SITES/ SELECT �� COMP. PLANS COM.. PLMS SELECT ED. LAYOUT/ � SEARCH SITESA.AYOUTS LAYOIRS �� SDD PUBLIC HRNG STTEMYOUT COMP PLNS SCOPING RPT PUBLIC MTGS. � DRAFTAED, PUBLIC HRNti AIRPORT 2020 COMP. PLAN AREA MTGS MAC MAC DEC. 1991 MC. MAC. JAN 1994 I APRIL 1993 EIS EIS EIS SCOPING EVALUATE 2nd PHASESION OTHER STA1E F¢jS AIRPORT DECIUM:NT SELECT FEDERAL FEDERAL PREFERRED FINAL RECORD OF DRAFT 131SCOP11 PHASE PUBLIC MTY;S ALTERNATIVES Sa b DL PUBLIC MTGS MAC MA � DOC AIRPORT DECISION APRIL. 1992 MARCH, 1984 JAN. 1995 MC MN. FM FAA MARCH, 1995 LEGISLATURE MSP DEVELOPMENT ~ I I I LISPEIDA UPDATEmmmmma UPDATE' MSP SCOPING D MR FINALAED. SELECT MSP LONGTP FORECASTS CONCEPT MANS ERi PUBLIC SDD0. UBLIC :AE RNG 2020 COMP.COMP PLAN PLAN MTGS MAC MAC. NOV, 1991 I APRIL, 1983 MAC. JAN 1994 AED =Akerlrative Environmerdal Document l SD=Scopinngg Document DSDD=Draft Scopmq Decision Document SDD =Scoping Deck ion Documerd MAC =MetropolltanAirportsCommission -16- MC =Metropolitan Council FAA=FederatAviatlonAdministration