The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4. Airport Relocation Site Selection ProcessSelecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport December 1991 Part four: Search Area Designation The fourth in a series of reports to the Twin Cities Area Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 E. Fifth St. St. Paul, MN 55101 612 291-6359 TDD 291-0904 Data Center 612 291-8140 Publication No. 559-91-156 Preparation of this document was financed in part through a planning grant from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as provided under section 505 of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the FAA. Acceptance of this report by the FAA does not in any way constitute a commitment on the part of the United States to participate in any development depicted therein nor does it indicate that the proposed development is environmentally acceptable in accordance with appropriate public laws. Metropolitan Council Members Mary E. Anderson, chair Liz Anderson Susan Anderson Polly P. Bowles Dirk deVries Bonnie D. Featherstone David F. Fisher Jim Krautkremer Carol Kummer Kenneth Kunzman E. Craig Morris Esther Newcome Donald B. Riley James W. (Jim) Senden Margaret Schreiner Sondra R. Simonson Dede Wolfson 0 -Contents Preface........................................................................................................................................ 1 Metropolitan Council Recommendations........................................................................... 2 New -Major Airport Search Area........................................................................................ 2 EnvironmentalReview Process........................................................................................ 4 Development of Associated Recommendations................................................................ 5 NextSteps in the Process.................................................................................................. 5 Issues to be Addressed During New -Major Airport Site Selection Process ...................... 7 Appendices........................................................................................................_...................... 13 Technical Description of Dakota Search Area................................................................... 13 Planning Process Since the Task Force Completed Its Recommendations in September..................................................................................... 13 Summary of Land Use Regulations Related to New -Major AirportDevelopment....................................................................................................... 13 Bibliography...................................................................................................................... 16 2 Associated Recommendations........................................................................................... 4 New -Major Airport Search Area Designation...................................................................... 4 Area DakotaSearch ............................................................................................................ EnvironmentalReview Process........................................................................................ 4 Development of Associated Recommendations................................................................ 5 NextSteps in the Process.................................................................................................. 5 Issues to be Addressed During New -Major Airport Site Selection Process ...................... 7 Appendices........................................................................................................_...................... 13 Technical Description of Dakota Search Area................................................................... 13 Planning Process Since the Task Force Completed Its Recommendations in September..................................................................................... 13 Summary of Land Use Regulations Related to New -Major AirportDevelopment....................................................................................................... 13 Bibliography...................................................................................................................... 16 ' • Preface This report represents a major step in airport planning for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. It describes a Metropolitan Council decision, made in December, 1991, to designate a large area in east -central Dakota County as the "search area" - - a general location - - for a possible replacement airport. The decision is the culmination of two years of planning in the Twin Cities that has led up to the search area selection. The report focuses on the designation itself and the activities of the Council in the last three months of 1991. This report should be read together with a companion report, Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Three. Recommended Search Area (Sept. 1991). This earlier report summa- rizes the work and recommendations of the Council's New -Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force. The task force report contains considerable data on the Dakota Search Area and comparative data on two other areas the task force considered. In addition, the task force report describes the methodol- ogy task force members used to rank the three search areas then under consideration and summarizes the public process the task force followed. People interested in reviewing the data base and the analysis of the data prepared by the Council should also review Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis and Appendices (Sept. 1991). The Bibliography section at the end of this report has a complete list of search area reports published by the Council. The Council has been conducting the search area planning under the "dual - track" process. One track is the subject of this report. The second track refers to the planning the Metropolitan Airports Commission has been conducting to see how additional capacity might be added at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP). The purpose of the dual -track planning, in its broadest sense, is to compile comparable cost and human, community and environmental impact informa- tion so a factual comparision can be made between the options of either building a new airport or expanding MSP. Under state law (the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of 1989), the Metro- politan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission are to complete all necessary studies, and make recommendations to the Minnesota Legisla- ture. That body will decide which option, or some variation, to implement. People interested in the status of the long-range planning for MSP should contact the MAC directly. K i Metropolitan New -Major Airport Search Area Council Recommendations 1. The Metropolitan Council desig- nates the Dakota Search Area as the search area for the location of a potential new major replacement airport to serve the scheduled air service needs of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 473.155, subdivision 3 (1990). The search area is defined in the "Tech- nical Description of the Dakota Search Area" section of the Appen- dices. 2. The Metropolitan Council finds that the environmental analysis is adequate to support the designation of the Dakota Search Area. This analysis is contained in Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis and Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport Part Three: Recommended Search Area and associated reports. Additional detailed environmental analysis will be done in the course of the siting process. 3. The Metropolitan Council directs staff to transmit the Council's action on the designation of the Dakota Search Area and the background documents to the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Associated Recommendations 1. Dual -Track Major Airport Planning Strategy. The Metropoli- tan Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission should: • examine in the 1991 Annual Contingency Assessment Report ways to shorten and expedite the planning process required for the 2 new major airport site selection, airport development planning and environmental analysis; • develop a detailed planning time line for the siting process (1992- 1996 or a shortened period) for use by the affected units of government, public agencies and general public; and • develop a budget for future work on both tracks of the process. 2. New -Major Airport Siting. The Metropolitan Airports Commission should establish an interactive Planning process with the affected communities, Dakota County and regional and state agencies to assist in the new -airport studies. The Metropolitan Airports Commission and the Metropolitan Council should address the issues identified in the "Issues to be Addressed During New Major Airport Site Selection Process" section of this report in the planning for a poten- tial new -major airport in the Dakota Search Area. 3• Land -Use Compatibility. The Metropolitan Council should work closely with Dakota County and communities in and around the search area to develop a joint management plan for land -use compatibility around a new airport that would take effect if the deci- sion is made to build a new major airport. 4. Financial and Technical Assis- tance. Communities in the search area should be provided financial and/or technical assistance for their participation in the site selection and new airport planning process. The Metropolitan Council should work with the communities, Dakota County and MAC to develop techni- cal and financial assistance propos- als for legislative consideration for the 1992 legislative session. The report and recommendations should be presented to the Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. 5. Assistance for Home Owners and :Land Owners. The Metropolitan Council, in consultation with the search area communities, Dakota County and MAC, should prepare a proposal for a purchase guarantee program and funding source to assist owners of individual homes and/or small acreage who are facing a hardship situation in selling their properties at fair prices in the search area. The report and recom- mendations should be presented to the Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. 6. Airport Site Protection. The Metropolitan Council, in conjunc- tion with the search area communi- ties, Dakota County, MAC, and communities adjacent to MSP, should study the pros and cons of various site protection measures, their impacts on the local area and how they could be implemented for each track of the dual -track process. The study should be presented to the Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. 7. Contingency Planning Assess- ment. In 1992, as part of the contingency planning process, the Council, in consultation with MAC, should reassess the long-term major airport capacity needs of the region and the adequacy of MSP. This update of the MSP Adequacy Study should be carried out with the assistance of an independent panel of experts to evaluate the basic assumptions and methodology used to develop long-term aviation forecasts for the region. This should include a financial assessment Of the state's budget in order to make a determination as to whether or not it is appropriate to continue with the dual -track process. Dakota Search Area The search area shown above is the area within which a potential new airport woula De siLea. i ms arca was sucu w accommodate the new airport conceptual runway design as shown on p. 15 of this report. Runway approach zones, airspace zones and airport noise zones may extend beyond, depending on local geographic features that may affect the exact runway placement. Where needed, legislation provides for a 3-5 mile buffer zone around the final site to ensure future community/airport land use and operational compatibility. (See Appendices section, "Summary of Land Use Regulations Related to New -Major Airport Development," for more information). The section also has an illustra- tion of the airport conceptual design that was used in the search area planning that shows federal and state protec- tion areas. Hew -Major Airport Search Area Designation Dakota Search Area After nearly two years of data collection, analysis, community meetings, review and debate, the Metropolitan Council finds that the Dakota Search Area Is the most promising area within which to locate a possible new replacement airport for MSP. The Dakota Search Area is located in Dakota County and is approximately 17 miles in length east and west, and 8 miles in width north and south. It covers approximately 115 square miles, or 74,590 acres. The search area comprises major parts of the City of Rosemount and the Townships of Nininger and Marshan and all of the Cities of Coates and Vermillion and the Townships of Empire and Vermillion. The Metropolitan Council's designa- tion of the Dakota Search Area marks the beginning of a new phase of the "new airport option" track of the dual -track strategy. The MAC is charged under the dual -track legislation to select a site for a potential new major airport within the search area, to prepare an airport development plan and to conduct the required environmental analysis. Designation of the Dakota Search Area is based on six major selection criteria adopted by the Council and its New -Airport Search Area Advi- sory Task Force. The task force reported its recommendations to the Council in September 1991 in the report Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part nree. Recommended Search Area. The three most significant criteria used by the task force were: • Metropolitan access (the ease of reaching the search area from the Twin Cities metropolitan region); • Potential environmental impacts (the environmental concerns within each search area); and • General search area characteristics (the social and economic nature of each area that will be affected by a possible new airport); The other criteria used involved general land requirements devcl- oped for a conceptual new airport, national, state and regional airspace considerations, and policy consider- ations. The data analyses based on the criteria are contained in the report Selecting a Search Area for a New -Major Airport. • Part Two, Data Analysis (September 1991) and its Appendices. Environmental Review Process The Metropolitan Council recog- nizes the great importance of assessing environmental impacts as part of the planning process for a potential new major airport. The environmental review process the Council has been following for the search area designation process is unique. It recognized that two separate agencies, the Council and the MAC, have responsibilities for different stages of the new airport option of the dual -track strategy. It also recognized the need to comply with both state and federal environ- mental rules. The Council used an alternative form of state environ- mental review which was approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB). The Council has been examining the environ- mental issues in a step-by-step process. The completion of each step has resulted in more detailed analysis. Each step provided guid- ance for the next step. The MAC will use a similar alternative review process in its siting effort. The MEQB found the Council's process to be "as comprehensive or more comprehensive than an EIS." In addition, the process is compatible with the policies and procedures of the Federal Aviation Administration. Steps in the Environmental Review Process • Initial Scoping. In August .1989, the Council held a public forum on the issues and concerns of the broader Twin Cities community regarding locating a new major airport. • Task Force. In September 1989, the Council appointed a New -Major Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force to assist in the planning and search area designation process. Members were added to represent each of the three search areas in January 1991. • Criteria Development. The task force developed a draft report on new major airport search area criteria in November -December 1989, and conducted a series of public discussions and critique sessions in January -April 1990. The Council adopted the criteria in May 1990 (Search Area Criteria for a New Major Airport). • Candidate Search Areas. The Council, with the advice of the task force, selected three search areas using the criteria and information on general availability of land (A Report on the General Land Avail- ability for a New Major Airport to Serve the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area). The MEQB agencies re- ceived the candidate search area report, Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport, Part One: Three Candidate Areas, for review and comment. • Public Meetings On Search Areas. 4` - The task force conducted a series of public meetings in each of the • . candidate search areas and in St. Paul to solicit public comments. The comments were used to refine and focus the study/analysis of search areas (Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport.• Summary of Comments at Eight Public Meetings). - Draft Data Analysis Report. The task force prepared a draft data analysis report on the three search areas (Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport Part Two. Draft Data Analysis and Appendi- ces). The MEQB review agencies received the report and provided comments. Public information meetings were held and three public comment meetings were conducted in July. The environmen- tal evaluation of the search areas focused on three key categories, as follows: - Physical Environmental Factors: wetlands, rivers, lakes, and streams, floodplains, groundwater/surficial geology, agricultural and forest land coverage, parks and open space, pipelines, hazardous/solid waste sites and organic soil; - Biological Environmental Factors: Animal and plant biotic communi- ties; and - Airport Development/Operations Environmental Factors: waste generation, air quality and water quality. - Task Force Recommendation. Following the receipt of public comments, the task force updated and revised the data analysis report. The task force prepared its draft recommendations for public com- ment (Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Three: Recommended Search Area) and held public hearings in early Sep- tember. The draft report highlighted the environmental issues raised in the search area selection process that would require further analysis in the site selection process. The task force recommended the Dakota Search Area to the Council in September. • Council Public Hearing. The Council conducted public hearings on the task force fmal''report on Oct. 30. The report was available at least 30 days prior to the public hearing. The hearing record was held open for 10 days and a sum- mary of the correspondence and what was discussed at the hearing was prepared. The summary was also sent to MEQB agencies. • Council Final Report. This final report has been prepared after review of the public hearing com- ments. The report and background reports -Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis and Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport; Part Three: Recommended Search Area -identify environmental issues raised during the search area process and that require further analysis in the MAC's site selection process. • Council Search Area Designation. ation. The Council's designation of the Dakota Search Area and determina- tion of adequacy of the analysis supporting the decision will be transmitted to the MAC and the Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. The transmittal will include identifica- tion of environmental issues raised in the search area selection process that require further analysis in the site selection process. Development of Associ- ated Recommendations As part of the search area designa- tion, the Council identified issues for further analysis in the site selection process. While the MAC is the lead agency, both the Council and MAC have responsibilities for various parts of the site selection and new airport master planning process. During the search area study, citizens, communities, business organizations, environmen- tal groups, and public agencies provided information and identified issues for attention during the site selection process. These issues are summarized in a following section of this report, "Issues to be Ad- dressed During the New -Major Airport Site Selection Process." This report will become part of the scoping for the new -major airport siting process when the MAC begins the siting process in January 1992. The siting process is to be com- pleted within four years. Once the new -airport studies are completed, comparisons of the advantages/ disadvantages and costs/benefits between expanding MSP and building a new major replacement airport will be made. Next Steps Following publication of this report, the responsibility for siting a loca- tion within the Dakota Search Area moves to the MAC. Under state law, the MAC has until the end of 1995 to pick a site, and complete all necessary studies. The Council will be assisting the MAC with the siting process. The MAC and the Council will make recommendations based on their studies to the legislature regarding implementation of im- provements at the current airport or building a new airport. The MAC will be considering physical, social and environmental aspects of the search area and could modify the spacing and orientation of the runways to accommodate these aspects. Once this has been accomplished, questions about land ownership and/or land use compat- ibility can be addressed. Once the Council designates the search area, new search area protec- tion takes effect (see Appendices). The Council will communicate the procedures to affected local govern- ments. The Council will also need to amend its Aviation Development Guide to incorporate the search area. The Council will continue to prepare an annual contingency report to the state legislature. The report includes information about changes in air service, the economy and other factors that could affect the timing of the region's dual -track decisions Part of this activity in 1992 includes a review of the aviation forecasts, the long-term airport capacity needs of the region and the adequacy of MSP. In addition, the Council will con- duct a legislatively mandated re -use study of the current airport site to assess possible new uses if the airport is moved to a new location. A task force created by the Council Will oversee the study. It is made up of representatives of groups inter- ested in the possible reuse of the airport. This search area designation report recommends looking at ways to shorten the amount of time needed to do the necessary studies to locate the site within the search area. The Council and the MAC are currently discussing how this might be accomplished. Issues to be Addressed During Hew -Major Airport Site Selection Process The following table summarizes the area is identified and the economic, subjects that will be looked at by environmental and social effects of a the MAC as a site within the search possible new airport are analysed. Airport Operation Issues New Airport Siting Process • Airport Design Requirements update long-term air carrier forecasts and annually assess major assumptions and results (annual contingency planning assessment). update facility requirements for 2020 and beyond for a new replacement airport; determine facility needs for potential date of opening (including number and orientation of runways, number and type of gates, terminal space requirements, parking facilities, on-site support facilities). determine development phasing of new airport and define airport transition plan (including impacts on regional systems and investments). compare capabilities of new airport and MSP. assess role and impact of alternative transportation modes on airport facility design and facility require ments. • Airspace System define new terminal control area, airspace gate structure, navigational way points/fixes and air traffic proce dures. assess specific impacts on existing land use, adjacent airports, navigational aids, airways for each alternative site. conduct preliminary airspace reviews (alternative sites and final airport layout plan) with the FAA • Land Use Compatibility (See also "Infrastructure Investment Issues") apply provisions of new -major airport search area protection law. develop/implement procedures for airport safety zone regulations and new major airport development area law. Environmental Issues New Airport Siting Analysis • Natural Habitat and Wildlife conduct biological survey comparable to a Minnesota County Biological Survey for the search area and environs to establish specific locations of critical plant and animal habitat. determine boundaries of critical plant and animal habitat. assess impacts of airport development and operation. identify mitigation measures and general cost of mitigation. • Surface Water and Groundwater define location of protected rivers, lakes and streams. assess impacts of airport development (land coverage of runways, terminal buildings, associated airport buildings, road access) and operation. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency require compliance with federal Clean Water Act. MAC is required to apply for a national pollutant discharge elimination system permit and a state disposal system permit. The permits regulate runoff to protect surface and groundwater. assess geologic sensitivity to surface -derived contaminants (surface spills, etc.). assess geologic sensitivity to subsurface -derived contaminants (petroleum storage tanks, leaking pipelines). assess impact of abandoned (unsealed) wells and existing wells (including WellheadProtectionArea). assess use of and impact on aquifers for water supply needs of airport operation. • assess impact of proximity to potential sources of contamination (old open dumps, landfills, etc.) assess depth to water table. assess relationship to regional and local groundwater flow regimes (vertical and horizontal gradients). assess impact of any groundwater appropriation permits. Q • Wetlands define location of wetlands including use of field checks. - evaluate type and classification of wetlands. assess impacts of airport development and operation. comply with requirements of state and federal law regarding avoidance of wetlands, wetland replacement and mitigation measures. • Agricultural Land identify prime agricultural land. assess impacts of airport development and operation on prime agricultural land (including potential use of airport development area law and land use controls to protect or continue agricultural uses). assess impact on Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program. • Noise Impacts federal and state noise analysis required to ensure airport development plan and operation meets federal and state criteria for noise impact and future land use compatibility (including FAR PART 150 Implementation Program). LdN 75 to be on airport site and LdN 65 on or within airport land use control area (airport development area law provides for noise -related regulations). assess land use regulations of the airport development area law and noise impact area determined for final airport site. assess application of Metropolitan Council land use compatibility guidelines. • Rural Development Impacts identify population, households and housing units within new airport site. assess land use changes (employment and economic activity). assess relocation costs and impacts. assess impacts on cemeteries. assess development impacts of airport development on local infrastructure (including roads).. • Airport User Impacts assess air travel distances (including cost of delay and airport efficiency) assess travel time and distance for population and employment to new airport site. assess travel time and distance for airport employees to new airport site. assess travel time and distance for airport -dependent businesses (air cargo, etc.) • Air Quality assess air quality impacts of airport road system (parking, terminal area access), boiler plant and aircraft operation; indirect -source permit required. assess compliance with state and federal air quality regulations. • Solid Waste/Hazardous Disposal assess impacts of waste disposal facilities on airport site. assess cast of mitigation measures (including relocation of facilities or the reimbursement for remaining economic life). • Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, Cultural Resources assess impact on properties included or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and cost of mitigation of impacts on properties covered by National Historic Preservation Act. survey to identify and evaluate cultural resources including consultation with Office of the State Archaeologist and Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. Fossil Fuels assess fuel consumption for ground transportation (automobile and transit alternatives) to serve new airport site and compare with MSP. assess difference in fuel consumption for aircraft between major city pairs and MSP/ new airport site. Economic Development and Airport Finance Issues New Airport Siting Process • Long -Range Metropolitan Growth assess impact of new airport site and MSP on the long-range growth and on the orderly and economic development of the Metropolitan Area including potential impact on Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework policies. annually assess changes in airline industry. Examine such factors as: aircraft operations; airline passengers and air cargo; technology -aircraft, navigational aids/landing systems, alternative transportation modes (modes competitive with air travel; modes used to provide airport ground access); fuels (availability and price); and finance; airline structure; national/regional economy. Examination will help ascertain need for and/or timing of major airport development • Land Use and Economic Development assess potential impact on regional development policy (Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework). assess impact of airport development on property tax valuation and taxes. determine method to capture for public uses a portion of the revenue from development around the new airport. determine reuse policies for MSP; examine airport -related development in airport environs -commercial, industrial and residential. update airport development area law to ensure adequate zoning and land use controls to protect the new airport from incompatible development. - Spin-off Development estimate timing, amount and type of spin-off development and impact on Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework policies. determine method to capture for public uses a portion of the revenue from development around the new airport. determine reuse policies for MSP; examine airport -related development in airport environs -commercial, industrial and residential • Airport Finance determine process, policies and controls needed and a financial plan to implement a site protection program for a potential new airport. determine financial plan for airport development (new airport and MSP) including sources of funds (fees, leases charges, federal grants, sale of MSP airport assets). determine reuse policies for MSP. compare financing options for new airport site development and MSP expansion. annually assess changes in airline industry (operations; technology -aircraft, navigational aids/landing systems, alternative modes-; finance; airline structure; national/regional economy). Infrastructure Investment Issues New Airport Siting Process • Onsite Airport Infrastructure Investment determine how to provide on-site airport public services (sanitary and storm sewer systems, water, fire, police) consistent with regional development policy, specifically the Metropolitan Development and Invest meet Framework. • Offsite Airport Infrastructure Investment assess impact of ground transportation (highway and transit) corridors and investment requirements including regional highway network and minor arterial network. assess impacts of on-site and off --site investment needs (regional and local community/county) and develop implementation schedule. conduct a study to determine jurisdictional roles and responsibilities for infrastructure improvements to serve the new airport and related off-site development. assess social and economic impacts of airport development on airportenvirons (residential, commercial, industrial, agriculture and public services including schools. 17 Appendices Technical Description of Dakota Search Area All land within an area with bound- aries described as follows: begin- ning at a point located at the north- west corner of Section 6, Township 114N, Range 19W, Dakota County, said point also being a common point of the corporate limits of Apple Valley, Rosemount, and Lakeville; thence easterly along the southern corporate limit of Rosemount to the centerline of Biscayne Avenue; thence northerly along said centerline to the centerline of County Road 42; thence easterly along said centerline to the centerline of Blaine Avenue; thence northerly along said centerline to the centerline of County Road 38; thence easterly along said centerline to the centerline of County Road 42; thence northeasterly along said centerline to the centerline of State Highway 55; thence easterly along said centerline to the corporate limits of Hastings; thence southerly and easterly along said corporate limits to the centerline of Highway 316; thence southeasterly along said centerline to the ccnterline of County Road 91; thence southerly along said centerline to the centerline of 220th Street East; thence westerly along said centerline and its extension to the corporate limits of Farmington; thence northerly and westerly to the point of beginning; all roads, streets, highways, and political jurisdiction boundaries as they exist as of December 21, 1990; all being in the County of Dakota, Minnesota. Planning Process Since Task Force Completed its Recommendations in September In September, the Metropolitan Council received the report of the New -Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force, Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part 3: Recommended Search Area. The task force selected the Dakota Search Area and made six other recommendations about the airport planning process for the coming years. The Council decided to hold public hearings to get public reaction to the report. The process was pub- lished in the State Register and local newspapers, and notices were mailed to local governments and citizens in the three search areas. Notices of the hearings were mailed to about 1,200 people, including every unit of government in the three search areas, "community contacts" identified early in the process and all of the people who had attended previous meetings in the recommended search area. The Council purchased advertisements in local papers, and distributed a newsletter on the question to about 700 people. On Oct. 30, the Council held two public hearings in St. Paul and in Rosemount. About 200 people participated in these hearings; 35 provided testimony. The public hearing record remained open through Nov. 14, allowing people additional time to submit written comments. In mid-November, the Council's Metropolitan Systems Committee reviewed the public hearing com- ments, and on Dec. 3, the commit- tee recommended designating the Dakota Search Area as the general location for a possible replacement airport for Minneapolis-St.Paul International Airport. Following committee action, there was a 10 - day public comment period to allow interested groups and individuals another opportunity to submit written comments based on the committee's recommendations. The full Council considered and adopted this report on Dec. 19, 1991. Summary of Land Use Regulations Related to New Major Airport Development Presented to the New -Major Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force on July 20, 1990 The following summarizes the numerous regulatory measures available to protect a new -major airport in the metropolitan area from incompatible land uses. These regulations are graphically depicted below. Except for the Airport Zoning Act, these regulations apply only to the seven county metropoli- tan area. New -Major Airport Search Area Protection The initial regulatory measure for protecting a new major airport site from incompatible land uses is the search area protection legislation (Minn. Stat. $ 473.151) passed by the Minnesota Legislature in 1990. This legislation requires that land use changes (rezoning, variances, and conditional use permits) within the candidate search areas be consistent with the comprehensive plans adopted by the affected local units of government. These com- prehensive plans have been re- viewed and approved by the Metro- politan Council. For the final search area, the Icgisla- tion requires that land use changes (rezoning, variances, and condi- tional use permits) be consistent with comprehensive plans of the affected local units of government, the metropolitan system plans (the Metropolitan Council's plans for airports, transportation, waste control, regional recreation open space), and the development and operation of a new major airport. The search area protections will remain in effect for one year follow- ing the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commis- sion report to the Legislature with recommendations concerning major airport development and acquiring a site for new major airport. Follow- ing the expiration of the search area protections, the Metropolitan Council will still be able to use its authority related to comprehensive plan approval and its authority to control the provision of metropoli- tan urban services to limit conflict- ing land uses around the airport site. The following regulations will also apply. Airport Land -Use Safety Zoning Assuming that the legislature decides that a new major airport is needed, the provisions of the Airport Zoning Act (Minn. Stat. § § 360.360.91) will apply once the new airport is built to protect the airport site from incompatible land uses. The Airport Zoning Act restricts land uses within zones emanating from the ends of the runways (Zone A and Zone B) and elsewhere. The Act, however, will not immediately apply if the airport site is simply landbanked and the runways are not built until a later date. New -Major Airport Development Area Act Minnesota Statutes, section 473.636, authorizes the Metropoli- tan Council to establish criteria and guidelines for the development of land within an area called the "airport development area." This area may consist of all or a portion of the property extending out three miles from the proposed boundaries of the new airport site. The airport development area may extend five miles in any direction from the airport site if the Metropolitan Council determines the extension is necessary to protect natural re- sources of the metropolitan area. The criteria and guidelines may relate to various land use and development control measures, including zoning ordinances, building codes, subdivision regula- tions, and official maps. The criteria and guidelines are meant to insure the development or maintenance of compatible land uses within the airport development area. The local units of government within the airport development area must adopt land use control measures which are consistent with the criteria and guidelines established by the Metropolitan Council. In addition, Minnesota Statutes, section 473.637, authorizes the Metropolitan Council to establish "aircraft noise zones." The noise zones will designate the acceptable land uses for the applicable level of noise within the noise zone. A noise zone may extend beyond the boundaries of the airport develop- ment area. The local units of government with land use control authority located within the zones must adopt land use control mea- sures consistent with the zones.)r. . nI •� ZONE B ZONE Airport Development Area;I (Minn. Stat. 473.636) I ;�,JZONEB7 I • I ZONE B NOISE ZONES (Minn. Stat. 473.637) SEARCH AREA (Minn. Stat. 473.1551) A ' ZONE A ' ZONE A ,X ',(Minn. Stat 360.061-360.074) ZONE A e--,360.81-360.91 New Airport Runway Conceptual Design Source: New Air Carrier Airport Conceptual Design Study and Plan. January, 1991. Metropolitan Airports Commission by TRA Airport Consulting, et. aL New Airport Conceptual Design State and Federal Protection Zones Source: Metropolitan Council Bibliography Metropolitan Council. Twin Cities Air Travel: A Strategy for Growth. October, 1988. Metropolitan Council. Twin Cities Air Travel: A Strategy for Growth. Report to the Minnesota legislature. Decem- ber, 1988. Metropolitan Council. Search Area Criteria for a New Major Airport. May, 1990 Metropolitan Council. A Report on the General Land Availability for a New Major Airport to Serve the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. November, 1990. Metropolitan Council. Twin Cities Major Airport Planning. • A Citizen's Guide. December, 1990. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part One., Three Candidate Areas. January, 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for New Major Airport: Summary of Comments at Eight Public Meetings. May, 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two.: Draft Data Analysis. June, 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area far a New Major Airport. Part Two Appendices, Draft Data Analysis Appendices. June, 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis. Sept. 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis Appendices. Sept., 1991. Metropolitan Council. Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport. Part Three: Recommended Search Area. Sept. 1991. Summary of The 1989 Metropolitan Airports Planning Law Presented to q The State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning Jill Schultz, Senate Research Tom Todd, House Research Deborah Dyson, House Research Revised November 18, 1991 The Metropolitan Airport Planning Process: 1989-1996 1989 Agency Coordination Documents Agency General Planning Documents Long -Range Annual Long -Range Plans for Planning Plans Fidsting Review for New Airport, Airport T 1996 Final Agency Report and Recommendations W The 1989 Metropolitan Airport Planning Law Reports and Planning Activities in Chronological Order Deadline for Completion Planning Activity or Report July 1. 1989 MAC -Council interagency agreement. September 1, 1989 0MAC-Council scope of work report. February 1, 1990 Council amends Aviation Guide Chapter. February 1, 1990 ` Council report on site protection. March 1. 1990 Council report on long-range aviation goals. March 1, 1990 Council report on assumptions and methods for forecasting demand over next 30 years. March 1, 1990 ` MAC report on assumptions and methods for forecasts used to operate and develop current airport. March 1, 1990 0MAC report on airport integration with state, national and international air transportation systema March 1. 1990 MAC report on conceptual design study for a major new airport. December 1, 1990 0Council report on general availability of land in and around seven -county metropolitan area. January 1. 1991 SMAC completes conceptual design plan for major new airport. January 1, 1992 MAC adopts long-term comprehensive plan for the current airport. January 1, 1992 Council designates a search area for a new airport. January 1, 1993 ` Council reports on reuse of land at the current airport.. By January 1, 1.996 0MAC completes site selection for a new airport, comprehensive plan facility requirements, and environmental work for site acquisition. Until. January 1, 1996 (or If constructing new runway or substantially expanded or end of process) relocated terminal, MAC must pass resolution, containing findings of fact and conclusions showing the construction is necessary and prudent. By July 1. 1996 MAC -Council report making recommendations on site acquisition and on major airport development in the metropolitan area for the next 30 years. February 15, annually Council prepares long-range assessment of air transportation trends and factors affecting major metro airport development. February 15, annually Council and MAC each report on results of aviation planning activities, expenditures, and funding sources. ' Designates a report on which the Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning must review ad comment to the Legislature. The Metropolitan Airport Planning Process: 1989.1996 Agency Coordination Documents July 1, 1989 - Council - MAC Interagency September Council - MAC Scope of Work Agreement 1, 1989 - Report Agency General Planning Documents Foreauting , March 1. 1990 • Council reports on forecasting aviation demand '`. • MAC reports on forecasting airport operational and facility needs Aviation System February 1. _1990 • Council amends metro aviation plat Much 1..1Qi4 • Council reports on long-range aviation al: • SMAC reports on airport systema and . development issuer Existing Airport Plans Annual Planning Review Documents Until January I, 19961 before constructing a new runway or a terminal, the MAC must pass a resolution, containing findings of fact and conclusions showing that the February 1S - Each project is necessary and prudent. year council reports on trends and factors affecting aviation. January 1, 1992 - MAC adopts February 15 - Each comprehensive airport development year council and MAC plan. each report on planning acitivities. New Airport Plans February 1, 1990 - Council reports on site protection methods. 01 March I, 1990 - MAC reports on conceptual design study. December 1, 1990 - Council reports on availability of land In and around the metro area. January 1, 1991- MAC reports on conceptual design plan. January 1, 1992 - Council selects airport search area. January 1, 1993 - Council reports on ways of reusing land at existing airport. Four years after search area selection (by January 1, 1996) - MAC selects a site and completes a long-range development plan and other documents necessary for acquiring land. l Final Report and Recommendations on Airport .Development By Council and MAC, M dui aftct sits selection (ley July 1, 1996) DU . AL -TRACK AIRPORT -PLANNING PROCESS, 1992-1996 SCHEDULE ELEMENT 1992 1993 1994 1995 NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTION NEW AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EIS PROCESS COMMUNITY IMPACT STUDIES ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDIES USP LTCP CONTINUING ANALYSIS & UPDATE mom DECISION DOCUMENT PUBLIC REVIEW/ COORDINATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PROCESS TASK 1992 1993 1994 - - 1995 FIRST PHASE SCOPING. SITE SELECTION ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, SITE SELECTION STATE EIS, SITE SELECTION ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. NEW AIRPORT PLANS STATE EIS, NEN AIRPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLANS ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. MSP PLANS STATE ELS. MSP LONG --TERM COMP. PIAN SECOND PHASE SCOPING PREPARE DRAFT EIS CONDUCT PUBLIC _ HEARING/MEETING STATE EIS DOCUMENT FINAL FEDERAL EIS FEDERAL RECORD OF DECISION METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612 291-6359 TDD 612 291-0904 DATE: January 28, 1992 TO: Metropolitan Systems Committee FROM: John Kari SUBJECT: "Major Airport Planning Activities -- 1991" Report to the Legislature Since the enactment of the "dual -track" legislation in 1989 the Council is required to report on its major airport planning activities undertaken the previous year to the Legislature. This report is due by February 15, 1992 for 1991 airport planning activities. The 1991 planning activities addressed are: • the annual contingency -planning assessment; • the designation of the Dakota Search Area for a potential major new airport; and • policies for the re -use of the existing major airport, Minneapolis -St. Paul (MSP) International Airport, should a new one be developed. The annual planning update for the legislature is also to include a summary of expenditures and funding sources for activities undertaken in 1991. The Council's Contingency Planning Advisory Committee reviewed the attached draft report at its January 24, 1992 meeting and recommended that it be forwarded to Council for adoption. RECOMMENDATION That the Metropolitan Council adopt Report to the Legislature Moor Airport Planning Activities of the Metropolitan Council: 1991 and direct staff to transmit the report to the Minnesota Legislature. Report to the Legislature MAJOR AIRPORT PLANNING ACTIVITIES of the METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 1991 Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Publication No. 559-92-020 ABOUT THIS REPORT This is the third annual report to the Minnesota Legislature on the Metropolitan Council's major airport planning activities. This report covers calendar year 1991. The report is required under the 1989 Metropolitan Airport Planning Act. The planning activities addressed are: • the annual contingency -planning assessment; the designation of the Dakota Search Area for a potential major new airport; and • policies for the reuse of the existing major airport, Minneapolis -St. Paul (MSP) International Airport, should a new one be developed. The annual planning update for the legislature is also to include a summary of expenditures and funding sources for activities undertaken in 1991. ii Contents Page About This Report ....................... i Annual Contingency -Planning Assessment .................................. 1 Purpose and Objective ........................................... 1 Status and Results .............................................. 2 New -Major Airport Search Area Study Search Area Designation .. ...................... ............... 4 Purpose and Objective ........................................... 4 Status and Results .............................................. 4 Re -Use Policies for Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport .................. ............ ........ 10 Purpose and Objective .......................................... 10 Status and Results ............................................. 10 Summary of Expenditures and Funding Sources Planning Activities 1991 .............................................. 12 Appendices........................................................ 13 Issues to be Addressed During New -Major Airport Site Selection Process ....................... .............. .. 13 ui Planning Activity ANNUAL CONTINGENCY -PLANNING ASSESSMENT Purpose and Objective The 1989 Minnesota Legislature adopted a strategy to guide the major airport planning and development activities of the Metropolitan Council (Council) and Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). The Legislature sought to ensure that a high level of air service was afforded the region and state and that airport facilities could be provided to meet the long- term demand. This planning strategy, commonly referred to as the dual -track strategy, provides for enhancing the capacity of Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP) and for the siting of a potential new major replacement airport. The legislation requires that the Council, in consultation with the MAC, conduct an annual planning assessment. This contingency -planning process is to assess the timing and scope of the dual -track strategy on a regular, systematic basis so that decisions can be made and judgments formed about both the enhancements of MSP and the siting of a potential new airport. The purposes and objectives of the annual contingency -planning process are as follows: 1. To accommodate the possibility that unforeseen events might warrant adjustments to the dual -track strategy; 2. To collect and analyze pertinent data needed to understand the air transportation system, the factors influencing the demand for aviation services and the factors influencing the capacity for meeting demand; I To provide an annual assessment of the major factors that bear upon the timing and scope of the strategy, so that decisions can be made regarding improvements and operational changes at MSP and the acquisition and development of a new major airport. To identify key forces behind the changes and their impact on the strategy; and 4. To establish benchmarks and trigger points for action combining quantitative and qualitative measures and assessments. To assess the need to update baseline aviation -demand forecasts. Status and Results Key planning activities and results in 1991: 1. The Council's 15 -member Annual Contingency -Planning Assessment Committee in 1991 provided advice on trends and developments affecting the dual -track strategy, oversaw the assessment process, and reviewed and critiqued draft reports. The committee prepared the second annual contingency -planning assessment (1990) for the Council's consideration in early 1991. The Council adopted the report and submitted it to the legislature on February 15, 1991. 2. The contingency -planning assessment drew the following conclusions: a. Dual -Track Strategy The second annual contingency planning assessment examined trends and factors affecting air transportation service in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area concluded that no changes are needed in the scope and timing of the dual -track major airport strategy. b. Aviation Activity Traffic at Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport (MSP) continued to grow during 1990. Enplanements increased by 4.5 percent to 9.6 million in 1990 and operations increased by 4.3 percent over the same period. Both rates exceed the one percent long-term annual rate of growth supporting the economic justification for new airport capacity for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The regional carrier market showed the strongest growth, with passengers up by 20.2 percent and operations by 25.5 percent. This is a significant change from last year's forecast that regional traffic would be the slowest growing segment at MSP. Hubbing traffic at MSP increased sharply over 1989. On-line connecting passenger traffic, a measure of the level of hubbing activity, grew by 12.2 percent in 1990, while origination and destination traffic increased by only 0.6 percent. 2 c. Airline Industry Jet fuel prices jumped dramatically in the last half of 1990, creating severe financial problems for the airline industry. Two airlines, Continental and Pan Am, filed for bankruptcy protection due in part to increased fuel prices. Because of a more fuel-efficient fleet, however, those airlines that survived this crisis will be in better shape financially to continue expanding than during the energy crises of the 1970s. However, these economic forces could very well lead to increased airline consolidation and decreased competition. d. Actions at Competitive Hubs Of the 55 largest airports in the nation, 26 airports, or 47 percent, are currently building new runways or plan to begin construction within the next 5 years. Further, Denver has broken ground for its replacement of Stapleton International Airport; Atlanta will be selecting a new airport site by June of 1991; and ambitious runway and terminal expansion plans are under way at Detroit, St. Louis and Dallas -Forth Worth. e. Federal Policy At the national level, Congress passed legislation that allows airports to impose head taxes as a new and independent source of revenue. For MSP, these passenger facility charges could add more than $25 million a year in revenue; this would be enough to support $250 million in new investment. 3. The assessment also included (1) an assessment of potential contributions of new technology to airport and aviation system capacity, (2) an analysis of the components of delay, (3) detailed operational data for MSP International Airport and (4) a financial model for contingency planning. 3 W Planning Activity NEW -MAJOR AIRPORT SEARCH AREA STUDY SEARCH AREA DESIGNATION Purpose and Objective As the metropolitan airports system planner for the Twin Cities region, the Council has the responsibility to identify a search area within which the MAC can select a specific site for developing a potential replacement major airport. The purpose and objectives for the search area selection process are: 1. To establish evaluation criteria and then to select a single search area for a major new replacement airport to serve the long-term needs of the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area and the state of Minnesota; and 2. To develop a consensus concerning the designation and protection of a search area among the various perspectives and interests affected by the development of a major replacement airport. Status and Results 1. The Council's New -Major Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force selected three candidate search areas for further study in December 1990 and recommended them for Council adoption. The Council adopted them in early January 1991 (Selecting a Search Area for a New Major Airport; Part One. Three Candidate Areas. January, 1991). The three candidate search areas were as follows: • Anoka•Isanti-Chisago Search Area is centered on Isanti County north of the Twin Cities. The area is roughly 11 miles east to west, and 11 miles north to south. Its southern border edges into northern Anoka County and its eastern border extends slightly into Chisago County. The area contains approximately 102 square miles, or 65,000 acres. It is located generally southeast of Cambridge, southwest of North Branch, northwest of Stacy and northeast of Bethel. 4 • Dakota Search Area is located completely in Dakota County. I roughly 17 miles east and west, and 8 miles north and south. It co 115 square miles, or 74,000 acres. It comprises major parts c Vermillion, Nininger and Marshan Townships. The search area is located east of Farmington, south of Rosemount (including a southe of Rosemount), southwest of Hastings, and north of Miesville, Nevi Hampton. • Dakota -Scott Search Area is located almost completely in Dako but extends slightly into eastern Scott County. The search area is miles east and west, and 10 miles north and south. It covers app 113 square miles, or 72,000 acres. The area is generally east of south of Lakeville and Farmington, west of Hampton and Ranc north of Northfield. 2. The task force took the Part One: Three Candidate Areas report community in a series of public meetings in the search areas. The purp meetings was to inform people about the status of the search areas, to much information as possible about the significance of the search area d( to ask people for more specific data about the search areas and to get publ to the idea of having a search area in their general area. In all, eight mee held, and 1,500 people participated. A Council report, Selecting a Search New Major Airport. Summary of Eight Public Meetings, summarizes what p at the meetings. To encourage ongoing communications with search area residents, the asked meeting participants to choose "community contacts who would st< touch with the task force. Some 58 were selected. Community contacts wer( to replace communications with local officials, but to supplement them. A for local governments and people who attended the meetings was also pi 3. The task force held eight meetings in June and July for local governmer the business community and the public. The meetings were organizes phases. In June, the draft data analysis contained in Selecting a Search . New Major Airport. Part Two: Data Analysis and Appendices (September, presented at "public information meetings. The meetings were intends people better understand the new information gathered and analyzes January and June 1991. In July, the task force held the second phase of rr hear public comment on the information. These sessions were an import. the task force's decision-making process. The data was used to help select search area. 4. Following review of the draft June data analysis report, the task force its draft final report and recommendations for Council consideration in AL 5 government, public agencies and general public; and (3) develop a budget for future work on both tracks of the b. New -Major Airport Siting. The Metropolitan Airports Cor should establish an interactive planning process with the communities, Dakota County and regional and state agencies in the new -airport studies. The Metropolitan Airports Commis the Metropolitan Council should address the issues identifie "Issues to be Addressed During New -Major Airport Site Process" section of this report in the planning for a poteni major airport in the Dakota Search Area (see Appendix A). C. Land Use Compatibility. The Metropolitan Council should woi with Dakota County and communities in and around the sea to develop a joint management plan for land -use compatibilit a new airport that would take effect if the decision is made t new major airport. d. Financial and Technical Assistance. Communities in the sea should be provided financial and/or technical assistance participation in the site selection and new -airport planning The Metropolitan Council should work with the communities County and MAC to develop technical and financial a proposals for legislative consideration for the 1992 legislative The report and recommendations should be presented Minnesota Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Plann e. Assistance for Home Owners and Land Owners. The Met, Council, in consultation with the search area communities County and MAC, should prepare a proposal for a purchase -f° program and funding source to assist owners of individu and/or small acreages who are facing a hardship situation their properties at fair prices in the search area. The re recommendations should be presented to the Minnesota Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. f. Airport Site Protection. The Metropolitan Council, in conjur: the search area communities, Dakota County, MAC, and cor adjacent to MSP should study the pros and cons of va protection measures, their impacts on the local area and could be implemented for each track of the dual -track pro,.; study should be presented to the Minnesota Advisory C Metropolitan Airport Planning. g. Contingency -Planning Assessment. In 1992, as a part of the contingency- planning process, the Council in consultation with MAC should reassess the long-term major airport capacity needs of the region and the adequacy of MSP. This update of the MSF Adequacy Study should be carried out with the assistance of an independent panel of experts to evaluate the basic assumptions and methodology used to develop long term aviation forecasts for the region. This should include a financial assessment of the state's budget in order to make a determination as to whether or not it is appropriate to continue with the dual track process. 9. The Metropolitan Council used an alternative form of state environmental review that was approved by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (MEQB). The Council has been examining the environmental issues in a step-by-step process. The completion of each step has resulted in more detailed analysis. Each step provided guidance for the next step. The MAC will use a similar alternative review process in its siting effort. The MEQB found the. Councils process to be as comprehensive or more comprehensive than an EIS.° In addition, the process is compatible with the policies and procedures of the Federal Aviation Administration. 91 Planning Activity RE -USE POLICIES FOR MINNEAPOLIS -ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Purpose and Objective If a new airport is developed, what happens to the existing airport and its infrastructure is a major unanswered question. The purpose and objectives of this study are as follows: 1. To identify opportunities and issues regarding the use of MSP if a new replacement airport is operational; 2. To determine interim operational and use options for the site if the decision is made to acquire or to build a new replacement airport; and 3. To develop policies and a strategy for the re -use and redevelopment of the MSP site. Status and Results 1. The Council appointed a Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport Re -Use Task Force in September 1991 with the following charge: • Advise the Metropolitan Council on the development of policies for the re -use of Minneapolis -St. Paul {MSP} International Airport should a new major replacement airport be developed to serve the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. • Provide a forum for the discussion of issues and concerns regarding the MSP re -use study and the development of re -use scenarios and policies. • Review, comment and make recommendations on draft planning and technical reports prepared as a part of the MSP re -use study or by other public and private organizations relevant to the re -use study. • Develop a set of recommendations regarding the re -use of MSP and report to the Metropolitan Council by October 1992 for Council consideration in its report to the legislature required by Jan. 1, 1993. 10 2. The task force in 1991 began Phase I of the re -use study. Consultants prepared a comparable -projects background report. The task force conducted several workshops to generate discussion and information that will be used as a catalyst for developing the Phase II study design as well as a beginning point for the ongoing public dialogue for the study. The consultants prepared a summary report of the workshops. The draft report summarized an initial long list of re -use options and possible goals and policies. 3. The task force is expected to approve a study design for Phase II in early 1992. 11 SUMMARY OF EXPENDITURES AND FUNDING SOURCES PLANNING ACTIVITIES 1991 Planning_ Activity Funding. Source Expenditures - New -Airport Search Federal Grant* $210,000 Area (All Phases Completed) • Annual Contingency- Federal Grant* $ 65,000 Planning Assessment: 1991 (Ongoing) • MSP Re -Use Study Federal Grant* $ 30,000 (Phase I) TOTAL for 1991 $305,000 * FAA 90 percent and local 10 percent share of planning costs. 12 -4. Appendix A ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED DURING NEW -MAJOR AIRPORT SITE SELECTION PROCESS The following table summarizes the subjects that will be looked at by the MAC as a site is identified within the search area and the economic, environmental and social effects_ of a possible new airport are analyzed. AIRPORT OPERATION ISSUES New -Airport Siting Process • Airport Design Requirements • update long-term air carrier forecasts and annually assess major assumptions and results (annual contingency -planning assessment). • update facility requirements for 2020 and beyond for a new replacement airport; determine facility needs for potential date of opening (including number and orienta- tion of runways, number and type of gates, terminal space requirements, parking facilities, on-site support facilities). • determine development phasing of new airport and define airport transition plan (including impacts on regional systems and investments). • compare capabilities of new airport and MSP. • assess role and impact of alternative transportation modes on airport facility design and facility requirements. 9 Airspace System • define new terminal control area, airspace gate structure, navigational way points/fixes and air traffic procedures. • assess specific impacts on existing land use, adjacent airports, navigational aids, airways for each alternative site. • conduct preliminary airspace reviews (alternative sites and final airport layout plan) with the FAA 13 • Land Use Compatibility (See also "Infrastructure Investment Issues") • apply provisions of new -major airport search area protection law. • develop/implement procedures for airport safety zone regulations and new major airport development area law. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES New -Airport Siting Analysis Natural Habitat and Wildlife • conduct biological survey comparable to a Minnesota County Biological Survey for the search area and environs to establish specific locations of critical plant and animal habitat. • determine boundaries of critical plant and animal habitat. • assess impacts of airport development and operation. identify mitigation measures and general cost of mitigation. 14 0 Surface Water and Groundwater • define location of protected rivers, lakes and streams. • assess impacts of airport development (land coverage of runways, terminal buildings, associated airport buildings, road access) and operation. • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and U. S. Environmental Protection Agency require compliance with federal Clean Water Act. MAC is required to apply for a national pollutant discharge elimination system permit and a state disposal system permit. The permits regulate runoff to protect surface and groundwater. • assess geologic sensitivity to surface -derived contaminants (surface spills, etc.). • assess geologic sensitivity to subsurface -derived contaminants (petroleum storage tanks, leaking pipelines). • assess impact of abandoned (unsealed) wells and existing wells (including Wellhead Protection Area). • assess use of and impact on aquifers for water supply needs of airport operation. • assess impact of proximity to potential sources of contamination (old open dumps, landfills, etc.) • assess depth to water table. • assess relationship to regional and local groundwater flow regimes (vertical and horizontal gradients). • assess impact of any groundwater appropriation permits. • Wetlands • define location of wetlands including use of field checks. • evaluate type and classification of wetlands. • assess impacts of airport development and operation. • comply with requirements of state and federal law regarding avoidance of wetlands, wetland replacement and mitigation measures. • Agricultural land • identify prime agricultural land. • assess impacts of airport development and operation on prime agricultural land (including potential use of airport development area law and land use controls to protect or continue agricultural uses). • assess impact on Metropolitan Agricultural Preserves Program. 15 • Noise Impacts • federal and state noise analysis required to ensure airport development plan and operation meet federal and state criteria for noise impact and future land use compatibility (including FAR PART 150 Implementation Program). • LdN 75 to be on airport site and LdN 65 on or within airport land use control area (airport development area law provides for noise -related regulations). • assess land use regulations of the airport development area law and noise impact area determined for final airport site. • assess application of Metropolitan Council land use compatibility guidelines. • Rural Development Impacts • identify population, households and housing units within new airport site. assess land use changes (employment and economic activity). • assess relocation costs and impacts. • assess impacts on cemeteries. • assess development impacts of airport development on local infrastructure (including roads). • Airport User Impacts • assess air travel distances (including cost of delay and airport efficiency). • assess travel time and distance for population and employment to new airport site. • assess travel time and distance for airport employees to new airport site. • assess travel time and distance for airport -dependent businesses (air cargo, etc.). • Air Quality - • assess air quality impacts of airport road system (parking, terminal area access), boiler plant and aircraft operation; indirect -source permit required. • assess compliance with state and federal air quality regulations. 16 • Solid Waste/Hazardous Disposal • assess impacts of waste disposal facilities on airport site. • assess cost of mitigation measures (including relocation of facilities or the reimburse- ment for remaining economic life). • Historic, Architectural, Archaeological, Cultural Resources • assess impact on properties included or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places and cost of mitigation of impacts on properties covered by National Historic Preservation Act. survey to identify and evaluate cultural resources including consultation with Office of the State Archaeologist and Minnesota Indian Affairs Council. • Fossil Fuels • assess fuel consumption for ground transportation (automobile and transit alternatives) to serve new airport site and compare with MSP. • assess difference in fuel consumption for aircraft between major city pairs and MSP/ new airport site. 17 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND AIRPORT FINANCE ISSUES 0 New -Airport Siting Process Long -Range Metropolitan Growth • assess impact of new airport site and MSP on the long-range growth and on the orderly and economic development of the Metropolitan Area; including potential impact on Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework policies. • annually assess changes in airline industry. Examine such factors as: aircraft operations; airline passengers and air cargo; technology --aircraft, navigational aids/landing systems, alternative transportation modes (modes competitive with air travel; modes used to provide airport ground access); fuels (availability and price); and finance; airline structure; national/regional economy. Examination will help ascertain need for and/or timing of major airport development. • Land Use and Economic Development • assess potential impact on regional development policy (Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework). • assess impact of airport development on property tax valuation and taxes. • determine method to capture for public uses a portion of the revenue from develop- ment around the new airport. • determine reuse policies for MSP; examine airport -related development in airport environs --commercial, industrial and residential. • update airport development area law to ensure adequate zoning and land use controls to protect the new airport from incompatible development. • Spin-off Development • estimate timing, amount and type of spin-off development and impact on Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework policies. • determine method to capture for public uses a portion of the revenue from develop- ment around the new airport. • determine reuse policies for MSP; examine airport -related development in airport environs --commercial, industrial and residential. 0 • Airport Finance • determine process, policies and controls needed and a financial plan to implement a site protection program for a potential new airport. determine financial plan for airport development (new airport and MSP) including sources of funds (fees, leases charges, federal grants, sale of MSP airport assets). • determine reuse policies for MSP. • compare financing options for new airport site development and MSP expansion. • annually assess changes in airline industry (operations; technology --aircraft, navigational aids/landing systems, alternative modes; finance; airline structure; national/regional economy). INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT ISSUES New -Airport Siting Process • On-site Airport Infrastructure Investment • determine how to provide on-site airport public services (sanitary and storm sewer systems, water, fire, police) consistent with regional development policy, specifically the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework- 0 ramework • Offsite Airport Infrastructure Investment • assess impact of ground transportation (highway and transit) corridors and investment requirements including regional highway network and minor arterial network. • assess impacts of on-site and off-site investment needs (regional and local communi- ty/county) and develop implementation schedule. • conduct a study to determine jurisdictional roles and responsibilities for infrastructure improvements to serve the new airport and related off --site development. • assess social and economic impacts of airport development on airport environs (residential, commercial, industrial, agriculture and public services including schools. 19 DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SITE SELECTION STUDY TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Wednesday, April 8, 1992, 8:00 a.m. MAC General Offices Nigel Finney, MAC Deputy Executive Director - Planning and Environment, called the meeting to order at 1:35 p.m. The following were in attendance: K. Kramer, MPCA; J. Kari, C. Case, Met Council; J. Hohenstein, City of Eagan; B. Aslesen, City of Vermillion; C. Brumbaugh, T. Petersen, FAA-ATCT; T. Hansen, City of Burnsville; G. Downing, EQB; C. Kjos, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service; D. Welsch, City of Apple Valley; D. Wise, MN Dept. of Agriculture; J. Tocho, Dakota County; D. Osberg, City of Hastings; D. Swanburg, USAF; R. Huber, G. Orcutt, F. Benson, FAA -ADO; L. McCabe, Mesaba Airlines; D. Tincher, Airline Pilots Association; C. Hewitt, University of Minnesota; C. Swanson, Washington County; K. Gaylord, Northwest Airlines; R. Theisen, MnDot; R. Wooden, DNR; S. Jilk, City of Rosemount; J. Ruud, FAA Center; P. Goodwin, Goodwin Communications; E. Futterman, L. Dallam, G. Aljberg, HNTB; M. Ryan, N. Finney, J. Unruh, MAC Mr. Finney reviewed the 1989 Metropolitan Airport Planning Act which established the Dual Track Process. As part of this process, the Technical Advisory Committee has been created to provide input to, and review work done on, the remaining elements of the Process. These elements include selection of a site for a new airport, preparation of a detailed development plan for the proposed airport, an update of the Long Term Comprehensive Plan for MSP, and preparation of the environmental documentation necessary for either continued development at MSP or development of a new airport in the Dakota Search Area. The Airport Planning Act requires a recommendation by the MAC and the Met Council to the Legislature in 2996; the MAC and the Met Council have been working to expedite the process and it is anticipated that, under an optimistic schedule, work could be completed by the end of 1994 with a recommendation to the Legislature during the 1995 session. Evan Futterman, HNTB, gave a slide presentation on the Dual Track Planning Process for 1992- 1995. The presentation included a review of work completed on the Long Term Comprehensive Plan for MSP, designation of a search area by the Met Council, a proposed schedule for the remainder of the process, and the various issues and concerns that will be addressed for each step of the process prior to a recommendation to the Legislature. Mr. Finney clarified that while the Airport Planning Act requires that the MAC and the Met Council make a recommendation to the Legislature, the final decision will be made by the Legislature. He also stated that the FAA will be conducting an Airport Capacity Design Study for MSP as requested by the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. This study will focus on the existing airfield and look at development alternatives to expand and SITE SELECTION PROCESS SUMMARY The process of selecting a new airport site from within the Dakota Search Area will be conducted in three steps: 1) site identification, 2) site screening, and 3) site selection. These steps are described following. Site identification—The first step in the process involves identifying potential sites. A set of site identification criteria will be used to delineate areas suitable for the new airport. The airport layout from the Conceptual Design Study will be placed within the suitable areas within the Search Area using some hard and fast identification criteria and a series of other considerations. The sites that are identified will comprise both a general physical boundary and a specific runway layout/orientation. 2. Site screening—The next step consists of screening the potential sites identified from the first step using a list of site screening criteria. The purpose of this screening process is to eliminate the least promising sites. The surviving three or four sites will be called candidate sites. 3. Site selection—The final step in the process involves evaluating the candidate sites based on a set of site selection criteria and selecting the "best" site. The criteria will be comprehensive in nature, and will address physical geography, airfield/airspace considerations, ground access, utility infrastructure, regional/community impacts, economic impacts, environmental impacts, and cost/financial feasibility. The evaluation of the candidate sites from an environmental perspective will be to a level of detail commensurate with an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). This analysis will appear as a chapter in the Federal EIS, and will make up an Alternative Environmental Document (AED) in the State environmental process. Following is a list of factors to be examined during the site selection process. These factors will be developed into specific criteria to identify, screen, and eventually select the best site. Based on technical and public input and physical features in the Search Area, factors will be added or deleted from the list. ��J SITE SELECTION FACTORS Revised April 28, 1992 FACTORS SITE IDEN- SITE SITE PRELIMINARY COMMENTS TIFICATION SCREENING SELECTION PHYSICAL V Airport layout must fit within Search Area. Land requirements I/ Conditions generally similar throughout Search Area. Topogmphy d Conditions generally similar throughout Search Area. Soils Depth of bedrock varies throughout Search Ama. GLOIO$y V V Conditions vary throughout Search Area. Hydrology Meteorological conditions V Conditions generally similar throughout Search Area. ✓ Avoid locating ground facilities within floodways. Floodplain AIRFIELD/AIRSPACE Operational efficiency V Initial layouts will match CDS Layout. % V Airspace will be restructured regardless of site. Airspace interaction GROUND ACCESSIUTILITY V MC deemed travel times acceptable within Search Ground access travel times Area. V Infrastructure varies throughout Search Area. Disruption of existing roadway system V Infrastructure varies throughout Search Arra. Availability of rail access N/ Infrastructure varies throughout Search Area. Availability of utilities REGI ONAL/COMMUN13 Y/SOCIO- ECONOMIC V Impacts generally similar throughout Search Area. Socioeconomic Metropolitan area growth impacts -V Could vary throughout Search Ams. V No major commemiai/industrial areas in Search Displaced commercial/indusuiai employ. Area. Ownership of large areas vs. individual owners. Land ownership VIncludes impacts within and around Scotch Area.Community social impacts Displaced residential population V N/ May vary throughout Search Area. V Will be considered during site selection. Public services Institutional factors % Could vary by site. V V State Safety Zones will no contain urbanized areas. State safety zones Revised April 28, 1992 . I Jo SITE SELECTION FACTORS (cont'd) FACTORS SITE MEN- TIMCATION SITE SCREENING SITE SELECTION PRELIMINARY COMMENTS ENVIRQNM NMAL Noise impacts Ldn 6$ noise contour will not contain urbanized areas. Section 4(0 land V ✓ Could vary throughout Search Area. Historical/araheological/cultunl Could vary throughout Search Arca. Biotic communities Initial DNR input, Summer 1992; fuss] sumnur 1993. Wetlands ✓ V V Sites will avoid concentrated areas of wetlands. Wild and scenic rivers %/ Could vary throughout Search Area. Prime farmland V V Could vary throughout Search Area. Hazardous waste disposal sites V ✓ Could vary throughout Search Area. Water quality ✓ Could vary throughout Search Area. Air quality Similar conditions throughout Search Area. Solid waste ti' Could vary throughout Search Area. Threatened and endangered species V V Could vary throughout Search Ana. Light emissions V Similar impact throughout Search Area. Enefgy supply/natural resources Will be considered during site selection. Construction impacts ✓ May vary through Search Ars&. COST/FINANCIAL FEASMILITY Land acquisition costa Costs will be considered during site selection process. Site preparation costs Cow will be considered during site selection process. Airport facility construction costs ✓ Costs will be considered during site selection process. Utility construction costa v' Cow will be considered during site selection process. Relocation cost V Cow will be considered during site selection process. Highway/rail construction cow V Cow will be considered during site selection process. Financial feasibility V Financial analysis will be used during site selection. Revised April 28, 1992 STUDY . NEW AIRPORT SITE SELECTiOt�i INVENTORY CHECKLIST INVENTORY ITEM I SOURCE` IREVD DATE AREA { COV'DI BASEMAP REGISTER NOTES I COMMUNITY DATA— i ns r.Jrc 1990 Census Blocks Map Met Council 1113/92 I 2 1 Good Arcinfo Tiger File 1990 US Census Info for GIS Met Council 6 1 1 Need digitized data Cemeteries I local Communities/Cour oes 3/92 1 6 R;—mdy for county review Communitv Centers Local Communities 1 6 County Land Ownership & Plat Maps Counties 2 Current Land Use Electric Source. Dist Plans Met Council/Dakota. Co Communities I -til• Companies 112192_ I 3192 6 1 Good MC 1990 photo analysis I Digitizing M ocess Fire Service Local Communities/Counties 6 Governance Ma(Townships, Districts Has itais Clinics Hudson Ma ellow P Communities Counties 3 92 6 Read for countV review Land values Counties 2 Museums Local C*mmurdfiestCou�es (151 Natural Gas Source Dist Plans Places of Worship Utility Companies Hudson MapsNallow P Communities Counties 3 t 6 Good Dioftng in ocess DWG File From Pipelines Utility Companies 3 6 Police Service Local Commun' ' Counties 6 I Prime farmland Counties/Soll Cons. Svc 1 Public Transportation Local Communibes/Counties 6 Schools Private Hudson Ma allow P mmunttieslCounties 2 6 Good & review Rea for cour Schools Public Field Work/Met Council/Courdies 2/92 2 Good Ready for couM review Stormwater aina a Channels Counties Wastewater Collection Systems Met Council 1 Wastewater Plans Met Council 1 Wastewater Treatment Facilities ( Met Council 1 Water and Sewer Maps Met Council/Communities 1 Water Supply Distribution Systems Communities 1 Water Supply Physical Plant Communities I Water Supply Plans Communities Water SupplySources Communities 1 MAPS & SURVEY DATA— Aerial Photos 1990 Current Land Coverage Maps Detailed Street Map With Names I Ma•or Roads & Highway stem Met Councilfrech Reproductions Met Council MnDOT Met Council 1023/911Unregistered 6 I 1/21/92 6 1 1/2192 t 4 Good Good Unregistered 4 lens EPPLE7 I DGN Hie— for exhibits one DXF File Maps & Dev Plans for Region Tiger Street Maps, Corrected to MN/DOT I USGS Topo Ma 1:24,000 Scale I Local Communities Counties I Met Council MAC 119/92 1 6 1 6 1 Good Good(31—DWG Arclnfo Tiger File Fie Hard Copy— I Zoning Mas Local Communities/Counties i 6 !PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS- Flood Hazard Boundary Maps DNR/HNTB Pre -90 1 Good Digitized from PaW Maps Flood Insurance Rate Maps Flood Plain Location Geologic Data I Under ground Hydrological Data DN NTB ( Met Council/FEMA Minnesota Geologic Surve Minnesota Geologic Survey )Pre -90 1 1 1 2192 2 1 2 1 1 Good Poor Good Good Digitized from mps Will not use Not digitized Not digitized I Meleorological/Climatological Information National Weather Service CC 1 I I Soils Maps Nall Structures Well Records Dakota County I Feld work OAA UAIC I 1 4 I4 6 i 1 Good Digitized NOAA data Arelinto file ME Alrtt'Vm I Q aL Almor'AVt_— Exist& Prop A'ir Trfc Rts & Rows fisting Airports in Region 'NOTES: (T) Search Area Only (2) Search Area & Dakota Co. (3) Matches USGS Hard Copy Overlay (5) Does Not Match USGS Hard Copy Overlay (4) Not Checked Against USGS Hard Copy (6) Search Area and Environs i DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS SUMMARY i t I NEW AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT L T H ml==r MC. DEC.1991 I i I I MSP LONG TERM IDENTIFY SONGS ORASITE'OU FINALAED, OPTIMIZE FINALAED, COMP PLANS COME? PLANS POTENTIAL SITES/LAYOUTS PUBLIC PUBIS HRNG SELECT SITFJt AYOUT lAY0UT/ SELECT NEW COMP PINS SCOPING RPT, S00 DRAfTAED, AIRPORT 2020 OTHER SO8OSDD,SDD M� DECISION PUBLIC WIGS. MAC PUBLIC HRNG COMP. PLAN rffi Of ALTERMWES PUBLIC MTGS MqC HRNG EIS DOCUMENT APRILL11993 MAC. JAN 1994 EIS EIS SCOPING 1st PHASE. EIS SCOPING EVALUATE PHASE DRAFT �, STATE AIRPORT SELECTIm, FEDERAL OTHER SO8OSDD,SDD PUBLIC FWAL DECISION PREFERREECORD Of ALTERMWES PUBLIC MTGS MqC HRNG EIS DOCUMENT AIRPORTDECISION APRIL, 1992 MARCH, FMARCH. '�• 1995 MAC. MC MI FAA FAA 1995 LEGISLATURE MSP DEVELOPMENT MSP MSP DRAFT FINAL AED, UPDATE LIPOATE SCOPING AED SELECT MSP COMP PLAN ( 2020 CONCEPT Dr wig, PUBLIC 2020 COMP FORECASTS PIANS MTGS MAC HRNG PLAN MAC. NOV. 1991 I APRIL.1993 MAC, JAN 1994 t AED-AaemativeErlvironmentaiDocument SD=Scoping Document OSDD=DraftScoping Decision Downer SOD= Scoping Decision Document i MAC = MetropolitanAirports Commission MC=Metrop kanCouncil FAA=Federal AviationAdministration