HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.a. Airport DiscussionCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MARCH 19, 1991
AGENDA ITEM: AIRPORT DISCUSSION AGENDA SECTION:
MAYOR'S REPORT
PREPARED BY: STEPHAN JILK, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AGENDA NO
ITEM #
ATTACHMENTS: RESOLUTION OF POSITION - A�PPVED,BY:///
AIRPORT PLANNING, & MEMO
This item is back on the agenda for discussion and to consider the
Resolution of Position for Airport Planning.
Attached please find a memo regarding this item and a resolution for
consideration.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Motion to adopt the resolution stating the City of Rosemount's Position
on the Airport Planning and Siting Process now taking place.
COUNCIL ACTION:
Adopted resolution.
<� 6?ilyof
osernount
P.O. BOX 510
2875 -145TH ST. W.
ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068
612-423-4411
TO: Mayor Napper
Council Members Klassen, Oxborough, Willcox, Wippermann
FROM: Stephan Jilk, City Administrator
DATE: March 13, 1991
RE: Resolution - Position on Airport
At the request of Council I have drafted the attached resolution
for your consideration regarding a position to take on the
airport planning process.
I trust that it outlines your concerns about the process without
saying "no airport" in and around Rosemount which I don't feel is
appropriate at this juncture.
I tried to center in on the process that is going on and
emphasizing the need to determine the need for a move before
anything further is done.
This item is on the agenda Tuesday for discussion and so comments
can be presented at the March 20th meeting at the High School if
we desire to do so.
Also attached are:
1. Resolutions from Eagan and Farmington
2. A summary of the meeting with Mary Anderson of the
Metropolitan Council.
3. Background materials for review for the informational
meeting held (being held).
lj
CITY OF RAGAN
RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO
THE NEW KAJOR AIRPORT SEARCX AREA REPORT
OF THE ADVISORY TASK FORCE OF TSE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
WUEREA6, the Metropolitan Council has identified and adopted three
candidate aearch areas for the potential relocation of Minneapolis -
St. Paul International Airport as a part of the Dual Track Airport
Planning Process, and
WHEREAS, the City of Eagan has actively participated in the airport
planning process and has -a substantial interest in the appropriate
balance between the commercial and enviror.mental aspects of the
region's major airport, and
WHEREAS, a potential relocation of MSP presents both challenges and
opportunities for the region, and
WHER XS, the primary Consideration in such: a dec,i.sion must be the
mitigation of the co:Amercial and environmental 'dislocation which
Would occur as a consequence of a, potential relocations and
WREREAS, the cothination of transportation infrastructure;
proximity to the metropolitan dourntowns and eXisting development --
patterns and other factors indicate an overy*helraing adva,Cage for
the southern search area alternatives,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED trat, in the context of the
relocation track of the dual track planning process, the City of
Eagan supports a southern alternative to be the preferred new major
airport search area, and
SE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Eagan specifically opposes
the northern search area as being inappropriate for a new major
airport due to its distance from the metropolitan downtowns; and
existing airport related development.
Motion Made By: Wachter
Seconded By: Gustafson
Those In Favor: All
Those Opposed: None
CERTIFICATION
I, E. J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota
County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution
was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the Cite of';
Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular reketing thereof
assembled this 19th day of Februarn, %9
E. vanove be e, City Clerk
Ci,, of Eagan
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 1991 -
A RESOLUTION OF POSITION REGARDING THE
AIRPORT PLANNING AND SEARCH AREA SELECTION PROCESS
WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Legislature has directed that the
Metropolitan Council conduct a two track approach to planning for
the future air transportation needs of the Metropolitan Region;
and
WHEREAS, this two track process includes the consideration for
planning and expansion of the existing airport and the search for
a site of a new airport if the decision is made to relocate the
existing airport; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council is in the process of selecting
a search area for the location of a new Minneapolis/St. Paul
Airport as part of this two track approach; and
WHEREAS, certain criteria have been developed by the Metropolitan
Council to determine the guidelines used in this search area
selection; and
WHEREAS, the final three areas now being considered by the
Metropolitan Council include two areas in Dakota County and one
in Chisago/Isanti Counties; and
WHEREAS, the two sites in Dakota County have direct effect on the
City of Rosemount as one search area actually includes a major
portion of the City of Rosemount and the other is near the city
limits of Rosemount; and
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount, along with many other cities have
attempted to involve themselves in this Planning and Search Area
Selection Process over many months; and
WHEREAS, the relocation of the existing airport may have
tremendous negative effects on the cities surrounding the
existing airport and those near any new airport in terms of
economic, social and environmental causes; and
WHEREAS, the guidelines actually developed by the Metropolitan
Council set out requirements to meet prior to making any decision
on the relocation of the existing airport and a final design and
location of a new airport; and
WHEREAS, Rosemount and other communities have worked closely with
the Metropolitan Council to use all proven methods of planning
for the proper development of their communities which has allowed
these communities to actually become better sites for new
airports and could now suffer a loss to their quality of life
RESOLUTION 1991 -
PAGE 2
they have worked to protect and whose citizens have indicated so
strongly they want to maintain; and
WHEREAS, the relocation of an airport to Rosemount and other
suburban cities could _forever change this quality oflife;and
WHEREAS, the City of Rosemount has serious concerns about the
following issues relating to this process:
1) The need to move the existing airport
2) The ability for cities near the existing airport to generate
input into the decision making process to expand the existing
airport or move it.
3) The determination of the feasibility of relocating the
existing airport.
4) The social, economic and environmental effects of moving the
airport to a new area both on the existing site communities
and those in a new site area.
5) The ability of cities in and around the final search areas to
have any realistic and authentic opportunity into the entire
decision making process of whether to move the existing
airport and the selection of any new site and that the final
selection has already been made.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Rosemount representing the Rosemount Community requests that the
Metropolitan Council do the following:
A. The selection of any site for the potential location of a new
airport be stopped immediately.
B. That the economic/financial feasibility study scheduled for
1992-1996 which is to be part of the analysis as to whether or
not to move the airport be completed before any further
consideration of new airport sites is given.
C. That the assessment of the impacts of moving the airport to a
new location in terms of social, economic, and environmental
issues be conducted now. This study would include the
consideration of such issues as transportation, development,
fiscal impacts, tax impacts, and job loss/creation, and use of
land now dedicated to agricultural use. The initial
determination of the three sites now selected would provide
enough data to make this study realistic, feasible and
credible.
RESOLUTION 1991 -
PAGE 3
D. Provide a realistic and credible method for all cities to
provide input into this planning process and allow cities to
assist in any decisions made on this matter.
E. Develop a technical and administrative assistance program for ---
all cities, counties and townships which are effected by this
process to enable them to develop processes to deal with all
of these issues such that the cost will be born by the State
of Minnesota and not the local entities involved as this is a
State and Regional issue.
F. That only after it is concluded that a new location for the
Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport is needed, the
economic feasibility of this move is proven, cities are
allowed to have a credible say in this process and
environmental, social and economic studies are completed on
the three final search areas to determine the most suitable
sites should a final search area be selected and a final site
be designated.
ADOPTED this 19th day of March, 1991.
Vernon J. Napper, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan M. Johnson, City Clerk
Motion by:
Voted in favor:
Voted against:
Seconded by:
RESOLUTION NO. R13-91
CITY OF FARMINGTON POSITION ON REGIONAL AIRPORT SEARCH AREA
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Farmington, Minnesota, was held in the Civic Center of said City
on the 19th day of February, 1991 at 7:00 P.M.
The -following-members were present: Kuchera, Galler, Derington,-Orr.
-
The following members were absent: Mayer.
Member Orr introduced and Member Derington seconded the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FARMINGTON that the following
concerns be addressed by the Regional Airport Advisory Task Force:
1. The economic impact of a northern airport location upon existing investment
around the current location, including public infrastructure, private business
and housing.
2. The integrity and adequacy of the confusing "Alternate EIS" process regarding
the opportunity to provide responsible public input; the short timetable for --
selection of the final search area and the incremental nature in which en-
vironmental assessment data is collected and reviewed.
3. Assurances that affected units of government be involved in the assessment
of environmental issues surrounding the detailed airport location and planning
process to guarantee that current environmental issues and nuisances at MSP
are not merely displaced to a new location.
4. The financial impacts and practical hardships resulting from the loss of
investment for agriculture, housing and other business due to the uncertainties
and extended timetable of the dual track process.
5. That the above referenced timetable be improved, or at the very least, maintained.
This resolution adopted by recorded vote of the Farmington City Council in open
session on the 19th day of February, 1991.
Attested to the, ( day of
SEAL
Mayor
SUMMARY OF MEETING AT METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
WITH MARY ANDERSON
Discuss the new major airport search area process.
ISSUES
(1) Need for more explicit discussion of (a) the
background(how we reached this point) and (b) both
components of the dual track process.
(2) M.A.C. staff involvement when reviewingbackground
issues such as the Adequacy Study anthe MSP
Comprehensive Plan- or, search area process issues such as
possible runway configurations and potential airport size.
(3) Clarification of the Alternative E.I.S. process with
appropriate handouts.
(4) Adequacy of data exchange/evaluation by local county/city
staffs.
(5) Re-evaluation of the public meetings structure.
RESULTS
A commitment from Metropolitan Council to resolve these
issues. Council staff will recommend to the Search Area Task
Force an extension from June until late summer/early fall for the
selection of the final search area.
TO: Mayor Napper
Council Members Klassen, Oxborough, Willcox, Wippermann
FROM: Stephan Jilk, City Administrator
DATE: March 13, 1991
RE: Resolution Position on Airport
At the request of Council I have drafted the attached resolution
for your consideration regarding a position to take on the
airport planning process.
I trust that it outlines your concerns about the process without
saying "no airport" in and around Rosemount which I don't feel is
appropriate at this juncture.
I tried to center in on the process that is going on and
emphasizing the need to determine the need for a move before
anything further is done.
This item is on the agenda Tuesday for discussion and so comments
can be presented at the March 20th meeting at the High School if
we desire to do so.
Also attached are:
1. Resolutions from Eagan and Farmington
2. A summary of the meeting with Mary Anderson of the
Metropolitan Council.
3. Background materials for review for the informational
meeting held (being held).
lj
Background Materials
March 6, 1991
Prepared for Public Meetings
of the New Major Airport Search
Area Advisory Task Force
Metropolitan Council
230 E. Fifth St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
612 291-6359
Publication No. 91-559-91-045
"Dual -Track" Strategy
In 1989, the, Minnesota Legislature enacted the "dual -track" major airport planning --- - and development strategy. The objective of the strategy is to meet the long-term air
transportation needs of the Metropolitan Area and the state by planning to enhance
capacity at Minneapolis -St. Paul (MSP) International Airport (Track A) while
keeping the new airport option open by selecting a site for its future development
(Track B). The 1989 legislation specifies actions for both the Council and the MAC
during the 1989-1996 planning period. In addition, the law defines the roles and
responsibilities of each agency in the implementation of the "dual -track" strategy.
The Council is responsible for the designation of a search area within which the
MAC will select a site for a possible new major airport. The search area designation
process is divided into two steps. The first involves the identification of candidate
search areas. One of the tasks in this step is a report to the legislature (by Dec. 1,
1990) on the general availability of land for an airport in and in the area surrounding
the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. The second step involves the identification,
analysis and evaluation of candidate search areas and the designation of a final search
area. The second step is to be completed prior to Jan. 1, 1992 when the Council is
to forward the designated final search area to MAC.
Within four years of the Council's designation of a search area, the MAC is to select
a specific site for a major new airport, prepare a comprehensive plan and
development schedule, prepare an estimate of facilities requirements and a concept
plan for development of the airport, and prepare and submit environmental
documents needed for site acquisition for administrative review.
After the MAC has selected a site for a new major airport, the MAC and the Council
are to make recommendations to the legislature regarding the acquisition and
development of a new major airport. The report to be submitted within 180 days of
site selection, is to address the effect of a new major airport on MSP and on the
local, regional and state economy.
A contingency planning group has been formed to monitor unforeseen changes in
such things as technology, travel habits, airline industry consolidation or the economy
that might require changes in the dual -track strategy. The groups reports its
assessments to the legislature annually.
Findings and Recommendations
Airport Adequacy Task Force
Metropolitan Council
1988
summary
In 1988, the Metropolitan Council's Airport _Adequacy _Task Force
and the Council adopted reports that concluded that Minneapolis -
St. Paul International Airport (MSP) may not be adequate into the
long term future. The following is a summary of the findings and
recommendations from the two reports, Twin Cities Air Travel: A
Strategy for Growth A Report to the Community, (October 1988)
and Twin Cities Air Travel: A Strategy for Growth, A Report to
the Minnesota State Legislature (December 1988).
The major findings are as follows:
• The long-term economic health and growth of the Metropolitan
Area and its multi -state economic region depends on a high
level of commercial air service.
• A high probability exists that growing demand for aviation
services will exceed the capacity of MSP within 10 years.
• If nothing is done to expand capacity at MSP, which
is near its limit, serious constraints on aircraft
operations will occur within 5 to 10 years.
• There is a two -out -of -three chance that the number
of passengers will increase by 50 percent or more
within 10 years, increasing to more than 24 million a
year (See below).
• Building a new north -south runway offers about a 70
percent chance of meeting the expected demand in 10
years, but only an 18 percent chance of meeting demand
in 20 years.
• Two new runways and extensive taxiways will be needed
to handle growth in commercial air traffic over the
next 20 years. Two new runways, however, offer only a
40 percent chance of satisfying the region's air travel
demand in 30 years (See below).
• The Metropolitan Area risks forgoing substantial economic
gains if airport capacity is not expanded in a timely manner
over the next 30 years.
• Runway and taxiway capacity form the major long-term
constraints on growth at MSP. Terminal capacity and ground
access to it also constiture significant constraints.
2
• Even with the steady introduction of quieter aircraft, a
growing frequency of flights will increase noise stress on
most surrounding communities.
• The loss to the region in economic activity, should the
region be unable to meet demand, could exceed $1.5 billion
annually.
• The Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission should
initiate immediately a dual -track strategy that calls for
enhancing capacity at MSP (Track A) while keeping the new
airport option open by banking land (Track B).
• The Council should establish a contingency planning process
to monitor trends annually and to adjust the timing of the
selected strategy to cope with unfavorable events or
favorable opportunities.
What's the chance of a
50 percent increase in
passengers at MSP?
In 5 Years ...........................10%
Chance
In 10 Years ..........................
69% Chance
In 15 Years ..........................
86% Chance
In 20 Years ..........................
93% Chance
In 30 Years ..........................
97% Chance
900, 000
800,000
700,000
rn
600,000
w
500,000
400,000
300,000
1993
What's the chance of a
100 percent increase?
In 5 Years ......................... 0% Chance
In 10 Years ........................ 1% Chance
In 15 Years ........................ 9% Chance
In 20 Years ........................ 34% Chance
In 30 Years ........................ 84% Chance
FORECASTS OF FLIGHTS AT MSP
1998 2003
MC =Metropolitan Council
MAC= Metropolitan Airports Commission
2008 2013 2U1U
Source: Metropolitan Council
Conclusions and Recommendations
Major Airport Contingency Planning 1990
Under the "dual -track" process, the Metropolitan Council, with the assistance of the
Contingency Planning Group, reports annual to the legislature on the use of Minneapolis -St.
Paul International Airport and on any changes in technology, travel habits or the economy
that might require adjustments to the strategy.
The following is a summary of the Annual Contingengy Assessment, Major Airport Planning
1990 report.
Major Conclusion
• The basic conclusion of the second annual contingency planning assessment of trends
and factors affecting air transportation service in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area
is that no changes in the scope and timing of the dual -track major airport strategy are
needed.
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 1990T while
origination and destination traffic increased by only 0.6 percent.
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 survive this crisis will be in better shape
financially to continue to expand than during energy crises of the 1970s. However,
these economic forces could very well lead to increased airline consolidation and
decreased competition.
4
Actions at Competitive Hubs
• Of the 55 largest airports in the nation, 26 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 underway at Detroit, St. Louis and Dallas -Forth Worth.
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.
5
NEW -MAJOR AIRPORT SEARCH AREA DESIGNATION
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS
APPROVED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD
October 18, 1990
SUMMARY
Introduction
The Metropolitan Council is committed to considering environmental impacts as part of the
planning process for a potential new major airport.. The environmental review process the
Council is following is unique. It involves two separate agencies that are responsible for
different stages and compliance with state and federal environmental rules. The Council is
using an alternative form of state environmental review which was approved by the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB). The Council will examine the environmental issues in
a tiered process under which each step results in more detailed analysis and each step
provides guidance for the next step. It involves: 1) screening the land available in the 14 -
county area; 2) selection of candidate search areas; 3) search area designation; and 4) site
selection/master plan/environmental assessment. The alternative review process is in lieu of
an environmental impact statement (EIS). The EQB found the 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.
Environmental Review Process
• Initial Scoping. In August 1989, the Council held public forum on the issues and concerns
of the broader Twin Cities community to help in the scoping of the search area process. The
40 -person forum included representatives of aviation industry, civic and community groups,
environmental interest groups, business and development groups and governmental agencies.
Participants identified issues, articulated the various perspectives and defined the elements
needing evaluation during a search area designation process such as location, cost,
environment, economic development and public policy process issues.
• 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. The
membership was set to represent the broad interests and viewpoints needed for the airport
search process --citizens, airline, government agency, municipal government, environmental and
community groups, economic development (Metropolitan Area and Greater Minnesota),
labor, business and major users of air transportation facilities. Members were added to
represent each of the three candidate 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, conducted a series of public discussions and
critique sessions in January -April 1990, and adopted a recommendation for Council in May
1990. The general criteria are:
• access to the metropolitan area,
• environmental impacts,
• general land requirements,
• airspace considerations,
• search area characteristics, and
• policy considerations.
O
The six criteria incorporate the environmental assessment topics required by the FAA and
project development and additional items identified by the Task Force that are needed for
making the public policy decisions regarding the selection of a search area for a new airport.
• Criteria Adoption. The Council reviewed and adopted a revised set of criteria in May 1990.
The criteria may be further clarified or revised as further information and comments are
received from the FAA, EQB agencies, communities and citizens.
• Candidate Search Areas. The Council, with the advice of the Task Force, designated three
candidate search areas using the criteria and information on general availability of land. The
EQB agencies received the candidate search area report for review and comment.
• Public Meetings On Candidate Search Areas. The Task Force is conducting a series of public
meetings in each of the candidate search areas and in St. Paul to solicit public comments.
The comments will be used to refine and focus the study/analysis of search areas.
• Draft Report. The Task Force will prepare a draft report recommending a search area. The
report will contain analysis incorporating the evaluation criteria, agency and public comments.
• Public Meetings On Draft Report. The Task Force will conduct public meetings on the draft
report, including at least one in the candidate search area recommended for designation and
in St. Paul, to solicit comments and responses to the recommendation and analysis. The draft
report will be available at least 20 days prior to the public meetings.
• Task Force Recommendation. Following the receipt of public comments, the Task Force will
complete the report (including the identification of environmental issues raised in the search
area selection process requiring further analysis in the site selection process) and recommend
a search area to the Metropolitan Council.
• Council Public Hearing. The Council will conduct a public hearing on the Task Force final
report. The report will be available at least 30 days prior to the public hearing. A record of
the hearing will be prepared and the hearing record will be held open for 10 days after the
hearing date. The Task Force report and recommendation will be sent to EQB agencies.
Within 60 days from the close of the comment period, a public hearing report with responses
will be prepared.
• Council Final Report. Using the comments received the Council will prepare a final report
(including the identification of environmental issues raised and requiring further analysis in
the MAC's site selection process) and search area designation recommendation.
• Final Public Comment Period. The report and recommendation will be reviewed by the
Council's Metropolitan Systems Committee. Between the action taken by the Metropolitan
Systems Committee and consideration by the Council of a decision on the search area report,
the Council will provide a 10 day public comment period.
• Council Search Area Designation. The Council will designate a search area and make a
determination of adequacy of the analysis supporting the decision and transmit the
recommendation and report (including the identification of environmental issues raised in the
search area selection process requiring further analysis in the site selection process) to the
MAC to begin site selection and comprehensive project planning.
7
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
metropolitan 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. § 473.1551) passed by the Minnesota Legislature
in 1990. This legislation requires that land use changes (rezonings, 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 comprehensive plans have been reviewed and approved
by the Metropolitan Council.
For the final search area, the legislation requires that land use changes (rezonings, variances, and
conditional use permits) be consistent with the 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 following the Metropolitan Council and
the Metropolitan Airports Commission report to the Legislature with recommendations concerning
major airport development and acquiring a site for a new major a; -,.Port. Following 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 metropolitan urban services
to limit conflicting 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 .Qf the
Airport Zoning Act (Minn. Stat. §§ 360.061-360.074 and §§ 360.81-360.91) 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 Metropolitan 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 resources of the metropolitan area.
The criteria and guidelines may relate to various land use and development control measures,
including zoning ordinances, building codes, subdivision regulations, 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
development area. The local units of government with land use control authority located within the
zones must adopt land use control measures consistent with the zones.
SCHEMATIC NEW MAJOR AIRPORT PLAdNNING
& DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT AREA
(Mian. Stat § 473.636)
I '
I
I A zoNE B
A
NE B
ZONE A
I
iZONE A`
? ZONE A
I . ZONE B
ZONE B 1 I
9—
NOISE
NOISE ZONES
( Minn. SUL § 473.637 )
1 f
+=.
I
I
i ( Mina. Stat § 360.061-360.074 )
360.31-360.91
SEARCH AREA
( Mian. SIAL § 473.1.551 )
0
"CHARACTERISTICS OF DEVELOPMENT EVOLVING AROUND AIRPORTS"
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
January 1991
• Introduction
As more business markets become national and international in scope, airports are increasingly being
viewed as catalysts for local economic development. Yet few types of urban development have been
as poorly predicted as development around airports. In some places large tracts of land reserved for
development around new airports have sat vacant for over a decade. On the other hand, unforeseen
rapid development around other airports has choked area roads with traffic. In some cases, the area
around a new airport has had both situations occur over a period of twenty-five years.
System for planning and forecasting airport land development has been devised based on airport
experience in Europe (Amsterdam, Paris), Japan (Tokyo, Osaka) and North America (Montreal,
Washington, Dallas -Fort Worth).
• Business Location Relative to Airport
At the Airport Employment and activities associated with airport operations: 1. airlines, 2. passenger
services (restaurants, shops, car rental, insurance, ground transport), 3. air freight services, and 4.
government (FAA, military, operating authority). Present at day of opening.
Adjacent to the Airport Employment and activities immediately adjacent: 1. directly supporting the
operation of the airport (e.g., flight kitchen, aircraft maintenance, car rental, hotel) and 2. closely -
related services (e.g., shipping, freight forwarding, customs, foreign trade zone). These types of
activities are often located on adjacent land reserved for such purposes. They typically start within
a year of airport opening. Magnitude correspond to volume of airport activity (passengers).
Vicinity of the Airport and Airport Access Corridor Employment and activities that require short travel
times to the airport: 1. Spin-off Industries (respond more directly to airport service and activities
including gas stations, housing for airport workers, retail). These activities often take 5 to 10 years
to develop. 2. Attracted Businesses (do not rely directly on the airport for their operation but value
the prestige, services, accessibility of location near an airport for customers or workers). Significant
variation among airports in overall mix of these types of businesses.
Employment growth within 4 miles of airports can be two to five times faster than in the suburban
ring of the metropolitan area in which they are located.
• Characteristics of Business and Land Development Attracted to Airport Areas
New Activities, attracted from outside the area because of the prestige and improved customer access
provided by enhanced international and national air service. These include: 1. national and regional
corporate headquarters of large national and multinational companies; 2. trade and merchandise
centers marketing retail and industrial products; 3. service companies dependent on air service to
reach customers; 4. airlines and related activities.
Expanded Activities in the metropolitan area, attracted because they are users of the airport services,
suppliers to markets generated by the airport or businesses that can take advantage of the local
transportation and other supporting infrastructure developed primarily to serve the airport. Typically
10
Firms are high-tech electronics, communications, warehouse and delivery services, and specialized
business services (high-tech firms also require access to skilled labor and `quality of life').
Business development may take 5 to 20 years (or more) to develop. Timing and magnitude depend
on other factors of access, regional economy, and regional land development patterns.
Hotel and convention facilities are not closely related to passenger volume. Hotel development is
related to four factors: 1. extent of hub versus destination travel, 2. airport location relative to office
activity centers, 3. hotel agglomeration at conference centers, and 4. land use regulation.
The development of new tourism and amusement parks is increasingly becoming dependent upon
airport accessibility (Orlando).
Retail is another growing activity. Shopping facilities on-site are increasingly included and expanded
and upgraded airports. Adjacent retail shopping centers generally follow population growth.
• Critical Factors Affecting Airport Area Land Development
Airport Market Orientation The nature of airport activity--hub/feeder/destination, passenger versus
freight, and destinations served --all affect the nature of land development.
* Hub airport status brings higher demand for on -premises and adjacent airport employment
but less for passenger services and hotels.
* Freight activity is greatest for airports with international and long-distance services.
Warehousing and distribution facilities are concentrated where cargo facilities are located.
* There is a strong relationship between the opening of air service to new countries and
subsequent opening of business offices of firms from those countries.
Location in Terms of Transportation Access and Urban Development Patterns
* Ultimately, airport area land development is ruled by real estate markets.
* Accessibility and proximity of the airport area to the existing centers of office, commercial
and distribution activities is very important.
* Magnitude and mix of development is shaped by the existing pattern of development and
whether or not the airport area is in the primary path of new development.
* Montreal experience shows that undeveloped land and careful land planning do not ensure
development (distance, travel time, not in path of growth).
* Washington Dulles shows how development can be delayed (growth came 20 years later
when access to Reston area provided from Dulles Access Highway, expansion of Washington
D.C. office market toward Virginia, congestion at National, airport marketing)
* Paris experience (Roissy/Charles de Gaulle) shows how airport development can be a slow
process (distance, lower prestige part of region, second airport).
11
* Dallas/Fort Worth experience shows how airport area development can shift over time.
Uneven pace since opening in 1974 due to economy, access, major residential/office
development (Las Colinas).
* Building and land development around airports is an opportunity, but it does not
automatically occur.
TYPES OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY
RANKED BY DEGREE OF ATTRACTION TO THE
VICINITY OF AIRPORTS
Very High Concentration Near Airport
Moderate Concentration Near Airport
• Air Transpdrtation Services
Automobile rentals
• Aerospace equipment
Printing and publishing
• Manufacturers of optical instruments
Manufacturers of converted
and lenses
paper products
• Manufacturers of communications
Manufacturers of electronic
equipment
components and accessories
Manufacturers of electrical
Construction
distribution equipment
Buses and taxis
• Freight forwarding
Building services
• Hotels/motels
• Automobile parking
High Concentration Near Airport
Manufacturers of medical
instruments and supplies
rManufacturers of electric and
Automotive services
electronic equipment
Manufacturers of specialty
• Manufacturers of specialty chemical
plastics parts
products
' Public warehousing
Increasing Concentration Near Airport
• Manufacturers of instruments, measuring
and control
• Air transportation services
Travel agent
• Specialty fabricated metal products
Public warehousing
• Wholesaling of pharmaceutical products
Specialty machinery
• Mailing and related services
• Computer data processing services
jlutyplS
P
12
THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CIVIL AVIATION ON THE U.S. ECONOMY.
Study by Wilbur Smith Associates, June 1989.
National
• Aviation's impact extends beyond airplanes and airports reaching to hotels and
rental cars, manufacturing and construction, trade and real estate and a host
of other industries whose fortunes depend on efficient air transportation.
The American economy depends on air transportation:
• commercial aviation and related economic activity (excluding
manufacturing) totaled $436 billion in 1987 ($6.2 billion in Minnesota w
or 1.4 percent of the nation's total).
• commercial aviation and associated businesses (excluding
manufacturing) employed 6.9 million people --6.3 percent of the US
civilian workforce in 1987 --who earned $129 billion (in Minnesota there
were 101,000 jobs and $1.87 billion in earnings).
aviation contributed $254 billion, or 5.6 percent, to the nation's 1987
GNP.
• Aviation is the nation's dominant intercity mode of transportation for those
passengers and goods which must be transported quickly and efficiently.
MSP Economic Impact
• Minneapolis -Saint Paul (MSP) International Airport in 1987 generated $4.62
billion in annual economic activity, supported 86,318 jobs, and generated.$1.62
billion in annual earnings. MSP ranked 16th among the nation's top 30
airports in economic activity.
• The total value of aviation to metropolitan and state economies includes not
only the economic impact of airline services, general aviation, airports and
aircraft manufacturing, but also the economic impact of those firms that serve
the arriving air passengers and that supply goods and services, directly and
indirectly, to the aviation and service and manufacturing industries.
13
State Economic Impact
• In 1987, aviation generated, directly or directly, jobs for over 110,000
Minnesota residents --5.3 percent of the state's workforce.
Air carrier and air cargo services are economically important to the state -46.2
• billion economic activity annually --as is general aviation --$358 million annually.
• For every dollar value of aviation products and services produced, total
Minnesota economic activity increases by $2.07, including $0.73 in payroll to
state residents.
AVIATION'S MINNESOTA IMPACT
Economic Earnings
Aviation Sector Activity (Payroll) Jobs
($Million) ($Million)
i
Minnesota
-Commercial Service $6,211.0 $1,867.1 101,057
• General Aviation 358.3 121.0 5,470
-AircraftManufacturing 287.8 82.2 3,866
i
Total Aviation $6,858.1 $2,070.3 110,393
MSP International
• Commercial Service $4,619.6 $1,615.3 86,318
(Source: Wilbur Smith Associates, June 1989)
airport$
14
NEW MAJOR AIRPORT LOCATION AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Briefing Materials
January 1991
The Business Impact Of Major Airport Location Efforts
Atlanta--Dallas-Fort Worth --Kansas City --Denver
What is the overall profile of the cities?
Regional Function Each city is a transportation hub and distribution center for its region.
Economic Character Similar employment distributions; Atlanta and Kansas City have more diversified
economies and are less susceptible to economic fluctuations; Denver and Dallas/Fort
Worth have stronger ties to resource and commodity based sectors and therefore are
more vulnerable to economic fluctuations. `
Airport Influence on
Growth Pattern The location of each airport relative to the traditional pattern of new growth
influence the rate but not the type or general sequence of development in the airport
environs. The Dallas/Fort Worth was developed adjacent to the primary pattern of
growth. The Atlanta and Kansas City were developed opposite to the traditional
growth pattern. When the airport location is away from the traditional path of
development a larger public and private effort is needed to pull development to the
airport environs.
Airport Distance
from the CBD Distance alone has not been a factor in the rate of development in the environs. The
Dallas/Fort Worth airport is 17.5 miles away from the CBDs of both cities and is not
perceived to be far away. Kansas City is 17 miles away and is perceived as too far
away. The Atlanta airport is nine miles away within the urbanized area. The
distance from the airport to the CBD need not be a deterrent to development if the
distance is not perceived to be too far.
What has been the individual cities experience with the airport and economic development?
Atlanta --Airport
& Development The southside of Atlanta has traditionally been an area of manufacturing and
warehousing operations and lower priced housing. Businesses choosing sites for
corporate or regional headquarters in the metropolitan area typically locate in the
CBD, midtown, north side Atlanta or along the perimeter highway. The reasons
identified for selecting non -airport environs location include (1) the high image office
parks, (2) proximity of high end housing, and (3) proximity to private schools and
quality public schools.
In 1980, when the Atlanta airport was expanded, the environs to the north, east and
west were developed with modest residential units and older industrial uses. The
airport expansion and corresponding noise abatement program created some prime
redevelopment parcels adjacent to the airport and suitable for non-residential use.
15
Dallas/Fort Worth
--Airport & Dev.
Kansas City --Airport
& Development
Denver --Airport
& Development
Because the local lending and development community was unaccustomed to major
development to the south, little development was considered until 1982, when a
coalition of chambers of commerce was established to entice development to the
south side. This effort introduced local developers and lenders to opportunities in
the environs that they had not considered before, even though they were frequent
users of the airport.
The airport was constructed on farmland midway between the cities and adjacent to
the primary Dallas direction of growth. In 1974, when it was completed, new office
and residential developments were under construction in north and northwest Dallas.
Many local real estate specialists contend that Las Colinas, the successful
development immediately east of the airport, was one of the logical next development
areas in Dallas with or without the airport since it was only 15 minutes from
downtown and on the new and expanding freeway system (others argue that without
D/FW there would be no Las Colinas).
Although the airport may have intensified the rate of growth, the pattern of quality
new projects close to Las Colinas was established prior to the construction of the
airport as the developer invested in extensive on-site amenities to establish the
quality of the development and to attract a larger part of the market.
The airport was completed in 1972 and although the interstate system is direct and
the commute relatively easy, the 17 mile distance from the CBD is perceived to be
to far. Most importantly, the airport is located north of the Missouri River in the
state of Missouri, in area which has an agricultural and blue collar image.
The Missouri River has traditionally been a strong psychological barrier to new
growth to the north. When the airport was built, only 10 percent of the population
and less than 10 percent of the jobs were north of the river. The major new growth
was to the south and southwest of the CBD in Kansas and Missouri.
There was no organized effort to counteract the traditional pattern of growth and
pull developers north across the Missouri and to the airport environs. It was only
when a single developer from the outside made a speculative move to develop
Executive Hills North in 1983 that a significant volume of new nonresidential growth
was attracted north to the airport environs. The developer constructed extensive
internal amenities to establish the quality of the development and to attract a larger
market share. This 3,700 acre development is the first and only mixed use --office,
retail, residential --in the airport environs. In 1969, as well as today, the major
direction of new growth was and is to the south and southwest of the CBD in
Kansas. The airport has spawned some new commercial and residential development
to the north, but it has not significantly retarded growth in the predominate
direction.
The new Denver airport is not in the traditional path of new development. The new
Denver International Airport will create a new market location. Denver Stapleton
is scheduled to close immediately upon opening of the new airport and it will
become an economic development district for the City of Denver.
16
What have been some of the major development impacts and issues?
International
Activity Non-stop international air carrier service bears a direct relationship to the level of
foreign interest is U. S. metropolitan areas. The subsequent level of foreign
investment depends on a broad array of factors and influences. International air
service provides two distinct but related economic opportunities: 1. The convenience
of passenger service may influence investors and corporate decision makers
considering a U. S. location. Foreign firms tend to only consider cities offering non-
stop or direct service. 2. The opportunity for international air cargo service increases
foreign imports and business activity in the airport environs for freight forwarders,
truckers, and assembly operators.
In Dallas/Fort Worth it was the concerted effort of public and private groups
cooperating that helped establish Dallas/Fort Worth as an international center
(under the guidance of the North Texas Commission, a private, non-profit business
organization founded in 1971 to promote and market the new airport).
Air Cargo Air cargo service generates substantial development activity on airport property and
within the airport environs. In Atlanta and Kansas City, more businesses in the
environs are there because of the air cargo activity, not the passenger activity.
Air cargo businesses include freight forwarders, which typically occupy
office/warehouse buildings and custom house brokers, which typically occupy office
buildings. Freight forwarders warehouse relatively high value inventory for an
average of 24 to 36 hours and have relatively strict tenant requirements, including
minimal driving time to air cargo entrances, ample truck access, building security,
and 25 to 30 percent office space. The historic growth and growth potential of
international air cargo far exceeds domestic air cargo.
Airport Design Terminals at commercial airports are designed to accommodate hub operations with
many connecting flights and a high volume of passengers or origin/destination
operations. While the physical design of the terminal does not influence economic
development in the airport environs, hub operations accommodate a higher volume
of flights, which enhances air cargo, freight forwarder and trucking operations.
Atlanta's airport was the first one designed to function as a hub facility with a high
proportion of connecting passengers. Dallas/Fort Worth was designed to maximize
the convenience of origin/destination passengers; serious consideration is being -given
by American Airlines to come up with a new terminal design concept as 65 percent
of its traffic is connects. Kansas City was also designed to serve origin/destination
traffic and it currently does not function as a major hub (TWA, Eastern and Braniff
expanded and -then cut operations over the last decade).
Freeway/Hwy Access Each of the airports is well served by interstate and state highway systems. The
interstate system was in place prior to the opening/expansion of the airport. Office
and lodging developments have clustered around the interstate interchanges. Next
to the interstate and state highway systems, the most important road network from
an economic perspective is that which links the industrial/warehouse facilities to the
air cargo entrances.
Transit Service Only Atlanta has rapid rail service to the airport; it opened in 1988 with 5,000
17
passengers daily and may have an impact on the efficiency of the road network in the
airport environs and on the timing for additional passenger parking.
Residential Dev. A key to attracting corporate headquarters to office buildings is proximity to quality
residential housing. Often, corporate site selection teams include executives who will
choose sites near where they currently live or intend to relocate. This general
correlation is consistent with development activity in the Atlanta, Dallas/Fort Worth
and Kansas City airport environs. Proximity to quality residential housing is not a
prime factor in attracting industrial development. Although a full mix of housing is
now available in the Dallas/Fort Worth environs, a recent study found that the
largest number of airport -dependent workers reside in Dallas, not in the airport
environs, and there is no correlation between where these employees live and their
airport -dependent jobs. The geographic sprawl of the Dallas/Fort Worth area and
the excellent road system contribute to a willingness to live and work in different
parts of the region. In Kansas City, the lack of quality housing has been a constraint
in attracting companies to the airport environs.
Metropolitan Dev. The impact of the airport extends far beyond the immediate airport environs.
Economic impact is spread throughout the metropolitan area particularly in Atlanta
and Kansas City where the airport location is not in the traditional growth path. A
Dallas/Fort Worth economic impact study found that the airport plays a pivotal role
in the attraction and retention of business and trade not only in the airport environs
but throughout the metropolitan area. In a survey of non -aviation firms located in
the Dallas/Fort Worth environs 22.6 percent said airport proximity was one of the
top three factors for its choice of location, 20.7 percent it was in the top ten reasons
for choice of location, and 56.6 percent said that it was not an important factor at
all; none said it was the only reason for site location.
Airport Attraction A major airport, especially one with significant international service and air cargo
operations, can act as a magnet in attracting new businesses and residents to its
environs. If the airport brings a new level of international business or expanded air
cargo opportunities, it can also pull new businesses into the metropolitan area and
to the environs. To achieve full economic potential, a sustained and cohesive
marketing effort must be undertaken to draw businesses other than those which must
locate at or near the airport. The lack of marketing initiative associated with Kansas
City demonstrates that an airport, by itself, may only produce a modest amount of
economic development. Once a quality image is established, businesses, developers
and lenders gravitate more quickly to the airport environs.
Large -Scale Dev. The presence of one major developer made the difference in development activity
(more than 1,000 acres) in both Dallas/Fort Worth and Kansas City in terms of
development: (1) They probably accelerated the rate of construction and absorption
in the environs because they initiated marketing campaigns specifically to attract
businesses to their location; (2) Large scale development established a theme of
quality development (each built substantial environmental amenities within phase
one of their projects); and (3) Only the large scale developments have offered high-
end residential units.
On -Airport Dev. Development of on -airport land can generate substantial revenue for the airport
authority. It can also complement or compete with land in adjacent communities.
Each of the three airports allow only a narrow range of businesses to locate on
airport land. These have included air cargo businesses, car rental agencies, hotels,
airline corporate and operations facilities and federal agencies. This narrow focus
RK,
Land Speculation
has minimized friction between the airport and adjoining cities.
In both Dallas/Fort Worth and Kansas City, land speculation was rampant from the
time airport sites were announced until they opened. In Dallas/Fort Worth,
speculation caused a number of individuals to make and lose money but it did not
deter development. The 12,000 acre Las Colinas and the 500 acre Freeport
development proceeded in a carefully scheduled manner by their long-term property
owner. Much of the land bought during the speculative period is just beginning to
be developed --20 years later. In Kansas City, the actual land for the airport was
quietly assembled, 15 years before construction began. However, between the time
that Kansas City announced plans to build a new terminal (1966) and its completion
(1972), land prices per acre increased from an average of 56,000 per acre in 1967 to
$11,000 in 1968 to as high as 520,000 in the early 1970s. In 1986, average land prices
in the airport environs ranged between 52,500 and 53,200 per acre.
Speculative
Non -Residential
Construction Where the airport was not in the path of traditional growth, the first series of
developments were owner -occupied and owner -financed. Both lending and
development communities were slow to finance and build speculative space available
for lease. The quality of developments have improved with time as the lending and
development sectors became confident that the airport environs were an acceptable
location for credit tenants. In Kansas City, substantial speculative construction began
more than ten years after the new airport opened.
Sequence of
Non -Residential
Development There was a consistent pattern in the sequence of non-residential development within
the airport environs, excluding large scale developments, 1,000 acres plus. The
sequence observed was as follows:
(1) Lodging,
(2) Single user,
(3) owner financed industrial, office/warehouse or office/distribution
buildings,
(4) Small (less than 15,000 sq. ft.) speculative industrial,
office/warehouse or office/distribution buildings of average design
quality,
(5) Larger speculative industrial, office/warehouse, or
office/distribution buildings, typically built out with 25% to 30%
office use,
(6) Multistory office buildings and
(7) Franchise and specialty restaurants.
What are the lessons learned from the Atlanta, Dallas -Ft Worth, and Kansas City experiences?
Regional Development New airports did not change the traditional development pattern of the region.
New airport location did influence the rate of growth but not the
type or sequence of development.
Quality "image" of airport environs is important to their development.
Large scale developments in airport environs can be as important as the airport in
19
attracting development.
Airport impact on development is broadly spread across the region; impact is not
isolated to airport environs.
Airport Location Actual distance in miles may not be the issue in how far is too far but the
"perception" of the location in the region.
Air cargo and hospitality industry generate much of the development in the airport
environs.
Major highway and/or Interstate access is important. Development seems as
attracted to these interchanges as to the airport.
Higher quality residential areas are important to attracting higher end corporate
headquarters and commercial -industrial development to the airport environs.
International Business In order to attract significant foreign investment and business location the airport
needs to have direct/non-stop service to foreign destinations.
In order to have a high level of air cargo activity it is important to have direct/non-
stop service to international destinations.
Land Speculation Land speculation did not adversely impact the cost of airport land but did play a
significant role in dampening development in the airport environs.
Sequence of Dev. There is a general pattern of development in the airport environs, only the pace of
development varies. (if in the traditional path of development it is faster, if not it is
slower).
Public/Private Dev.
Initiatives In order to maximize the development potential, particularly if not in the traditional
development path, a strong coordinated effort is necessary. Such efforts should be
focused on what is possible given traditional development activity in the sector and
those who need to be located near the airport (air cargo, hospitality, international).
20
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Planning for Capacity Enhancements at MSP
A Status Report
Runway Proposals
Sizable capacity expansions require additional runways. The
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is conducting a planning
process to see how much additional capacity could be added to the
airport by adding one new runway at Minneapolis -St. Paul
International Airport. Early in 1990, consultants identified 12
possible alignments for a new runway.
The MAC has since pared the list to three alternatives. Each
alternative would add about the same amount of capacity to the
airport.
All of the runway alternatives assume that the airport's current
crosswind runway, called 4-22, will be extended to 11,000 feet in
length. That extension is currently undergoing an environmental
impact statement review..The extension is intended to improve
noise abatement techniques and allow big aircraft to take off
fully loaded.
Runway Alternative A --The proposed new 7,500 foot runway would be
built 800 feet north of the current runway on the north and east
side of the Lindbergh Terminal. It would be used predominantly
for landings. The runway would slightly expand the current noise
impact zone in south Minnneapolis, Mendota Heights and Eagan.
In the year 2000, 8,940 homes, and 22,250 people, would be in the
runways's high noise zone. South Minneapolis would be affected
the most, followed by Bloomington, Richfield, Eagan and Mendota
Heights. The runway would require demolition of some homes north
of County Rd. 62 in Minneapolis, and shifting the location of the
facilities of the Air Force, the National Guard and the officers
row section of Fort Snelling.
Runway Alternative B --This proposed new 8,000 foot runway would
be located 1,000 feet south of the runway on the south and west
side of the Lindbergh Terminal. It would also be used largely for
landings.
The noise zones for south Minneapolis, Mendota Heights and Eagan
would expand slightly. Some 8,830 homes and 22,050 people would
be in the runway's high noise zone. Again, south Minneapolis
would have the most people exposed to the noise, followed by
Richfield, Bloomington, Eagan and Mendota Heights. The proposal
would require demolition of homes in the New Ford Town area of
Richfield and depressing or tunneling Cedar Av. near County Rd.
62 for safety reasons.
21
Runway Alternative C --This new runway would be located almost
parallel to Cedar Av. on the west side of the airport, but canted
slightly to the southeast so aircraft would not fly over the new
Mall of America in Bloomington.
The 8,000 foot runway would be used for departures to the south
-- and for -arrivals -from the south. This_proposed._runway_alters
current noise zones the most, and would result in fewer people in
the high zoise areas. Some 7,780 homes and 19,240 people would be
affected. The runway would impact south Minneapolis residents the
most, followed by Richfield, Bloomington, Eagan and Mendota. This
alternative would also require the acquisition of the New Ford
Town area, plus Rich Acres in Richfield, some air freight
facilities and the Registry, Sheraton and Excel Inn Hotels just
across Interstate Hwy. 494 in Bloomington.
Terminal Proposals
Adding a runway means more aircraft landings and take offs at the
airport. It means moving more passengers, so comparable terminal,
parking and like facilities would be necessary. The MAC has also
been looking at alternative terminal concepts and has narrowed
the planning to three choices.
Each concept is based on having 97 gates to board or depart from
aircraft, up from today's 67 gates. Each concept assumes
considerable expansion of terminal facilities, up from today's
1.8 million square feet to the 2.9 million maximum in Concept B
2020.
Parking would be expanded also, to 25,000 space for public
parking and car rental. In addition, 19,000 spots would be
available for Northwest employees. This compares with today's
15,000 and 9,600 respectively.
Each of the three concepts includes an underground people mover
(and baggage mover) transit system. The system would connect the
parking and terminal facilities and, under one concept, connect
with a proposed new remote gate boarding facility on the west
side of the airport.
Each concept involves relocating passenger facilities for
international flights into the overall terminal facilities.
International flight gates and Customs are currently housed in
the Hubert Humphrey Terminal south of the Lindbergh Terminal.
Finally, each of the terminal concepts has been planned so it
fits in with each of the three new runway plans the MAC is
considering.
Terminal Concept A --A new terminal building would be constructed
22
south of the current parking ramps. The new building would have a
parking structure. The Lindbergh Terminal Building would be
retained. Its concourses and new gates --and the gates from the
new building --would extend like a horsehoe to the south.
A new 25 -gate remote arrival and departure facility would be
built in the northwest side of the airport. It would not have
terminal services, such as full airline ticketing, baggage claim
or other amenities. A new parking facility would be built near
the new remote gate building. It could be used by passengers who
have no luggage and who want to go directly to their departure
gates.
Terminal Concept B 2010 --This concept involves constructing a new
terminal on the northwest side of the airport, with parking above
it. International services would be provided from the new
terminal building. Passengers would enter the airport from the
west side, off Cedar Av. or County Rd. 62., not from Hwy. 5 as
they do today.
The Lindbergh Terminal would remain, but with additional gates.
The concept would allow aircraft to taxi around the current
Lindbergh Terminal -parking ramp area. That means they can get to
and from their gates more quickly. Remote parking would also be
provided on the south side of the airport for passengers heading
directly to their gates.
Terminal Concept C 2020 --This concept evolves from Concept B and
retains all of its features. The differences in the year 2020
include an expand northwest terminal building and parking. In
addition, the Lindbergh Terminal would be reconfigured and the
gates would be realigned.
23