06-02-97 agenda0
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD
MONDAY, JUNE 2, 1997
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
6:30 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Ar_PtinA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
I. 6:30 -7:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF ISSUES RELATING TO GROUP HOMES
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 19
11. 7:00 -7:30 P.M. ANNUAL MEETING WITH FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 20
III. 7:30 -8:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF DESIRABILITY OF GRANTING TO NON -
CONFORMING BUSINESS SIGN OWNERS AN ADDITIONAL
THREE YEAR AMORTIZATION PERIOD
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 21
IV. 8:00 -8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES TAKEN IN AREA
BOUNDED BY PENN AVENUE, 76TH STREET, 1 -494 AND 1 -35W
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 22
V. 8:30 -9:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF 6900 BLOCK OF PENN
STORMWATER PROJECT
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 23
VI. 9:00 -9:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED ITEMS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 24
VII. 9:15 -9:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF ACCESS TO SEVERAL 77TH STREET
BUSINESSES AND USE OF DIRECTIONAL SIGNS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 25
VIII. 9:30 -10:00 P.M. UPDATE OF CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS SCHEDULED IN CITY
OF RICHFIELD DURING 1997
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 26
10:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT
AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST.
REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HOURS IN ADVANCE TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE
SERVICES DIRECTOR AT 861 -9702.
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 26
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Update of construction projects scheduled in the City of Richfield during 1997.
Background:
Staff from the Engineering Division will present a status report on this summer's Public
Works construction projects. The attached sheets identify the projects to be discussed.
Recommended Motion:
No formal action is needed from the City Council at this time.
Basis of Recommendation:
None.
Alternative Recommendation:
Council may choose to request additional information from staff about various projects
now in progress or planned for 1997. This information can be provided in the form of
Council Memoranda or in subsequent Study Sessions.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This discussion is scheduled for the June 2, 1997 Council Study Session. Engineering
Supervisor George Atkinson will be present to discuss 1997 construction projects
involving the Engineering Division.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
Attachments
•
1997 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
• STREET
*STORM SEWER
• MAINTENANCE
• PROJECTS BY OTHER AGENCIES
77th ST. CLEANUP
• CROSSWALK AT COLFAX
• 78th ST. ENTRANCE TO LYNDALE
*SOD S. BLVD. EAST OF PORTLAND
• 771h ST. TURN LANE AT LYNDALE
• LYNDALE MEDIAN
TRAFFIC
• MERIDIAN CROSSINGS ENTRANCE
• MERIDIAN CROSSINGS SIGNALS
• 77th /12th SIGNAL
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
• 77th ST. CLEANUP (5 PROJECTS)
• STREET RESURFACING (d PROJECTS)
• TRAFFIC (3 PROJECTS)
STREET IMPROVEMENT;
STREET RESURFACING
• LYNDALE - LAKESHORE TO 74th
• LYNDALE / 661h INTERSECTION
•65lhST. PENN TOXERXES
•76th ST. WESTOFSHERIDAN
IMPROVEMENTS
• COLUMBUS STORM SEWER
• TREATMENT PLANT WETLAND
• GALYAN "S /FOUNTAINHEAD LIFT
• WOOD LAKE DREDGING
MAINTENANCE PROJECTS = AGENCIES
*BLACKTOP CRACK ROUT AND SEAL ■
•PORTLAND /1 -494 BRIDGE RE -DECK
• BLACKTOP STREETS SEALCOAT
• CURB, GUTTER, SIDEWALK REPAIR
• ALLEY RESEALING AND REPAIR
• HUMBOLDT /LAKESHORE OVERLAY
• 70tli /35 -W EXITSIGNAL
•.PENN / 74th STORM SWR.
J
Y
wl:t_7 1
RIm mR7���t,
mm
mmmmm
•y
n w �
MI � 01 mms. r.n ■ l.�
7wf.i•1 1w X71 i
■�■ � r. NIA- c! r
■ � GNU � •.T', �
mm
Mmm
low
' �' NAffii�wiwwnne uw niwn. � � /s I� �
NINNI! t�NINl�ill �!
• �MIpIgCRI�NINp� M���y w\!1
Nldll� � 11NNHNY � �IA/ � � r � °"
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 25
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of access to several 77th Street businesses and the use of directional signs.
Background:
The City Code 416.07 Subd. 2(g) provides explicit information for signs along the 77th
Street Corridor. The ordinance allows off site directional signs on private property.
Representatives from Hampton Inn have approached the City to request special
consideration of the difficult access to their site at 77th and Lyndale. Staff will present
some alternative ways to address their access including the use of directional signs on
77th Street right of way. The signs could be a demonstration project for a term of one
year. The businesses could pay rent to cover costs. If, after one year, the
demonstration is a success, staff could approach Council to have the ordinance
changed to allow similar signs along the 77th Street Corridor. A schematic drawing of a
possible design of the sign is attached.
Recommended Motion:
The item is on for discussion purposes, however, staff is seeking direction on whether
to pursue a demonstration of directional signs.
Basis of Recommendation:
Not applicable.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
For discussion purposes only.
Respectfully submitted,
Ja m Prosser
City
11139W 2
0
I•
K]
w"I
Fashion
Fabrics
Muffins �
Galore
Antique
Furniture
George's
Pub
Buried or
Surface
Mounted
Sign Post
Sign Design
,
Concrete
!Footing
,Sign Concept
January2l, 1997
Fashion
Fab ri cs
I I 1 1
1 1 1 1
c
0
r
i
I
,
Typical Section along 77th Street
Illustrative Image
Business Directional Signs
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
-
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 24
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Status of airport related issues.
Background:
Recent developments regarding airport issues include the following:
• Runway 4 -22
A drop piece specifically targeted for southeast Richfield is currently being developed.
Originally, information dispersed would address the City's position and lawsuit status of
Runway 4 -22's extension and use and the halted sound insulation program. Recent
BBN analysis of the proposed north -south runway noise impacts present a need to
address issues that the proposed north -south runway will create. In addition a briefing
paper is being prepared for City Council, staff, and others.
The intent of the drop piece is to send the message to residents that:
♦ the City is actively working on noise mitigation efforts
♦ the City would like input from residents regarding actions to take
♦ airport noise is likely a long -term problem that won't be eradicated
♦ the City will work on ways to improve conditions for residents.
• Proposed North -South Runway
As one piece of Richfield's noise mitigation plan, the City asked Dr. Sanford Fidell to
take noise measurements at various locations near runways and determine the low
frequency impact a north -south runway would have on Richfield residents. The results
of this study are quite serious. Major findings of the analysis include:
♦ Aircraft operations on a north -south runway would substantially elevate ambient
noise levels in low frequency levels in areas of Richfield up to about a mile from the
runway, by 20 dB or more under some conditions.
♦ INM models apparently do not reflect this increase in low frequency noise levels.
♦ Similar levels of low frequency noise exposure that would be caused by a north -
south runway have produced noise complaints in communities near other airports.
♦ An acoustic barrier with adequate dimensions is unlikely to be cost effective.
♦ Low frequency noise produced by jet aircraft operations on the proposed runway
would be of significant level to create rattling noises inside homes in eastern
portions of Richfield, including residences with conventional "acoustic insulation"
treatments.
♦ Areas of Richfield that would be exposed to low frequency noise from aircraft
operations at levels sufficient to induce rattling noises inside homes, extend farther
westward from MSP than the 60 dB DNL contour.
In essence, it has been determined that the City of Richfield will be experiencing more
impact than the MAC's report had concluded. MAC's preliminary EIS report on ground
noise impacts not only underplay the noise impacts residents will experience, it does
not recognize and address the "hard to mitigate" low frequency impacts.
• Relocation of Recreational Assets
A meeting of the ballfield task force will be held on June 2. Members of this group will
be shown three draft proposals for relocation of ballfields and asked to comment on
them. The task force is also expected to develop a course of action for public input.
The public input process will begin early in June.
Relocation of the ballfields has been a slow but positive experience. Much time has
been spent on rearranging parks and making them more efficient in space allotment.
Large changes to neighborhood parks within Richfield has been kept to a minimum.
The Golf Course Task Force has been put on hold pending the outcome of a
memorandum of agreement between city, metro, state, and federal agencies. The Met
Council, Department of Natural Resources, National Park Service, Minneapolis Park
and Recreation Department and Richfield Recreation Department continue to seek
surplus federal land that is not being used (Fort Snelling, Mississippi River, Minnehaha
Creek area). Funding of land acquisition is an issue in question.
• MASAC Meeting
The May 27 meeting appeared to be more of a battle of wills than a meeting of minds.
After a heated discussion of "close -in" and "distant procedures ", a vote was taken and
passed by a (weak) majority vote resulting in a "Distant Community Departure Profile"
utilization on Runways 11 UR and Runways 4/22, and a "Close -in Community Departure
Profile" utilization on Runways 29UR. It was evident that several City MASAC
members objected to the way MAC staff treated this issue. An airport consultant to the
City has stated that the departure profiles are not a significant issue for Richfield.
Numerous residents located in the blocks between 65th and 66th streets and 12th and
14th avenues came to the MASAC meeting to request their homes be included in the
Part 150 Sound Insulation Program. MAC staff responded to this request by telling the
residents that:
♦ MASAC was not the forum in which to address this problem
♦ complaints by residents do not influence any decisions that MAC makes (no reason
to keep calling)
♦ a noise monitor will not be installed in the neighborhood because these
measurements do not hold any influence with the sound insulation program and it is
already known that this neighborhood experiences a lot of noise
♦ maybe in the distant future something can be done to help them.
Many residents left the meeting frustrated and disheartened. A copy of their letters and
petition has been attached.
• FICAN Meeting
The Federal Interagency Committee on Aviation Noise public forum, held on May 13,
did very little to enlighten attendees to noise mitigation activities that go beyond sound
insulation or airplane improvements. Much of the studies being done fall into the
category of reactive measures. With European countries becoming more stringent in
their noise standards, the FAA needs to fall in line with compliance.
When asked about health issues of residents located near airports, the committee
replied that there are too many variables to consider and a study would yield invalid
results. Also stated was the excessive cost and time that a study would involve. At
that, the representative of the air force launched into a 45 minute presentation on the
effects of noise on chickens, turkeys, llamas, cows, desert tortoise, and eagle eggs.
The City of Richfield will soon be submitting comments for FICAN's Annual Report.
Issues addressed will included:
• revisiting the controversial DNL metrics as the most accurate measurement of noise
level
• providing adequate funding to noise impacted communities
• establishing measurement of low frequency impacts
• and studying long -term health effects of residents located near airports.
A copy of FICAN's Report on Aviation Noise Research and 1996 Annual is available in
the Administration Department. FICAN's internet site is located at
www.hmmh.com /fican.
• New Ford Town and Rich Acres Acquisition
The most recent status report for acquisition and relocation is as follows:
1. Phase V: Nine appraisals have been ordered for business owners and multi - family
dwellings located on 66th Street East. MAC's appraisal firm has completed six field
appraisals. The process is anticipated to be completed by the end of May.
Tenants will be contacted by WDSCO to schedule the initial interview meetings after
the appraisal and environmental process has been completed and a written offer
has been presented to the owner.
2. Auction 8 Update: Thirty homes were successfully closed between March 13 and
April 16.
00 3. Auction 7 Update: Seeding and cleanup began at the end of April.
! 4. Twelve homes are currently in the status of condemnation.
Recommended Motion:
Discuss current airport issues.
Basis of Recommendation:
It is important for the Council to provide direction to staff regarding airport concerns.
Alternative Recommendation:
Defer discussion to another date.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This matter will be discussed at the Study Session of June 2, 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
Jame . Prosser
City nager
JDP:cak
0
I�
ti
A
ti
�
ti
Z O O O O
N
Z00000
Z00000
Z00000
Z00000
O
ui
O
D
G
O
O
V
ti
ti
ti
ti
o
0
Z 1A O O O
Z M O O O
Z O a 0 0 o
Z O O o O O
o.
o
0
0
0
W
= a'
O
Li >
t�D
t4D
co
O
V H
to
440
0
to
Z O O O O O
isZM
oOO
Zw, 000
ZMOOOO
Z00000
aW
a 0
M W
o
0
0
0
o
to
0
0
to t0
0
to
c. F"
ZwrZ
Z�oN. -o
CD
W
to N
ID N
to r-
to
O
'
O
ZOO
O C,4 co)
Z lM
ZN�O ONO
�OOOO
ZN
J
� V
G
M
Q
0
G
=o
LL LL V L
E �=
M E
z
M E
zr
� �
m
N >� c U
t � V `0
O
N >+ 0
mho `co
cEo c
LL V tM
t�`a= o
V' U- V tM L
IU`p= c
LL LL V m s
MM 0
u' LL V Of L
Z
Z
d >+C U
Cl)
U• T C U
0 >�C U
d. AC U
c O
Z
c�0 LV)
Z
c Q `CA
Z
`fn
Z
Y
N�
V
��.
N�
ti
ti
�
ti
Z O O O O
Z 0 0 0 0
Z 0 0 0 0 0
Z 0 0 0 0 0
W
O
D
D
W
ti
ti
ti
ti
o
oNtOOO
QOOOO
QOOOOO
QOOOOO
C W
3 Q:
O
Li >
t�D
t4D
co
to
VZ
N N O O.
Z M� O O
Z t0 O O O o
Z O O O O O
G
C
aW
a 0
MI.-
°D Q
o
to
0
to p) O
0
to t0
0
to
c. F"
ZwrZ
Z�oN. -o
zcoLO
Z00000
tAy
C�
ON
O
O
_
EE�
�_
E E -
RE�=°o
EE�
=o
LL LL V L
=o
LL u V L
LL ii
=o
LL V t
m
N >� c U
t � V `0
O
N >+ 0
mho `co
Oft
� �0 `!n
Of
� � V `V)
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Y
V
V
lop
IL
S
Z
0
co
00
omi g
3
=
=
5
m
a
3
�
a
= QK7
ui y. 0)
QK0
N y. m � (G
Q.K7
N y. Ol � fG
(G
00
omi g
r_ m
=
=
=
=
=
= QK7
ui y. 0)
QK0
N y. m � (G
Q.K7
N y. Ol � fG
Or
CO) . S1 � fC
Q��
(n . O1 m
Q�7
CO) 5. al B m
A 7�! �D
S tG 'n
0 TI
A 7� �p
S co ' T1
n 97
A O`< N
S O Ti -n
ci
A 7� �p
S co
0��
A 7� i
S m TI
ci TI
A 7� �D
S fG TI
ci TI
O
oa�3c�
3 fD•Z3
O d
a0
9 m� 3
O p�
oo�3m
3 m•�
O
oo���
3 aSe
O 0
oo�3n�
3 �°
O al
00�+3�'
3 m,z
CD `<
m '?
m 'Z
m 'Z
m
m
0 3
�CJf
OD N O Z
OOO(4
00 -w ?
W 0r%)
v
r
�b.
OJ
OOOWv
N
a�
O W O
W O
O
O
v
W O W N
O
4 O
CD
V N O
O
O
O
O
O O
v46
ov
v
v
v
,v
,v
mV
D0)
W O U1 W r
O O — -+ O r
O O O O O r
C C C C C r
O -+ O t0
r
000 0 P. r
N
m
v v
WOUIO�WDWZ
N
CD
v
000001-
cp
CJt
v
v
O0000
an d
�laD�
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
cn
m
O1
cn
OA
OA
cn
cn
_
m3
M
wv
O N; r
v
O O O O r
v
O O O O O r
v
O O O O O r
O O O O O
v
r
v
O O O O O Z
M
00
0
0
0
0 0 0 0 0
0
o
m
v
G
�o
o
o
c
0
0
0
v
N
OOO -4 CD r
OOOO -►r
OOOOOr
OOOOOr
OOOOOr
v
OOOOOr
...
cn
Ch
cn
cn
o000Or
cn
cn
y
r_ m
" Q= O
W y. Ol IF (
" Q= m
CO y. O) EF (
" Q= �
(n y. S) IF m
Q= =
(n N m
-, Q= =
(A y. a) 2 m
" Q= o
Cl) y. al EF m
A 7 �p
Sm 'n
O 0 11
A 7 �p
Sco -n -
O n
A 7 �p
SO T
O n TI
A 7 CD
Sm T
O n
A= l< 0
Sm -n
O 0 TI
A 7� CD
Stc -n
O n TI
m
co���
N
co0)3a)
0)
oo,a0,
d-n
03 :0)
1-y
0 0)
0X0) O
n3
N N v
v
O
O
v
0
r CA
s p Z
Cfl O co 00 r
Z
co O -� ,� r
Z
O O O W r
L" Z
N O ODD r
v
W O W N
Z
r
Z
O O O N� r
N
V N O
O
O
O
O
O O
L O
Z ?
v v
WOUIO�WDWZ
v
OO -.,AOZ
v
000001-
v
000001-
X10 0Nr
v
v
O0000
an d
�laD�
Lr
O1
cn
OA
OA
cn
cn
C O
M
—ON 4 Z
O O O O0 Z
0 0 0 0 0 1-
0 0 0 0 0 1-
0 0 0 0 0
1-
0 0 0 0 0 1-
0
G
�o
o
o
m
0
0
0
v
c
v
v
v
v
v
v
m
OOOco
oOOOOr
000001-
oOOOOr
o000Or
000001-
y
cn
cn
N
a
a
a
s
•
a
•
16 May 1997
Steve Vecchi
MASAC
60040 28th Avenue S.
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Dear Mr. Vecchi,
We have learned recently that our block on 65th and 13th Avenue S.
is not included in the soundproofing of homes.
We are asking you to send someone to our house with a noise
monitor to be installed for AN EXTENDED period of time so you can get
a true reading of the airport no she over our house.
It seems strange to us that we are surrounded by houses from 65th
and 14th to 65th and 11th that are /or are scheduled to be soundproofed
and our block has been excluded. We have the same planes going over our
• house.
We would appreciate a prompt response to our request to have our
house monitored. Thank you.
Sincerely,
PHILIP & X'1V_
Mc f WN
6509 - 13th Avenue S
Richfield, MN 55423
Phone: 869 -1507
U
n
LJ
May 18, 1997
To: MASAC
Attn: Mr. Bob Johnson
Chair Person MASAC
Thru: Richfield City Council
Attn: Dawn Weitzel
Richfield MAC Representative
Subj: MSP 150 Sound Insulation Program
Dear Mr. Johnson,
We the residents of Richfield Heights petition the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), MASAC, and the City of Richfield to include our homes in the MSP 150 Sound
Insulation Program. Our homes are located in the blocks between 65th and 66th streets,
and 12th and 14th streets. We believe that our request are justified based on the three (3)
following reasons:
• (a). We feel that when the initial sound testing in our area was conducted,
that it was done in an unprofessional and hasty manner, and on a day when
prevailing winds limited the amount of over flights in the area of concern.
We feel that the combination of these two factors may have resulted the FAA
and other concerned parties receiving unfair and incorrect data on sound levels
in our area. (see enclosure 1.)
(b). In the past year, it seems as though there have been an increasing number
of flights occurring over the Richfield Heights area, understanding that this is the
result of many factors and for the most part cannot be avoided. We do feel that
the current flight paths and information kept by the FAA does not reveal the
actual number of aircraft flying directly over our homes and the increase in the
amount of noise and vibration felt by the homeowners in our area.
(c). Finally, we do not feel that the current Noise Exposure Map passes the
common sense test. It is hard to justify our homes not being included in the
sound insulation program when the map clearly shows all homes in the Richfield
Heights area qualify except for ours. This includes homes directly across the
streets from ours on three sides (North, East and West), and homes farther away
from the airport than ours, (see blocks 28 and 36). We understand how the system
works. We do not feel that it is fair or accurate as can be seen by looking at the
map our blocks are literally islands surrounded by homes that do qualify.
(see enclosure 2.)
•
We have been trying to resolve this problem since August of last year and have been in
contact with various offices that represent the FAA, the City of Richfield, and the Center
for Energy and Environment. In all cases, the people that we have spoken with have been
courteous and helpful and have been very successful in educating us on the MAC
program and how homes qualify. Unfortunately, there does seem to be some confusion
among these various organizations. We were told in early April that we did in fact
qualify and that we would be contacted in May as to when we would be attending
meetings to finalize details. In May we were told that while Richfield Heights did qualify
our homes did not. We know that as MAC insulates a home, neighbors who do not
qualify want to know why they cant receive the same service, and as we were told, a
line has to be drawn some where, and we can't make everyone happy, we just don't have
the money to do everyone ". We feel that we are an exception to this domino effect
because all the homes surrounding us already qualify and since 66th St. is a major four
lane road it forms a natural boundary to the south. Therefore, we are turning to you and
your organization for assistance in helping us to resolve this problem. We request that
you consider our petition and review our qualification for the MAC Part 150 Residential
Sound Insulation Program.
is
0
The following residents have been appointed to represent us in this matter and can be
contacted for further information or assistance.
Phillip McKeown
6509 13th Av. South
Richfield, Mn. 55423
(612) 869 -1507
Respectfully,
2
Mike Butler
6514 14th Av. South
Richfield, Mn. 55423
(612) 798 -5913
� 0
lgA4v, S�O. �____
• My home was selected in our area to be used for the sound testing being conducted by
the Airport Authority. A gentleman arrived at my home a 7:00 in the morning and
set up the test equipment around and inside my house. The gentleman then departed
and returned to pickup the equipment at 7:00 PM, due to the winds on this particular day
another runway was being used and not one aircraft flew over our area. I asked the
gentleman if he would be returning and he stated "No, I'm finished and will be heading
back to Boston this evening ". Since that time no other test have been conducted in our
area of Richfield heights.
Phillip McKeown
6509 13th Av. South
Richfield, MN. 55423
•
0 Encl. 1
R
,.lam• ..
. k U�Y
!aL: ?/7
tip'•
^t1 ?
a
if >r►
ST. 1Stca►
.z'� , � � is }� ;n:
�
RI CHF IELD
sr.
1990 POP 35.7
TO
28
lot
•�
�
7
�
R
f•7
7A
! $.�
I
ti �
•
� a
ti
w
a►
ai
p
ai
a ei
ei
A to
q
e
a e�
1
It
>
>
}
77
77K
�y
`
s
Tntr' hOfl£PS
35
7t
f!d
C
C
c
C`
rfi
/'CCe�v /rt f SOtl+�d
vb
t
T'
o
a
fz
43
'2,`y2
a
.3'SZ•a
' dr
47
50
METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION
t,P r` g s °rti> Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport
6040 - 28th Avenue South @ Minneapolis, MN 55450.2799
,t
c Phone (6i2) 726 -8100 • Fax (612) 726 -5296
9� 4rR DO Pt �` G
May 21, 1997
Philip & Jean McKeown
650913th Avenue South
Richfield, MN 55423
Dear Mr. & Mrs. McKeown,
Thank you for your recent letter dated May 16, 1997 concerning questions regarding the
eligibility of your Richfield home (6509 13th Avenue South) in the Metropolitan Airports
• Commission (MAC) Part 150 Residential Sound Insulation Program.
Since the Part 150 Residential Sound Insulation Program is a federal program, many of
the program rules, including eligibility, are established by the federal government and
must be met by all U.S. airports who choose to implement Part 150 Programs, The
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determines eligibility Part 150 Residential Sound
Insulation Program eligibility for homes closely surrounding the Minneapolis/ St. Paul
International Airport (MSP) using a DNL (day /night level) computer - generated noise
contour. The DNL noise methodology is = based on noise field monitoring. Instead,
the DNL noise contour is an estimated yearly noise average containing all noise exposure
assumptions including arriving and departing aircraft operations, runway use, flight track
information, aircraft type information, noise abatement runway use priorities and any
runway & taxiway modifications.
Although many homes are impacted by aircraft noise, the DNL contour is designed to
define the most critical noise impacted land use surrounding the airport. The certified
MSP 1996 DNL (day /night level) Noise Exposure Map (see attached) is the current
DNL noise contour certified by the FAA for Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport
(MSP). Based on FAA guidelines, only blocks that are intersected or completely
pontained within the outermost contour boundary are eligible for the Part 150 Residential
Sound Insulation Program. Your block does not meet this criteria. Your neighboring
blocks are eligible because they are intersected by the outermost DNL contour boundary.
Unfortunately, this criteria cannot be changed or debated. Performing acoustic field
monitoring won't change or affect this situation, either.
It is likely that within the next 2 -3 year period, the FAA will request that an updated DNL
noise contour be generated for MSP. The only chance for blocks to become eligible in
the future would be if they were contained within this updated DNL noise contour's
boundary. It is important to note that new blocks entering the program in the future would
not be insulated until all currently eligible blocks are completed.
Sincerely,
Steven J. Vecchi
Manager, Part 150 Programs
Metropolitan Airports Commission
•
U
C`
ca
O
0-
Q
•
a)
M
a
O
E C
O
O
E Y
a
O Q
U)
� E
O CU
Cl) T
-a
c c a0 Y
L
3 "O
4?
' L cu
_ cu C o
.�
U 0
0)
3 3 'c U 0
c Y
_
3 E
C -,.e
-a .0 ,E
0
Q ,E
3 M rn E
0 -a 0
� o
Q
E 3 m w-c--
O L
a
O
O N 6
a)
-a
-a
-a C 7
ca O
a C
U
a)
O
o
a) U
L
a)
a)
L
a)
a)
L
a)
a) >. �-
,, f,� CO Y
Cl)
a)
L
N
L
a)
a) •�
C •�'�
N
a)
L
a)
>,
a) a,,, cn Y
U
L)
a)
L)
a)
L)
a)
tl!
Q U
N
co
a)
fl d >'
cn
a) .@ C C
CU
Q O U
d
C
c3n
C
cn
C
a
X 3 U C 3
C
C
X— m cu
�
� X 7 U C�
C
C
C
Q
Q
Q
W U c0 c0
Q
Q
W O cn
Q
U a) U c6 m
Q
Q
Q
c
cu > rn a
_ cn
c
c
N
p
-0
N
O O
C a)
cn 0)
cn cn p O
C
O
C
Cl.
a) a)
3 C
a) - �
0
0
O
L L L N
~_
cu U
E
O
'a V) a) O7 C
O C
C
O
E
a
0
N
O 0 p
O
O
C cn
i
3
t C p 0
Q
L
4-
.0
N
N
O a3
O
Li-
a) C
0
E
cn
:3 :3
cn
co
:3
n U
`
N
O
O
-
2,E
cn
•a 0cn
c— 0
Y
3
�3
0
u M
cZO
c,) E Q
c)
L
(n
O
>
a)
O
O
O . �
C 3 =
•�
O
O
O
O
CO
cn O N
'
y
U
�
Cl)
7
p Q
:3 a)
N
O
cn
t
:3
-a
C--
0)
?� 3
O
N
N
ca
E ,O7
O O E
.O
co
-
n
N
i
O
� c 0 >, n
-0
w
3
CZ
3
3
C E E 'a
M
� 2
p c
:5 (1) a)
o O
3
3
3
O
°
C:
c
C
c N
C -0�
(B Q E
C
C
O
°
c
c0
n O O
Y
Y
Y
r-
Y
a)
Y
C') =
j
O
O ,c O
E
O
O
O ,�
O O
y a) Q
C
0
0
.�
0
L
O N
E
a)
-a
a) a) >+ a)
C O �•
0
'a
�
a)
"O
Q
•a a) 3
C
=-
C O
O a)
"a
'O a)
(6
O
j
'O a)
(0
V
C
Cl)
() �
C_
c0 (L6
Y N ""' O
C
C
C 0. =
a)
C O c)
a) C
C 7
a)
a
C
3 Q
=
�tj6
�p " .E O CCU
c0
c0
c0 O 7
>>� O
a> Y U N cu p
>C
C
>C
C
V
C� N
�!
U ca .� to U
V) w
> +�
� :� to Q T
>
.�
U
> .N
C
O
M
C
O
O
N
U
a
m
n
a)
U)
C
�
O
O
Q
a)
Q
> ai
Y
a)
i
co
L
-0
L
O
..Q
Q
U
'O
Q
Q
co
L
M
�—
r
N
O
O
(fl
O
M
L
°
((0
-a
v
_
C
a)
Q
c~
CO
cu
CO
()
L
Q
c
a)
CU C
a)
L••
O
O
Y
a)
L
C
r
O
C
a)
CD
3
L
N
7
+�
C •N
W O
a
C
a)
0
=
Q
U
C
C
2
ECG
Qm-M
m
0
C(
U
Q cn
CD
E
ed
Z
o
0
t�A
Y
O C
O
w
O
O
O
C
O
L
L
Q
L
Q
L
0-
Q
L
Q
L
Q
Q
L
Q.
Q
L
Q
L
Q
L
Q
L
Q
Q
L
0-
Q
L
a
Q
1
I
I
I
I--
1
a0
I
I
I
1
1
I
1
N
I
W
N
N
m
a)
M
a
N
N
C w O'
to
.�
O N G T3
N O
4) p�
O Q 4 0
t6
a o-f O U
ca CD
m L c Q U co
w
3 5 �
N
N
a o o
�r
o
N_
a
0
N L N N Q
•O
S� ACS Y � L •O
os °� 0.
�.�
-a
m X
CO o f = Q
�' 3 � °3 3
U o o
N O N •�
N .+ V T O
S] N
CC-
0 0 0 . Q N
� �
15 C: co
� 0 CO
-- 3 C,4 o ai
LL V
v N O O
N v Z a. O
In co
N
c6 N C
N LS O✓ �.0.
co U r O 1- co 4)
Z O O O O N C a N t6 V is
"' N
✓ t7 p N G O N_ a co
a- N N O NO N O 7 N O CO
<6
7 3 U N N
7 N O
N 7 V N O N O S
10 N G O
?j v
O
O Q
M (U tll
r
N
N
7
N
1"-
r
O
di
ct1
Q
�
v
N
.r
m
r
Cy)
cn
�
c0
t3
N
V
cll
co
0..
&
�
.% E
\CD ?
®E
.
£ § /
} 0
c ° g _
%
.
/ 7
} R k
%% 2�
of
k�
% S 6 k
0\\ 7 k
# £
\ / / k
0 0 0
«kk k 1
\2E2
«
2 2 ■
\ Q
$
k k ƒ 0
k ��
0 CO
$ #
% -0 # c am
o k
a
-0 7 R a (D 2 0
§ ®
c m a) S 0 CD k
..
$ ƒ
n k 3 2 k 2
k k k k
: a)
kz
k 2 R
V i
c g c ®— e#-
f 2 /
#
° @ ®
$
g = » 2 k —
m r o — £
7
E2
\k������
e
7
E k#
g c
r= c§ G o� a e o
�
0-0
c m
ƒ k k ¥CD k
0 Cn
02k
0 J% 2f EE»
ƒ
Q m e
E e\
k>
6
co
V
co
'
7
a
#
LO
.
V
a Lo c& t ¢
(0
0
2
\ & k
0
2
a E ƒT- V-
k
/
■
o m G m
R
E
A
k f�7� 7
2
2
Q � � ¥ @ Q
m m m
»
2 a
.
&
G ¥�d� C-4
co
®
.
t
&
�
•
0
M Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
MONTHLY MEETING - Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Chairman:
Robert P. Johnson
Vice Chairman.•
Thomas Hueg
Technical Advisor.
Traci Erickson
Acting Secretary:
Melissa Scovronski
Airborne Express.
Brian Bates
Air Transport Association:
Paul McGraw
AIPA:
Charles W. Curry Jr.
City of Bloomington:
Petrona Lee
Vera WBcox
City of Burnsville:
Ed Porter
City of &gmt:
Tom Egan
City of Inver Grove Heights.
Dale Hammous
City of Mendom Heights:
JIB Smith
City ojMinnewolis:
James B. Serrin
John Richter
Joe Lee
Judith Dodge
City of Rlcltfreu.
Krlshd Sinker
Dawn Weitzel
City of St. Louis Park:
Robert Adrews
City of St. Paul.
C. Scott Bunin
Thomas H. Hoeg
Cami Am McGuire
Delta Air tines Inc.:
Rich Kidwell
Federal Express.
Dan DeBord
Federal Aviation Administration:
Bruce Wagoner
Ronald Glaub
MAC StajF
Dick Keloz
MBAR
Robert P. Johnson
Mesaba Northwest Airlink:
Daniel Sheehan
Metropolitan Airports Commission:
Commissioner Alton Gasper
MN Air National Guard:
Major Roy J. Shetka
Northwest Airliner
Mark Sahnen
Jennifer Sayre
St. Paul Chamber of Commerce:
Craig Wrack
Sun Country Airlines.
Dale Kariya
United Airlines In
BIB Yantiss
United Parcel Service.
Mike Geyer
U.S. Air Force Reserve.
Captain David J. Gerken
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
1.) Promote public welfare and national security; serve public interest, convenience,
and necessity; promote air navigation and transportation, international, national, state,
and local, in and through this state; promote the efficient, safe, and economical
handling of air commerce; assure the inclusion of this state in national and international
programs of air transportation; and to those ends to develop the full potentialities of the
metropolitan area in this state as an aviation center, and to correlate that area with all
aviation facilities in the entire state so as to provide for the most economical and
effective use of aeronautic facilities and services in that area;
2.) Assure the residents of the metropolitan area of the minimum environmental impact
from air navigation and transportation, and to that end provide for noise abatement,
control of airport area land use, and other protective measures; and
3.) Promote the overall goals of the state's environmental policies and minimize the
public's exposure to noise and safety hazards around airports.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Statement of Purpose
This corporation was formed in furtherance of the general welfare of the communities
adjoining Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport - Wold- Chamberlain Field, a
public airport in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, through the alleviation of
the problems created by the sound of aircraft using the airport; through study and
evaluation on a continuing basis of the problem and of suggestion for the alleviation of
the same; through initiation, coordination and promotion of reasonable and effective
procedures, control and regulations, consistent with the safe operation of the airport and
of aircraft using the same; and through, dissemination of information to the affected
communities, their affected residents, and the users of the airport respecting the
problem of aircraft noise nuisance and in respect to suggestions made and actions
initiated and taken to alleviate the problem.
Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
Representation
The membership shall include representatives appointed by agencies, corporations,
associations and governmental bodies which by reason of their statutory authority and
responsibility or control over the airport, or by reason of their status as airport users,
have a direct interest in the operation of the airport. Such members will be called User
Representatives and Public Representatives, provided that the User Representatives and
Public Representatives shall at all times be equal in number.
The Airport 24 -hour Noise Hotline is 726 -9411.
Complaints to the hotline do not result in changes
in Airport activity, but provide a public sounding
board and airport information outlet. The hotline
is staffed during business hours, Monday - Friday.
Metropolitan Airports Commission Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
This report is prepared and printed in house by
Chad Legve, ANSP Technician
Questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC - Aviation Noise & Satellite Program
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Tel: (612) 725 -6331, Fax: (612) 725 -6310
ANSP Home Page: http: / /www.macaysat.org
eContents
Operations and Complaint Summary 1
Operations Summary - All Aircraft ...................:................................... ..............................1
MSP April Fleet Mix Percentage ........................................................... ..............................1
Airport April Complaint Summary ........................................................ ..............................1
April Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office ......................... ............................... l
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary 2
ComplaintSummary by City ................................................................. ..............................2
Available Time for Runway Use 3
TowerLog Reports - All Hours ............................................................. ..............................3
Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours .................................................. ..............................3
All Operations 4
Runway Use Report April 1997 ............................................................. ..............................4
Carrier Jet Operations 5
Runway Use Report April 1997 ............................................................. ..............................5
Nighttime - All Operations 6
Runway Use Report April 1997 ............................................................. ..............................6
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 7
Runway Use Report April 1997 ............................................................. ..............................7
Carrier Jet Operations by Type 8
Aircraft Identifier and Description Table 9
Runway Use - Day /Night Periods -All Operations 10
DaytimeHours ...................................................................................... .............................10
Community Overflight Analysis 11
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours ........................................................ .............................11
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (1 1pm - 6 am).. .............................. .............................11
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Remote Monitoring Site Locations 12
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 13
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ........................ .............................13
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events 14
Count 'of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT ................... .............................14
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 15
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 16
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 17
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 18
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 19
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified 20
Flight Track Base Map 21
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 22
Carrier Jet Operations - April 1997 ...................................................... .............................22
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 23
Carrier Jet Operations - April 1997 ...................................................... .............................23
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 24
Carrier Jet Operations - April 1997 ................................................... ............................... 24
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 25
Carrier Jet Operations - April 1997 ................................................... ............................... 25
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 26
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 27
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
I*
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Operations and Complaint Summary
April 1997
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Runway
Arrival
% Use
Departure
% Use
04
250
1.5%
97
0.6%
22
261
1.6%
810
5.2%
11
5946
35.8%
6035
38.5%
29
10157
61.1%
8725
55.7%
MSP April Fleet Mix Percentage
Airport April Complaint Summary
Airport
Scheduled
Scheduled
ANOMS
ANOMS
Stage
1996
1997
Count 1996
Count 1997
St
Stage 2
51.7%
42.1%
N/A
44.8%
Stage 3
48.3%
57.9%
N/A
55.2%
Airport April Complaint Summary
Airport
1996
1997
MSP
653
977
Airlake
0
0
Anoka
1
1
Crystal
2
1
Flying Cloud
0
1
Lake Elmo
0
0
St. Paul
4
2
Misc.
1
2
TOTAL
661
984
April Average Daily Operations Summary - FAA Airport Traffic Record
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page I
1996
1997
Air Carrier
827
867
Commuter
338
315
G.A.
144
171
Military
9
10
TOTAL
1318
1363
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page I
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
April 1997 0
Complaint Summary by City
Page 2
City
Arrival
Departure
Total
Percentage
Arden Hills
1
1
2
0.2%
Bloomington
1
3
4
0.4%
Burnsville
0
9
9
1.0%
Circle Pines
0,
1
1
0.1%
Eagan
27
25
52
5.6%
Eden Prairie
3
12
15
1.6%
Edina
0
7
7
0.7%
Falcon Heights
0
1
1
0.1%
Inver Grove Heights
1
310
311
33.3%
Jordan
0
3
3
0.3%
Mahtomedi
1
0
1
0.1%
Mendota eights
8
28
36
3.9%
Minneapolis
88
193
281
30.1%
Ninin er Twp
0
1
1
0.1%
Oakdale
2
2
4
0.4%
Prior Lake
0
2
2
0.2%
Richfield
3
17
20
2.1%
South St.Paul
0
3
3
0.3%
St.Anthony
0
1
1
0.1%
St.Louis Park
22
23
45
4.8%
St.Paul
110
10
120
12.9%
Sunfish Lake
1 0
16
16
1.7%
Total
1 267
1 668
935
1 100%
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
Time
Total Nature of Complaint
Total
00:00 - 05:59
49 Excessive Noise
853
06:00 - 06:59
27 Early/Late
72
07:00 - 11:59
164 Low Flying
4
12:00 - 15:59
91 Structural Disturbance
5
16:00 - 19:59
280 Helicopter
0
20:00 - 21:59
193 Ground Noise
41
22:00 - 22:59
137 Engine Run -up
1
23 :00 - 23:59
36 Frequency
1
Total
E
977 Total
977
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
0
0
0
0
0
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Available Time for Runway Use
Tower Log Reports - April 1997
All Hours
0%
39%
4%
30%
cis z 22
04
2%
10%
V9%
Nighttime Hours
0%
8%
n 22
04
3%
N
11%
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
V 64%
A 51%
V 80%
76% %
Page 3
Metropolitan Airports Commission
All Operations
Runway Use Report April 1
Runway
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
0
•
0
Arrival/
Departure
Percentage
April 1996
April
Count
April 1996
Percentage
04
A
250
1.5%
N/A
N/A
11L
A
2905
17.5%
N/A
N/A
11R
A
3041
18.3%
N/A
N/A
22
A
261
1.6%
N/A
N/A
29L
A
5524
33.2%
N/A
N/A
29R
A
4633
27.9%
N/A
N/A
Total Arr.
16614
100%
N/A
N/A
04
D
97
0.6%
N/A
N/A
11L
D
2794
17.8%
N/A
N/A
11R
D
3241
20.7%
N/A
N/A
22
D
810
5.2%
N/A
N/A
29L
D
4815
30.7%
N/A
N/A
29R
D
3910
25.0%
N/A
N/A
Total Dep.
15667
100%
N/A
N/A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
0
•
0
•
r:
� 0
56.0%
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report April 19
1 1.2%
vz
1.2%
5.2%
Metropolitan Airports Commission
62.2%
38.6%
A
PR;unway
Arrival/
Departure
Count
Percentage
April 1996
Count
April 1996
Percentage
A
125
1.2%
N/A
N/A
11 L
A
1855
18.0%
N/A
N/A
11 R
A
1797
17.4%
N/A
N/A
22
A
125
1.2%
N/A
N/A
29L
A
3342
32.4%
N/A
N/A
29R
A
3076
29.8%
N/A
N/A
Total Arr.
10320
100%
N/A
N/A
04
D
17
0.2%
N/A
N/A
11 L
D
1732
17.6%
N/A
N/A
11 R
D
2064
21.0%
N/A
N/A
22
D
516
5.2%
N/A
N/A
29L
D
3001
30.5%
N/A
N/A
29R
D
2506
25.5%
N/A
N/A
Total Dep.
Ir
9836
100%
N/A
N/A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 5
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Nighttime - All Operations
Runway Use Report April 12P i
6.4170
Runway
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
.7
is
Arrival/
Departure
Count
Percentage
April 1996
Count
April 1996
Percentage
04
A
94
12.2%
N/A
N/A
11L
A
20
2.6%
N/A
N/A
11R
A
64
8.3%
N/A
N/A
22
A
92
11.9%
N/A
N/A
29L
A
398
51.6%
N/A
N/A
29R
A
103
13.4%
N/A
N/A
Total Arr.
'771'
N/A
N/A
04
D
12
3.6%
N/A
N/A
11L
D
59
17.5%
N/A
N/A
11R
D
128
37.9%
N/A
N/A
22
D
67
19.9%
N/A
N/A
29L
D
62
18.4%
N/A
N/A
29R
D
9
2.7%
N/A
N/A
Total Dep.
337
100%
N/A
N/A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
.7
is
•
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report April 1
.9.8%
Runway
Arrival/
Departure
Count
Percentage
April 1996
Count
April 1996
Percentage
04
A
49
9.6%
N/A
N/A
11L
A
9
1.8%
N/A
N/A
11R
A
34
6.7%
N/A
N/A
22
A
59
11.6%
N/A
N/A
29L
A
284
55.8%
N/A
N/A
29R
A
74
14.5%
N/A
N/A
Total Arr.
509
100%
N/A
N/A
04
D
1
0.7%
N/A
N/A
11L
D
30
19.7%
N/A
N/A
11 R
D
61
40.1%
N/A
N/A
22
D
43
28.3%
N/A
N/A
29L
D
12
7.9%
N/A
N/A
29R
D
5
3.3%
N/A
N/A
Total Dep.
152
100%
N/A
N/A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 7
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Page 8
Carrier Jet Operations by Type
April 1997
Aircraft Type
Count
Percentage
B707
0
0.0%
B727H
249
1.2%
13733/4/5
612
3.0%
B747
88
0.4%
B74F
43
0.2%
B757
2001
10.0%
B767
0
0.0%
BA46
1
0.0%
CL65
270
1.4%
DA10
0
0.0%
DC10
911
4.5%
DC87
106
0.5%
DC9H
2853.
14.2%
EA30
24
0.1%
EA31
36
0.2%
EA32
2009
10.0%
FK 10
847
4.2%
L1011
56
0.3%
MD 11
5
0.0%
MD80
1010
5.0%
BA10
16
0.1%
BA 11
0
0.0%
B727
2164
10.7%
B737
1394
6.9%
DC8
72
0.4%
DC9
5389
26.7%
FK28
0
0.0%
Total
20156
700%
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
55.2% Stage III
44.8% Stage H
•
•
0
•
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Aircraft Identifier and DescriptionTable
Identifier
Aircraft Description
B707
BOEING 707
B727
BOEING 727
B727H
BOEING 727 - HUSH KIT
B733/4/5
BOEING 737 - 300/400/500
B737
BOEING 737 100/200 SERIES
B747
BOEING 747
B74F
BOEING 747 FREIGHTER
B757
BOEING 757
B767
BOEING 767
BA10
BRITISH AEROSPACE 125
BAI 1
BRITISH AEROSPACE I I I
BA46
BRITISH AEROSPACE 146
CL65
CANADAIR 650
DA 10
FALCON 10
DC 10
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 10
DC8
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8
DC87
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC8 70- SERIES RE
DC9
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9
DC9H
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT
EA30
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300
EA31
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A310
EA32
AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320
FK 10
FOKKER 100
FK27
FOKKER F27 (PROP)
FK28
FOKKER F28
1-1011
LOCKHEED TRISTAR L1011
MD 1 I
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 11
MD80
MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80- SERIES
SW3
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 3
SW4
SWEARINGEN METROLINER 4
SF34
SAAB 340
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 9
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Runway Use - Day/Night Periods - All Operations
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport April 1997
Daytime Hours
Runway
Name
Departures
Day
Percentage
Use
Arrivals
Day
Percentage
Use
Total Day
04
85
0.6%
156
1.0%
241
11L
2735
17.8%
2885
18.2%
5620
11R
3113
20.3%
2977
18.8%
6090
22
743
4.8%
169
1.0%
912
29L
4753
31.0%
5126
32.4%
9879
29R
3901
25.5%
4530
28.6%
8431
Total
15330
100%
15843
100%
31173
Nighttime Hours
Runway
Name
Departures
Night
Percentage
Use
Arrivals
Night
Percentage
Use
Total Night
04
12
3.6%
94
12.2%
106
11L
59
17.5%
20
2.6%
79
11R
128
37.9%
64
8.3%
192
22
67
19.9%
92
11.9%
159
29L
62
18.4%
398
51.6%
460
29R
9
2.7%
103
13.4%
112
Total
337
100%
771
100%
1108
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Ll
•
•
i
I'
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Community Overflight Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport April 1997
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (11pm - 6 am)
Number
Number
Total
Percent
Number of
Overflight Area
Arrivals
Departures
Carrier Jet
Carrier Jet
Operations
Operations
Operations
per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/
3652
5507
9159
45.4%
362.0
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/
125
516
641
3.2%
25.3
Bloomington
Over St. Paul -
125
17
142
0.7%
5.6
Highland Park
Over Eagan/
6418
3796
10214
50.7%
403.7
Mendota Heights
Total
20156
100%
1 7%.6
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (11pm - 6 am)
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 11
Number
Number
Total
Percent
Number of
OverBight Area
Arrivals
Departures
Carrier Jet
Carrier Jet
Operations
Operations
Operations
per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/
43
.17
60
9.1%
2.1
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/
49
43
92
13.9%
3.2
Bloomington
Over St. Paul -
59
1
60
9.1%
2.1
Highland Park
Over Eagan/
358
91
449
67.9%
15.6
Mendota Heights
Total
661
100%
23.0
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 11
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Remote Monitoring Site Locations
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
Page 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
•
•
ul
inn apolis
FS #1
•
F
111
F #9
F
#2
FS #4
n F 11 •
�J
•
FS #3
• F 10
O•
FS #6
•
•
FS #1
FS#
•
Mendota Heighis
FS #7
ao
FS #1
Ri
hfield Fs
1s
F #23
•
. FS #13
D
� 0
•FS #19 •
F #16•
• F
FS #21
14 •
Inver Gr ve Heights
FS #17
oor, ngton
(� D
Eagan
• FS 4
F #2�2
bO
(7
10000
ft
c
Q
Page 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
•
•
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
- April 1997
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
RMT
ID
City
Approximate Street Location
Events
>65dB
Events
>80dB
Events
>90dB
Events
>100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
886
66
0
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
949
146
1
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street& Belmont Avenue
1010
431
13
0
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
1501
445
20
1
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
1430
872
162
2
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
1368
860
149
7
7
Richfield
Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street
267
11
0
0
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
189
11
0
0
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
99
57
7
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
213
82
26
0
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
49
4
1
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
177
17
1
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court,
208
4
0
0
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
4296
180
1
0
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
403
27
0
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
3490
1060
10
0
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
41
5
1
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
206
39
2
0
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
48
1
0
0
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
67
9
0
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
115
4
0
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
2018
21
0
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Avenue
1233
43
5
0
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
2789
88
13
0
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
April 1997
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
RMT
ID
City
Approximate Street Location
Events
>65dB
Events
>80dB
Events
>90dB
Events
>100dB
1
Minneapolis
Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street
868
168
1
0
2
Minneapolis
Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street
1485
432
5
0
3
Minneapolis
W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue
2726
216
20
0
4
Minneapolis
Oakland Avenue & 49th Street
2662
662
65
3
5
Minneapolis
12th Avenue & 58th Street
4636
2224
673
63
6
Minneapolis
25th Avenue & 57th Street
5091
2717
1172
220
7
Richfield
Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street
2957
1010
137
4
8
Minneapolis
Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street
400
105
10
2
9
St. Paul
Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue
28
2
2
0
10
St. Paul
Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street
254
21
3
1
11
St. Paul
Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue
86
19
3
0
12
St. Paul
Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue
198
46
2
0
13
Mendota Heights
Southeast end of Mohican Court
1392
315
18
0
14
Eagan
First Street & McKee Street
2397
526
59
1
15
Mendota Heights
Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue
2236
500
38
0
16
Eagan
Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane
2664
966
196
10
17
Bloomington
84th Street & 4th Avenue
579
90
13
0
18
Richfield
75th Street & 17th Avenue
1459
320
107
10
19
Bloomington
16th Avenue & 84th Street
'524
218
53
2
20
Richfield
75th Street & 3rd Avenue
754
50
7
0
21
Inver Grove Heights
Barbara Avenue & 67th Street
750
189
3
0
22
Inver Grove Heights
Anne Marie Trail
1135
187
2
0
23
Mendota Heights
End of Kenndon Avenue
3184
989
334
39
24
Eagan
Chapel Lane & Wren Lane
1530
255
6
0
Page 14
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
r
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
,��
Max
Level
A/D
04/11/9716:20:36
B727
91.6
D
04/07/97 20:33:17
DC9
89.7
D
04/04/9718:53:25
B727
89.4
A
04/15/9719:35:07
B727
88.7
D
04/07/97 20:39:26
B727
88.6
D
04/02/9716:05:57
B727
88.4
D
04/07/97 20:20:52
DC9
88.4
D
04/26/9717:16:20
DH8
88.3
D
04/15/97 20:24:18
DC9
87.6
D
04/05/97 13:17:19
B747
87.4
D
RMT #3: W. Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/03/97 9:51:50
B727
98.6
D
04/23/97 20:17:24
B727
97.6
D
04/18/9716:25:41
B727
96.4
D
04/25/9719:04:51
DC9
96.0
D
04/29/97 8:20:20
B727
95.8
D
04/25/9714:55:51
B727
95.4
A
04/13/97 15:05:10
B747
94.4
D
04/20/97 9:16:08
DC9
94.3
D
04/26/9715:04:31
DC9
94.3
D
04/27/97 21:45:18
B727
94.3
D
RMT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/18/9719:20:43
B727
97.1
D
04/26/9715:05:04
DC9
91.0
D
04/01/9712:23:05
B737
90.6
D
04/05/9712:11:30
B727
90.6
A
04/29/97 9:40:50
B727
90.4
D
04/02/9716:05:49
B727
90.2
D
04/30/97 21:46:08
DC 10
90.2
D
04/15/97 21:22:49
DC9
89.9
D
04/02/97 20:34:18
DC9
89.8
D
04/04/9718:54:59
B727
89.4
A
RMT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/29/97 9:40:13
B727
103.1
D
04/24/97 7:22:54
B727
101.3
D
04/29/9717:05:22
DC9
100.8
A
04/02/9711:47:30
B727
100.5
D
04/18/9719:19:47
DC9
99.9
D
04/03/9712:17:28
B727
99.5
D
04/19/97 9:48:01
B757
99.1
D
04/30/97 9:21:22
B727
99.1
D
04/27/9711:55:15
B727
98.0
D
04/23/97 20:44:09
B727
97.9
D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 15
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #5: 12th Ave. & 58th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
Type
Level
A/D
04/03/9711:52:46
DC9
106.4
D
04/03/97 9:51:36
B727
105.6
D
04/26/9714:46:42
B727
105.2
D
04/03/97 9:14:48
B727
104.9
D
04/03/9710:02:18
B727
104.9
D
04/11/9717:34:36
B727
104.3
D
04/30/9715:39:56
B727
104.2
D
04/03/9713:58:38
B727
104.0
D
04/24/9716:30:40
B727
104.0
D
04/25/9719:51:23
B727
102.7
D
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
Richfield
Date Time
A/C
Ihm
Max
Level
A/D
04/20/97 7:46:24
B727
100.9
D
04/02/9717:02:55
B727
100.5
D
04/03/9713:39:10
B727
100.4
D
04/30/9716:18:48
B727
100.2
D
04/12/9714:45:30
B727
99.6
D
04/30/9718:35:07
B727
99.5
D
04/30/9712:08:56
B727
99.2
D
04/27/9713:50:51
DC9
99.0
D
04/29/9711:38:12
B727
98.7
D
04/30/9715:15:04
B727
98.5
D
Page 16
RMT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/30/9713:51:23
B727
112.1
D
04/03/97 7:39:47
B727
109.4
D
04/24/9713:23:06
B727
108.7
D
04/02/9718:29:36
DC9
108.3
D
04/29/9717:04:57
B727
108.0
A
04/02/97 21:07:58
B727
107.7
D
04/19/97 9:47:37
B757
107.7
D
04/18/9716:25:06
B727
107.6
D
04/18/97 22:17:08
B727
107.1
D
04/30/9718:31:30
B727
107.1
D
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/24/97 7:23:23
B727
100.9
D
04/30/97 7:51:39
B727
100.6
D
04/02/97 7:31:44
B727
94.6
D
04/23/9716:18:46
SW3
94.6
D
04/16/9717:29:53
B727
94.4
D
04/15/97 20:31:54
B727
94.3
D
04/03/9712:25:04
B727
94.1
D
04/08/9711:25:11
DC9
93.7
D
04/19/97 12:29:01
EA32
93.7
D
04/30/97 7:44:44
SW3
1 93.7
D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
n
•
•
.7
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. RMT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
St. Paul St. Paul
Date Time
A/C
Max
Level
A/D
04/05/9713:17:46
B747
97.6
D
04/29/9714:00:30
DC9
93.5
A
04/01/97 3:01 :18
B727
93.4
A
04/06/97 0:22:28
B727
91.6
A
04/30/97 9:40:56
SW4
91.5
A
04/23/97 21:47:47
DC 10
91.4
D
04/28/97 22:43:40
B727
91.4
A
04/06/97 0:43:07
B727
90.7
A
04/03/97 23:27:21
B727
90.3
A
04/22/97 12:34:25
DC 10
90.0
D
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/05/9713:17:19
B747
101.7
D
04/19/9712:18:17
B747
98.0
D
04/19/9715:14:49
B747
98.0
D
04/06/97 0:43:50
B727
97.9
A ,
04/21/9711:47:50
B727
97.7
A
04/28/97 22:44:29
B727
95.4
A
04/01/97 3:02:00
B727
95.0
A
04/06/97 0:23:10
B727
94.9
A
04/20/97 4:08:59
DC 10
94.4
D
04/06/97 0:01 :31
1,101
94.2
A
RMT #11: Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. RMT #12: Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
St. Paul
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
AM
04/24/9718:55:57
DC9
96.6
A
04/24/9713:48:14
BA31
92.8
D
04/30/97 12:32:01
DC 10
91.0
D
04/19/9715:15:05
B747
90.8
D
04/30/9715:13:48
B74F
89.5
D
04/02/9713:08:04
LR24
87.9
A
04/30/97 8:01:30
SF34
87.9
D
04/23/9712:26:11
DC9
87.2
D
04/19/9712: 18:33
B747
86.7
D
04/07/97 9:14:04
SF34
85.4
D
St. Paul
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
04/08/97 8:46:46
B727
99.0
D
04/26/9714:29:33
B727
98.1
A
04/29/97 22:57:42
B727
93.5
D
04/02/97 8:42:16
DC9
87.1
A
04/07/97 9:33:14
DC9
86.5
D
04/28/97 9:43:11
DC 10
86.4
D
04/15/97 9:42:56
MD80
86.2
D
04/25/97 7:09:08
B737
85.8
D
04/14/97 8:07:23
B727
85.6
A
04/04/97 7:07:12
BE80
85.4
D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 17
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court
Mendota Heights
Date Time
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/04/97 9:39 :24
B 227
96.9
D
04/28/9713:23:52
DC9
96.4
D
04/24/9717:16:00
DC9
95.1
D
04/02/97 7:48:51
B727
95.0
D
04/03/97 20:20:59
B727
94.3
D
04/03/9718:54:24
B727
94.2
D
04/01/97 19:36:31
B727
93.9
D;
04/23/97 17:52:18
B727
93.5
D
04/28/97 13:25:48
B727
92.8-
D
04/03/97 22:23:52
B727
92.1
D
RMT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date Time
A/y Cis
Max
Level
A/D
04/01/97 20:09:23
B727
99.1
D
04/01/9713:33:34
B727
97.6
D
04/03/9718:53:59
B727
97.4
D
04/01/97 20:43:01
B727
97.0
D
04/01/97 9:14:44
DC9
96.6
D
04/01/97 22:21:36
B727
96.3
D
04/14/97 9:26:40
BA31
96.2
D
04/01/97 20:32:40
B727
96.0
D
04/04/97 20:38:27
B727
95.8
D
04/04/97 7:49:06
B727
95.3
D
RMT #14: 1st St. & McKee St.
Eagan
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/28/9715:19:52
G2
101.6
D
04/22/9716:17:55
B727
99.0
D
04/22/9713:19:40
DC9
97.6
D
04/01/9712:40:43
B727
97.3
D
04/19/97 4:56:22
B727
97.1
D
04/04/97 20:17:56
SF34
96.4
D
04/01/9716:55:39
B727
963
D
04/03/9719:04:18
B727
96.3
D
04/03/9718:48:59
B727
96.2
D
04/04/9713:35:52
DC9
96.2
D
RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane
Eagan
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/14/9715:43:07
B727
102.0
D
04/02/9710:00:06
B727
101.8
D
04/23/9715:40:55
B727
101.6
D
04/01/9712:40:25
B727
101.3
D
04/04/9717:02:55
B727
101.3
D
04/22/9713:19:27
DC9
101.1
D
04/23/97 7:37:50
B727
100.5
D
04/23/9719:25:44
B727
100.4
D
04/04/9713:35:43
DC9
100.3
D
04/14/97 9:35:32
DC9
100.3
D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 18 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
•
L-']
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #17: 84th St. & 4th Ave.
Bloomington
Date Time
C
Max
Level
A/D
04/04/9713:27:26
B747
98.2
D
04/03/9712:40:58
B727
97.6
D
04/13/97 7:11:37
B727
97.0
D
04/13/9714:11:53
B747
96.2
D
04/20/97 6:11:28
DC9
96.0
D
04/19/97 21:07:45
B727
95.5
D
04/21/97 6:15:18
B727
95.0
D
04/25/9711:12:00
B727
94.8
D
04/13/9713:21:34
DC9
94.7
D
F74/09/97 7:34:21
DC9
94.3
D
RMT #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St.
Bloomington
Date Time
C
Max
Level
A/D
04/19/97 7:18:50
B727
102.5
D
04/19/97 6:54:35
B727
101.0
D
04/12/97 6:48:42
B727
99.7
D
04/26/9719:04:25
B727
99.6
D
04/13/97 6:07:58
B727
99.5
D
04/19/97 7:37:51
B727
99.2
D
04/12/97 7:18:42
B727
98.7
D
04/30/97 22:48:38
B727
98.5
D
04/19/97 7:12:28
B727
98.0
D
04/20/97 6:11:30
B727
97.5
D
RMT #18: 75th St. & 17th Ave.
Richfield
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/19/97 7:33:04
DC9
104.8
D
04/26/97 21:34:51
B727
103.2
D
04/09/97 7:14:49
B727
102.6
D
04/04/9713:27:05
B747
102.5
D
04/13/9716:11:33
B727
102.3
D
04/20/97 8:37:33
B727
102.0
D
04/25/97 5:08:10
B727
101.8
D
04/08/97 7:09:24
B727
101.7
D
04/15/9716:14:15
B727
101.3
D
04/03/9712:40:41
B727
100.6
D
RMT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
Aft)
04/15/974:53:02
B727
96.9
D
04/27/9710:23:53
B727
94.1
D
04/26/97 21:35:07
B727
93.4
D
04/18/97 22:55:00
B727
92.7
D
04/13 /97 6:10:33
B727
92.0
D
04/08/97 4:51:03
B727
91.8
D
04/26/9719:30:40
B727
90.3
D
04/27/97 7:59:27
B727
90.0
D
04/19/97 7:33:12.
DC9
89.6
D
04/18/97 16:31:30
FK 10
88.7
D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 19
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St. RMT #22: Anne Marie Trail
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time
,yam Max
Level
A/D
04/04/97 7:50:16
B727
91.6
D
04/01/9717:12:03
B727
90.5
D
04/21/97 7:40:28
B727
90.1
D
04/28/9717:29:07
B727
89.3
D
04/14/9712:05:50
DC9
89.0
D
04/14/9713:13:07
DC9
89.0
D
04/01/9718:45:56
B727
88.9
D
04/14/9717:36:07
B727
88.8
D
04/22/9716:21:04
B727
88.7
D
04/25/97 22:20:14
B727
88.4
D
RMT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/26/97 9:34:13
B727
104.2
D
04/03/97 17:10:45
B727
103.6
D
04/02/9711:55:46
B727
103.2
D
04/14/97 9:26:27
MD80
103.2
D
04/28/9713:25:13
B727
103.2
D
04/21/97 20:52:46
DC9
103.0
D
04/04/97 20:38:18
B727
102.6
D
04/02/97 9:29:40
DC9
102.5
D
04/01/97 12:13:12
B727
102.4
D
04/01/9713:43:13
DC9
102.2
D
Page 20
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time
A/C
Type
Max
Level
A/D
04/01/97 7:52:20
DC9
96.0
D
04/01/97 7:53:56
DC9
96.1
D
04/28/97 7:56:14
B727
90.0
D
04/03/9716:25:05
B727
89.3
D
04/03/9717:10:08
B727
89.3
D
04/23/9715:01:51
B757
89.3
D
04/28/97 7:43:28
B727
89.0
D
04/14/9714:51:56
DC9
88.6
D
04/24/9716:53:18
B727
88.5
D
04/14/9714:54:51
DC9
88.2
D
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
Eagan
Date Time
A/C
Max
Level
A/D
A/D
04/13/9710:07:43
B727
96.8
A
04/12/9711:55:41
DC9
96.3
A
04/14/97 9:13:20
B737
96.0
D
04/02/9710:00:27
B727
95.9
D
04/02/9716:55:24
B737
95.5
A
04/15/97 6:10:25
B757
95.1
A
04/02/9712:20:18
DC9
94.9
A
04/09/9710:29:34
DC9
94.9
A
04/02/97 8:39:41
B727
944
A
04/15/97 8:56:44
DC9
94.3
A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
•
•
•
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
April 01 to April 30,1997
Noise Monitor Locations
Date
#13
#14
#15
#16
#17
#18
#19
#20
#21
#22
#23
#24
1
67.2
68.7
70.5
71.5
*
52.9
48.5
47.3
62.7
*
76.3
68.8
2
63.2
70.0
64.3
73.0
*
70.6
69.6
57.2
60.7
*
73.1
65.2
3
66.0
69.4
67.3
71.9
60.1
67.3
67.8
53.2
*
62.9
74.6
67.3
4
65.9
69.5
67.5
71.5
57.9
65.2
63.1
47.2
61.0
61.4
76.0
57.3
5
58.9
67.2
61.1
70.7
46.1
52.8
62.1
49.7
53.8
58.7
70.5
63.8
6
j *
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
7
44.7
64.4
51.9
70.4
56.8
63.3
55.7
59.4
47.4
59.6
59.6
64.5
8
42.6
69.7
46.3
*
53.7
62.5
57.8
61.8
37.5
54.9
52.0
59.1
9
62.2
66.3
61.7
70.3
57.5
67.0
64.5
50.2
62.7
58.8
71.7
71.0
10
65.6
71.6
65.4
75.1
51.5
54.5
44.1
47.7
65.5
66.4
75.3
67.9
11
51.9
55.9
43.1
63.8
62.2
55.5
42.3
43.1
40.5
46.0
61.4
63.9
12
45.2
62.5
49.0
68.5
61.2
67.5
68.9
48.6
50.5
52.4
61.4
63.8
13
39.0
59.8
46.5
65.0
69.0
73.5
71.0
64.6
41.8
52.7
69.1
66.0
14
64.8
67.9
68.1
71.8
57.9
65.5
61.7
54.1
62.7
65.6
75.6
70.1
15
59.1
64.8
63.8
69.5
59.9
70.5
66.1
64.8
57.6
59.8
68.4
63.9
16
60.0
59.4
46.5
65.4
45.4
48.9
40.7
51.7
60.0
56.7
51.3
70.1
17
65.2
72.2
65.7
75.6
57.7
65.2
65.7
52.2
64.4
66.3
75.1
59.3
18
57.1
66.4
63.4
70.4
60.0
71.0
64.7
64.1
55.9
60.6
68.0
66.8
19
49.2
65.7
51.6
69.2
64.4
72.3
72.4
59.0
48.7
59.4
61.7
64.4
20
44.2
63.4
38.7
66.6
63.3
72.2
70.4
56.5
49.6
57.2
50.8
60.0
21
63.0
68.3
63.7
72.3
57.7
58.4
52.2
44.9
64.6
64.2
73.7
57.2
22
66.0
69.7
66.0
73.2
60.7
59.4
46.4
55.8
64.5
63.2
75.3
59.3
23
63.0
69.2
63.2
74.1
63.9
62.6
44.8
53.7
60.7
64.1
71.9
68.8
24
56.6
63.2
55.6
*
60.8
69.4
68.5
56.1
54.0
57.0
66.6
59.8
25
60.2
67.8
57.9
70.4
58.2
68.4
66.9
55.9
61.8
60.2
66.4
60.8
26
59.2
65.4
59.6
69.0
58.5
69.4
66.6
58.3
57.4
58.3
69.6
51.9
27
53.8
62.7
58.8
66.3
65.9
71.1
64.0
58.3
53.0
55.4
62.4
60.0
28
*
69.0
67.9
71.0
56.9
60.7
54.2
51.1
64.8
63.1
76.1
54.9
29
48.8
65.7
59.2
*
61.9
69.9
64.8
55.7
48.3
59.9
63.2
60.2
30
51.5
65.6
51.9
71.2
63.7
69.8
67.6
62.8
*
60.4 1
58.2
62.7
Mo. Ldn
62.3 1
68.2 1
65.4
72.3
61.2
69.2
65.9
61.7
62.0
62.7
72.4
68.4
* Less than twenty four hours of data available
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.7 days
Page 27
Z�
1
JJ �1
i�
n
c
n
i
n
T
V
n
cv;
• v ,
N
� n
b
Qn V�
� c
y�
G 1
T
zx
� n
0
z
m
S
41
'0
D�
A
-i
1�1
Div
N � n
C
OV) p
al MC
IL M to
i
VMZ
iD
2
O
M
m
D
z
2�
i
I
a
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 23
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Review of status of the 6900 block of Penn Stormwater Project.
Background:
On July 25, 1994 the City Council approved the stormwater project at the 6900 block of
Penn Avenue. Since then five of the seven homes in the block have been purchased.
The project remains in the Capital Improvement Program to complete the work through
Stormwater Utility funding. On May 15, 1997 neighbors in the 6900 block of Russell
Avenue held a neighborhood meeting attended by Council Member Rosenberg and the
Director of Public Works. The neighbors expressed concern that the project is not yet
completed. Attached is a memorandum of Pete Willenbring, WSB, the City's consultant
stormwater engineer, recommending that the City wait until the other homes are
purchased. Staff will discuss the status and alternatives available.
Recommended Motion:
None.
• Basis of Recommendation:
None.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for discussion on June 2, 1997.
Res Ily submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
Attachment
•
�sB
•
&Associates, Inc.
To: Mike Eastling
350 Westwood Lake Office
8441 Wayzata Boulevard
Minneapolis, MN 55426
From: Pete Willenbring
Date: May 22,1997
612- 541 -4800
FAX 541 -1700
B.A. Mittelsteadt, P.E.
Bret A. Weiss, P.E.
Peter R. Willenbring, P.E.
Donald W. Sterna, P.E.
Ronald B. Bray, P.E.
Memorandum
Re: Ponding Area to be constructed in the future between 69th and 70th Streets
and Penn Avenue
WSB Project No. 1000.21
As requested, please find attached a possible grading plan that could be undertaken in the
interim to create additional storage in the areas over which property has been secured along
Penn Avenue between 69th and 70th Streets. The excavation of approximately 1300 cubic
yards in the two locations shown on the attached figure will provide approximately 0.8 acre
feet of additional storage in this area.
We have also completed a review of the impact of lowering 70th Street at the vicinity of its
intersection with Russell Avenue in an effort to provide additional flooding protection for
the structures in the vicinity of 70th and Russell. This analysis indicates that lowering the
high point in 70th Street near Russell Avenue would increase the probability of flooding the
remaining homes that have not yet been acquired within the mid -block area even if the
excavation is undertaken at this time. For this reason, I would recommend that prior to
lowering 70th and Russell, that the City acquire the last two remaining structures.
If you have any questions concerning this information, please do not hesitate to contact me
at 541 -4800.
bjf
•
Infrastructure Engineers Planners
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
F. I WPWIM 1000.111052297. ME
f:\ loon, 71\rmd\pqnd�
m
x
>
rp
0 0
z
---o ---------------
-:�
I
lr
W(M
I
1 II
II
4
----------
m (A
X 0
n 0
>
0 0 -----------
el
(A
IV
--0
FF]
FT�
.n
C/) 10
n
F-
0
rej
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ---
C � I
)l I � I
Fri
FrI
C0
(D
------- --------------
--------------------------------------------------- L ------------------------
i-�3diS H169
a
to
X
m
"n
U.'r,
wA.1 PPrrAqtn Py a' META my D-trr lirrr"",
ELAI As wit*
A
350 Westwood lake Offloo
TEMPORARY PONDING AREAS
y Implit"O I'Dot L"CER III"
n;C"L'A-WS tr-111K 57AIL Or RNtXWrStrA'1*
i4:Aww'----'76Hw oil
WSA6
1144`1 Wayzata 13oulovAtd
Minneapolis, MN 65426
PENN AVE. - 69th ST. TO 70th ST.
711C milm
r i
m
012-60.4NO
Asit"W"Oft
LID, MINNESOTA
1,11W I w.21
14
A Aivoefaft.% bw.
FAX 641-1700
WC11FIE
14
INFRASTRIXTURE ENGIN•ERS - PLANNERS
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 22
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Review of the traffic calming measures taken in the area bounded by Penn Avenue,
76th Street, 1 -494 and 1 -35W.
Background:
A traffic diverter to calm traffic was installed on a trial basis in late October 1996 at the
corner of 77th Street and Morgan Avenue. In April and May residents and businesses
were surveyed on their opinion of the diverter's effect on traffic. There were 55 replies -
26 supported making the traffic diverter a permanent feature; 24 did not want it, and 5
were undecided.
A map showing support and opposition to the diverter is attached for your information.
The map shows a pattern of opposition by residents and businesses located near the
diverter and along the 7600 block of Logan Avenue. Residents in favor of the diverter
are located north and west of the diverter. This pattern is consistent with the effect that
the barrier has in diverting commercial traffic to the east.
The Council should decide whether the diverter should become a permanent
improvement or some other measure should be tried.
Those opposed to the diverter, both businesses and residents, claimed that the diverter
made access to their property difficult. Certain delivery truck movements were
negatively affected by the diverter. However, residents in favor of the diverter noted a
reduction in traffic and the speed of traffic on 77th Street west of Morgan Avenue and
reduced traffic on Morgan Avenue.
Many residents opposed to the diverter suggested other barriers be placed in different
locations to separate commercial and residential land uses. One commercial owner
noted that the residents bought their homes knowing that the businesses were already
there. He felt it was unfair to punish businesses with the diverter. This disagreement
reflects a classic conflict between residential and commercial uses that find it difficult to
coexist. Any traffic calming measure will disturb one, or the other, or both land use
types. Refinements and alternative measures are always possible with traffic calming
but it will not eliminate the conflict between incompatible land uses.
City staff has reviewed survey responses to develop a list of additional traffic calming
options:
• Close the driveway from Wally McCarthy's Olds, Inc. to Logan Avenue
• Place a barrier at Knox Avenue and 77th Street
• Place a diverter at Logan Avenue and 77th Street
• Place a barrier at the south side of Morgan Avenue and 77th Street
• Place barriers at both Knox /77th and on south side of Morgan /77th
• Speed bumps or humps on 77th Street
In anticipation of the opening of Galyan's, residents suggested:
• Widen the 78th Street frontage road
• Post 78th Street for No Parking
• Stop sign or traffic signal at 76th /Knox for left turns and pedestrians crossing 76th
Street
• Paint pedestrian crosswalks at Morgan Avenue and Newton Avenue across 76th
Street
• Need more traffic calming measures with Galyan's coming
• Perform traffic study six months after Galyan's opens
• Stop sign at 77th Street and Knox Avenue to slow traffic on Knox
• Post a squad car near the auto dealerships to slow traffic
Recommended Motion:
None. For discussion purposes only although Council will be asked for direction as to
remove or leave the traffic diverter in place.
Basis of Recommendation:
None.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item will be discussed at the June 2, 1997 Council Study Session.
Respec Ily submitted,
Jam Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
Attachment
s
PENN1 V E.
LOGAN
,
i
't ti Ii
o p �
b
x
7Ef� T CE_3.5_
Iti
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 21
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discuss the desirability of granting to non - conforming business sign owners an
additional three year amortization period.
Background:
On April 28, 1997, the City Council held a public hearing on the second reading of an
ordinance amending the City's sign ordinance to allow for a three year amortization
period for non - conforming outdoor advertising displays. The amendment also provided
for the owners of such signs to request an extension. The request for extension would
be heard by a Hearing Examiner, appointed by the City Manager, with no appeal to the
City Council. The additional three year amortization came about because attorneys for
Universal Sign Company had asserted, and subsequently the City's legal counsel had
concurred, that the City's sign ordinance was subject to misinterpretation and would
likely not withstand legal challenge.
The ordinance amendment applied only to outdoor advertising displays, not non-
conforming business signs. There are approximately 25 non - conforming business signs
which are required to be removed by October 4, 1997 under the current sign ordinance.
The owners of all of these signs have been notified of the status of their sign. They're
also aware of City assistance which is available to them in the form of
architectural /design review and possible financial assistance,in the form of a below
market rate loan. To date, there has been no consideration given to the possibility of a
three year amortization extension for non - conforming business signs. The reason for
this is that there has been no compelling reason to do so as there was in the case of
outdoor advertising displays. None of the owners of these signs have challenged the
ordinance. However, as the effective date of October 4, 1997 gets closer, that may
change.
Should the City Council wish to consider providing a similar three year amortization
extension for non - conforming business signs, several options exist. The ordinance
could be amended to:
• Provide a three year extension for all non - conforming signs.
• Provide a three year extension for only a selected group of non - conforming signs --
possibly those in active redevelopment areas.
• Eliminate the amortization provision altogether and allow all non - conforming signs to
remain indefinitely.
• Amend the ordinance to allow for an extension request, which would be heard by a
Hearing Examiner.
• A combination of two or more of the above.
Recommended Motion:
No formal action is being recommended at this time.
Basis of Recommendation:
The City Council requested that staff present additional information on the amortization
provision of the sign ordinance.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for discussion at the City Council Study Session on June 2,
1997.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
•
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 20
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Meeting with the Richfield Friendship City Commission.
Background:
The Special City Council meeting with the Friendship City Commission is one of a
series of meeting between the City's Boards and Commissions and the City Council.
The purpose of this special meeting is to provide an informal opportunity for Friendship
City Commission Members to inform the City Council of recent and current issues. It
also provides a forum for an open dialogue between the City Council and the
Friendship City Commission.
Members will be revisiting commission projects of 1996.
Recommended Motion:
There is no action recommended.
Basis of Recommendation:
• The Council has provided an opportunity for the Richfield Friendship City Commission
to meet jointly with the Council to discuss topics of mutual interest and concern. Any
discussion which might ultimately lead to an action would have to be considered for
specific action at a regular Council meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This special meeting has been scheduled for June 2, 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
'(�Za
Ja a D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
Copy: Friendship City Commission Chair
•
• CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 19
Agenda June 2, 1997
Issue Statement:
Review of issues relating to group homes.
Background:
At the City Council meeting on April 28, 1997 residents expressed their concerns about
a group home moving into their neighborhood. The City Council requested that the
topic of group homes, or residential care facilities, be placed on a Study Session
agenda.
The attached fact sheet explains that treatment of residential care facilities for
handicapped people is governed by state and federal law. At the federal level,
handicapped people are considered a protected class and are protected from housing
discrimination by fair housing laws. According to federal law, a City cannot treat
housing for handicapped people differently than it treats housing for non - handicapped
families.
In the State of Minnesota, the zoning enabling legislation (Chapter 462) states that
cities must consider a residential care facility serving six or fewer persons a permitted
single family residential use. Cities must consider a residential care facility serving
more than six people a permitted multi - family use.
Minnesota requires that programs serving more than six people be located 1/4 mile
from each other. Programs serving six or fewer people are exempted from the 1/4 mile
distance requirement unless the programs are located in cities of the first class
(population over 100,000). The Attorney General has ruled that cities cannot adopt
distance requirements that are stricter than these state requirements.
When the City's Zoning Ordinance was amended in 1995, a 1/4 mile distance
requirement for programs serving six or fewer people was added. It is the opinion of
the Assistant City Attorney that the requirement is invalid and unenforceable because it
is stricter than the requirement imposed by State law. The City Council will be asked to
amend the ordinance, removing the distance requirement, at a future Council meeting.
There are 19 programs located in Richfield known to provide residential care for
handicapped persons. Of these 19 programs, 16 are located in single family zoned
areas. Hennepin County issues the licenses for these residential programs and
monitors them on a regular basis. In most cases, these programs serve four or fewer
people and are served by a live -in staff person 24 hours a day. The programs are
• primarily for persons with developmental disabilities. The remaining three programs are
located in apartment buildings in multi - family and commercial zoning districts.
• A list of residential care facilities located in Richfield was obtained from Hennepin
County (see attached map). In the past, residents have been concerned that the
location of a group home in the neighborhood generates higher incidences of crime and
negatively impacts property values.
A review of crime statistics for 1996 and 1997, to date, indicates that these residential
care facilities have not generated an unusual number of police calls. One property had
a higher than usual number of calls; however, they were primarily calls for medical
services.
Staff also reviewed property values for the properties surrounding residential care
facilities. The change in property value of neighboring properties was compared for the
three years prior to the year that the group home moved into the neighborhood and for
three years subsequent. No significant decrease in value after a group home moved
into a neighborhood was found. In fact, many properties saw a greater increase in
value after the group home moved into the neighborhood. It is important, however, to
remember that a variety of factors affect the value of property making it difficult to
isolate the impact of one factor.
Recommended Motion:
No formal action is being recommended at this time.
• Basis of Recommendation:
The City Council requested information on group homes at the City Council meeting on
April 28, 1997.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion /Decision Mode:
This item is scheduled for discussion at the City Council Study Session on June 2,
1997.
Respectfully submitted,
l
Jams .Prosser
City Manager
JDP:ds
.7
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
(Group Homes)
Federal Level
• Beginning in the late 1960s, a national movement toward deinstitutionalization led
to the closing of many large institutions and the development of community -based
facilities. Handicapped people moved out of state institutions and into the
community.
• In 1988, . Congress passed the Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA)
♦ The Fair Housing Act 0 968) prohibits housing discrimination on the basis of
"race, color, religion, or national origin ". In the FHAA, the Fair Housing Act is
extended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of handicap.
♦ The purpose of the FHAA is to permit people with disabilities to live where they
wish, irrespective of the views and prejudices of others.
♦ Under the law, a City must "make reasonable accommodations ... to afford such
persons equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling."
State of Minnesota
0 Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462.357 (zoning enabling legislation)
• A state licensed residential facility serving six or fewer persons shall be considered a
permitted single family residential use.
A state licensed residential facility serving 7 to 16 persons shall be considered a
permitted multi - family use. A City may require a conditional use permit. Any
conditions imposed cannot be more restrictive than those imposed on facilities for
non - handicapped persons unless the conditions are necessary to protect the health
and safety of the residents.
Separation Requirement
• The Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) Licensing Act requires that
programs serving more than six persons be located 1,320 feet (1/4 mile) apart to
ensure that an over - concentration of these programs does not occur. DHS monitors
the concentration of these programs when it issues licenses.
• Programs serving six or fewer persons are excepted from the distance requirement
in all cities except cities of the first class (population over 100,000) . A distance
requirement is enforced for programs serving six or fewer persons in cities of the
• first class because programs have been overly- concentrated in these communities,
primarily Minneapolis.
h: \cdadmin \p &z \gphomes.doc 1 May 16, 1997
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
(Group Homes)
"The Department of Human Services shall not grant a license to any residential
program if the residential program is within 1,320 feet (1/4 mile) of an existing
residential program unless one of the following conditions apply: (1) the
existing residential program is located in a hospital licensed by the
commissioner of health; (2) the town, municipality, or county zoning authority
grants the residential program a conditional use or special use permit; (3) the
program serves six or fewer persons and is not located in a city of the first class
(population over 100,000 people); or (4) the program is foster care."
(Minnesota Statutes, Section 245A.11, subd. 4 -- Department of Human Services
Licensing Act)
• The City of New Ulm adopted an ordinance applying a 1/4 mile distance
requirement to all residential programs, regardless of size. In 1990, the Minnesota
Attorney General ruled that a city may not impose distance requirements for group
homes in city zoning regulations that are more stringent than the distance
requirements established under state statute. In other words, cities (except first
class cities) cannot impose a distance requirement for programs serving six or fewer
persons.
IS Licensing Requirements
F-
L-1
• Residential programs are licensed by the state Department of Human Services
(DHS) .
• Hennepin County issues licenses for programs that serve 4 or fewer persons
(considered adult foster care programs). The County makes sure that all programs
meet licensing criteria and monitors them on a regular basis.
• A non - licensed residential program opened in Richfield in 1994. At the time, the
City required the program to obtain a conditional use permit because it was not
licensed. Since that time, the Zoning Ordinance was changed to allow both
"licensed residential care facilities" and "community based residential care
facilities" as permitted single family uses. A community based residential care
facility is not licensed but is similar to a licensed facility in its operation and the
services it provides. In the case of the Richfield program, it was not required to be
licensed by the State because of the small number of residents being served.
hAcdadmin \p &z \gphomes.doc 2 May 16, 1997
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
(Group Homes)
Richfield:
Number
• According to County and State records, there are 16 residential care facilities in
Richfield that serve 6 or fewer residents. They are primarily adult foster care
programs that are licensed through the County and limited to 4 or fewer residents.
• In addition, there are three residential programs for persons with disabilities that
are located in apartment buildings. Two programs are located in multi - family
districts. Another program is located in an apartment building in a commercial
zoning district. All three apartment buildings received conditional use permits
before they were constructed.
• Residential care facilities account for 0.5 percent of the total housing units in
Richfield.
Types
• There are various types of residential programs designed to serve different
populations. The Department of Human Services defines the different types of
programs and their requirements in state rules. For example, a Rule 34 facility is a
residential program for developmentally disabled children or adults. There are also
programs for persons with mental illness, persons who are chemically dependent,
and children and adolescents in crisis.
• The programs available in Richfield are primarily for people with developmental
disabilities.
♦ Sixteen programs serve persons with developmental disabilities
♦ Two programs are for persons with mental illness (one of which is an apartment
building)
♦ One program (in an apartment building) is for persons who are chemically
dependent
♦ One program (in a single family home) is for youth in crisis
Effects on Property Values
• The change in property value of neighboring properties was compared for the three
years prior to the year that the group home moved into the neighborhood and for
the three years subsequent. The comparison indicates no significant decrease in
property value after the group home moved into the neighborhood. In fact, in many
h: \cdadmin \p &z \gphomes.doc 3 May 16, 1997
•
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
(Group Homes)
neighborhoods, property values increased at a higher level after the group home
moved into the neighborhood.
Crime and Nuisance Reports
• It is not unusual for a home in Richfield to have one to two police calls in a year.
An apartment building will generate a similar number of calls per unit in a year.
• A review of police records of the number of calls for service (including medical
service) during 1996 and the first four months of 1997 indicate that, in general, the
residential care facilities in Richfield did not generate a higher than normal number
of police calls.
• The statistics on group home properties indicate the following information:
• Five homes generated no calls during this 16 -month period.
• Four homes generated one call during this period.
• Two homes generated two calls during this period.
• One home generated three calls.
• Two homes generated four calls.
• One home generated 15 calls (12 of which were medical /health related calls).
• One 11 -unit apartment building generated 12 calls.
• The remaining two apartment buildings generated fewer than one call per unit.
hAcdadmin \p &z \gphomes.doc 4 May 16, 1997
•
0
RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITIES
(Group Homes)
Public Safety- -- Calls for Service
• 70 calls to 81 housing units*
...................... .......;.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.... ;:.; >:.>
............................................
...............................
Emergency Medical
16
22.9%
Theft
9
12.9%
Health
8
11.4%
Missing Adult
6
8.6%
Public Assistance
3
4.3%
Detox Commitment
2
2.9%
Disturbance
2
2.9%
Fire /Fire Assist
2
2.9%
Miscellaneous City Ordinance Violation
2
2.9%
Noise Complaint
2
2.9%
Vandalism
2
2.9%
911 hang up
1
1.4%
Burglary
1
1.4%
Drunkenness
1
1.4%
Exposer
1
1.4%
Fire alarm
1
1.4%
Harassment
1
1.4%
Judicial Matter
1
1.4%
Malicious Mischief
1
1.4%
Overtime Parking
1
1.4%
Property Damage Accident
1
1.4%
Recovery of Stolen Property
1
1.4%
Suspicious Vehicle
1
1.4%
Suspicious Person
1
1.4%
Threat
1
1.4%
TOTAL
701
100%
Note: The call for service may relate to an incident or crime committed against the property or
occupants of the property, or it may be an incident or crime committed by the occupants of the
property. The call may also relate to something that occurs on the street and is not related to the
property; the property is only a reference to the location of the incident.
* Time period included all of 1996 and first four months of 1997.
h:\cdadmin \p &z \gphomes.doc
May 16, 1997