03-03-97 agenda•
CITY OF RICHFIELD
MONDAY, MARCH 3, 1997
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
•
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. 7:00-7:30 P.M. PRESENTATION OF COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING UPDATE
II. 7:30-7:45 P.M. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN RICHFIELD CITY
CODE SECTION 400 TO:
• UPDATE CITY BUILDING REGULATIONS TO LATEST VERSION
OF STATE BUILDING CODE
• UPDATE CITY FIRE PREVENTION REGULATIONS TO LATEST
VERSION OF STATE FIRE CODE
STUDY SESSION LETTERS NO. 5 & 6
III. 7:45-8:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED ISSUES
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 7
IV. 8:15-8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF LAYOUT TO ADD THIRD LANE FOR HIGH
OCCUPANCY VEHICLES ON 1-35W FROM 1-494 TO 42ND STREET
IN MINNEAPOLIS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 8
V. 8:30-8:45 P.M. DISCUSSION OF COLUMBUS AVENUE STORM SEWER PROJECT
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 9
VI. 8:45-9:00 P.M. DISCUSSION OF REDECKING PORTLAND AVENUE BRIDGE
OVER 1-494
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 10
0 9:00 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. 10
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of redecking of Portland Avenue bridge over 1-494.
Background:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has notified the City of its
intention to redeck the Portland Avenue bridge over 1-494. The work will be done in
July and August 1997.
MnDOT staff met with City staffs from Richfield and Bloomington to discuss detour
routes and the length of traffic disruption. It was agreed among all three parties that the
bridge be closed for seven weeks instead of leaving one lane open in each direction for
eleven weeks. Leaving one lane open in each direction was considered unworkable
because of the excessive number of left turning vehicles trying to gain access to the
frontage road or the freeway entrance ramp. These left turning vehicles could easily
block traffic. Therefore, by closing the bridge the work could be finished in less time.
The detour routes selected include 77th Street to Nicollet Avenue for southbound traffic
on Portland Avenue, and 12th Avenue and 77th Street for northbound traffic on
Portland Avenue. The frontage roads will remain open on both sides of 1-494 but will
not be posted as detour routes. People will be able to use the frontage roads to get on
and off the freeway.
• City staff has asked MnDOT to notify affected businesses and residents in an area
bounded by 12th Avenue, 76th Street, Nicollet Avenue and 1-494 about the proposed
bridge redecking project and the proposed detour. City staff have supplied MnDOT
with mailing labels for the MnDOT notice.
Recommended Motion:
The Council is being informed of the proposed bridge work and detour. There is no
action being requested.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The bridge closure assures smoother traffic flow along the proposed detour routes.
2. The bridge closure will shorten the time to redeck the bridge by four weeks causing
less disruption to Richfield businesses and residents.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
The Council is being informed of the upcoming bridge work needed on the Portland
Avenue bridge. No decision is being asked of the Council.
Respectfu submitted,
• James rosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 9
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of Columbus Avenue storm sewer project.
Background:
At the May 28, 1996 City Council meeting, Council authorized an expanded scope of
the Columbus Avenue storm sewer project to provide relief to Norby Pond. The revised
cost of the project was $515,000 including $14,500 for internal construction engineering
costs. Pete Willenbring, WSB and Associates, the design engineer for the project,
discovered a difficulty when designing the crossing of 66th Street. This difficulty is
reflected in the bids staff received for the project. The total project cost using the low
bid construction cost is $725,000.
Details of the change in the plan, storm water Capital Improvement Budget and
alternative courses of action will be available at the March 3, 1997 Study Session.
Recommended Motion:
There is no formal action recommended at this time. This is a discussion item intended
to update the Council
•
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Funds are available in the Storm Water Utility Fund for these improvements.
2. Staff has met with residents who are expecting relief from the flooding they have
experienced.
3. There is a need for this project to be completed early this spring to avoid conflict
with the Fourth of July celebration.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This item will be discussed at the March 3, 1997 Council Study Session.
Respectfu submitted,
James . Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. s
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Review of the layout to add a third lane for high occupancy vehicles on 1-35W from 1-
494 to 42nd Street in Minneapolis.
Background:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has proposed to extend the
High Occupancy Vehicle lane on 1-35W from 1-494 to 42nd Street in Minneapolis (See
attached map).
The Council revised its comment on the adequacy of the 1-35W Final EIS as amended
at the January 27, 1997 Council meeting. MnDOT is now asking for layout approval
from both the cities of Minneapolis and Richfield. The topic is on the March 24, 1997
Council agenda. City staff has met with MnDOT officials to assure that the Council's
comments are incorporated into the design of the roadway. Key issues being
discussed are:
• the need for noisewalls including resident input on the decision;
• acquisition of land needed for storm water ponding;
• a transit station on the freeway;
• gateways for 66th Street and Lyndale Avenue;
• traffic impacts on local streets;
• bikeway/pedestrian crossings of the freeway; and
• the potential for redevelopment opportunities.
City staff is using the following public involvement efforts in the review of the proposed
layout for this project:
• A notice that the City Council will review the project in March was placed in the
March 1997 issue of Your City newsletter.
• A mailing list of 1,000 owner residents living along 1-35W from 76th Street to
Portland Avenue will receive an invitation to attend the March 13, 1997 Open House
at City Hall.
• The letter inviting people to the March 13 Open House will include responses by the
City and MnDOT to the issues raised at the January 14 Open House sponsored by
MnDOT
• City staff will devise a process for residents to express their wishes about whether or
not to build new noisewalls where none exists today. This may occur at the same
time as the March 13 Open House.
• City staff has already given presentations on the proposal to both the Planning
Commission and the Community Services Commission.
If the project is approved, work south of 66th Street could begin as soon as 1999.
Recommended Motion:
None. For discussion purposes only although the Council will be asked for guidance on
the proposed public involvement process for reviewing the layout for the 1-35W
improvement.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. Although the MnDOT proposal doesn't correct all 1-35W deficiencies, it is generally
consistent with the City's position on I-35W:
• by keeping regional trips on the regional highway network;
• by providing an HOV lane rather than light rail transit; and,
• by promoting high speed bus service and carpooling.
2. The proposal can be built under existing state budgetary limits.
3. Refinements in the design are possible to lessen negative effects on Richfield.
Alternative Recommendation:
1. Consider several minor refinements to the MnDOT proposal designed to reduce
negative impacts on Richfield. Revisions in the design may improve its acceptability
i to the City.
2. Consider opposing the proposal; however, this is inconsistent with the Council's
January 27 comment on the addendum to the Final Environmental Impact
Statement.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
No decision is needed at this time. A decision on the proposed layout will be requested
at the March 24, 1997 Council meeting. The Council has approval authority over
projects like this one. If MnDOT complies with any conditions to Council approval, no
further City approval will be needed
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
n
l?_J
(t? L21?
•
•
0
Existing
Proposed
1-35W/Highway 62 Common Section Improvements
and
High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane, 42nd Street to I-494
The 1-35W/Highway 62 common section on the Minneapolis/Richfield border has been a problem section of the freeway sy
for years. The common section interchange currently handles 250,000 vehicles a day. The east-west portion handles nearly
160,000 vehicles a day. Some portions of the common section are congested for up to 13 hours per day.
The common section is also a high accident area, with an accident rate up to three times higher than the average of the
metropolitan freeway system The higher accident rate can be attributed to high traffic volumes and poor geometrics. The poor
geometncs consist of I-35W and Highway 62 sharing lanes in the common section, left-hand exits (SB to EB, and NB to WB),
a left-hand entrance (WB to SB), forced lane changes, weaving sections, curved roadway alignment, and access at L'yndale in
the middle of the common section.
The Metropolitan Council Transit Operations (MCTO), Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA), Southwest Metro, and
the University of Minnesota operate over 300 buses a day on I-35W and currently carry about 11,000 passengers a day.
Project description
• Rebuild the 1-35W/Highway 62 common section to provide safety and operational improvements by:
• Separating the two roadways, which:
+ Provides separate Highway 62 roadway;
+ Provides better lane continuity;
+ Eliminates weaving sections.
• Replacing the SB 35W to EB 62 left-hand exit with a right-hand exit;
• Replacing the NB 35W to WB 62 and NB 121 left-hand exit with a right-hand exit;
• Replacing the WB 62 to SB 35W and WB 62 left-hand entrance with a right-hand entrance.
• Add a high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction in the median of the freeway between I-494 and 46th
All existing access is maintained or improved, except for the following:
A
• 66th Street to EB 62 (via NB 35W) is no longer possible; Lyndale to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
• Lyndale Ave. to NB 35W is no longer possible; 66th or 60th to NB 35W are potential alternate routes,
• Diamond Lake Road to EB 62 (via SB 35W) is no longer possible; Portland to EB 62 is a potential alternate route,
• 46th St. to NB 35W; changes from starting an additional lane on NB 35W to a ramp that merges on to NB 35W.
Cost $75,000,000
Right-of-way
For roadway improvements: 5 single-family homes
For drainage: to be determined
Schedule
Informational meetings to discuss project with public:
Addendum to I-35W EIS to update environmental process:
Project layout submitted to Cities of Minneapolis and Richfield for approval:
Proposed construction staging schedule:
Stage Location
1 I-494 to 66th Street
2 66th St. to Minnehaha Creek
3 Minnehaha Creek to 42nd St.
Project Contact
Adam Josephson, P.E.
Mn/DOT Metro Division
1500 West County Road B-2
Roseville, MN 55113
Phone: 582-1320 FAX#:582-1308
Start Construction
April 1999
April 2001
April 2002
Open to traffic
Fall 1999
Fall 2003
Fall 2003
Spring/Summer 1996
December 1996
December 1996
0
11/18/%
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 7
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Status of airport related issues.
Background:
Recent developments regarding airport issues include the following:
• Runway 4-22
An impasse has been reached regarding Richfield's tolling agreement with the MAC. A
tolling agreement would enable the lawsuit to be dismissed without prejudice. Richfield
would also retain the right to seek judicial relief if the MAC should decide to proceed
with the noise redistribution component of the project. In early February it was stated
that the MAC was "inclined against" a tolling agreement. As an attempt to clarify
misconceptions, Jim Prosser sent a letter to Executive Director Jeffrey Hamiel
reiterating the purpose of the tolling agreement and Richfield's position of the proposed
north-south runway. [see following attachment]
In December 1996, the Commission approved reconstructing a section of the south
parallel runway. Test results showed that underlying subgrade problems warranted
46 more then just surface repairs. Even though Northwest Airlines Flight Operations staff
was notified of this reconstruction, other NWA staff was unaware that this project would
limit the runway's use to 6,000 feet. The construction period would last from May until
August. Due to NWA's concerns about the timing of the reconstruction, this project may
be delayed by one month to give NWA time to adjust their fleet use plan. The
reconstruction may mean additional flights off 4-22.
• Termination of Lease Agreement: Relocation of Recreational Assets
The Athletic Group Task Force has been studying numerous possibilities of relocating
recreational activities formerly located at the Rich Acres athletic fields. After much
discussion, consultant George Watson, Brauer & Associates, will be bringing forth two
or three land alternatives. These alternatives include the upgrade of current facilities
and redesign of parks for maximum usage.
The Met Council, DNR, Minneapolis Park and Recreation Department and Richfield
Recreation Services Department are analyzing various excess land possibilities within
the area. These are several land options that could be utilized. Also, the Golf Course
Task Force will soon be meeting to brainstorm alternative options.
• Final EIS of the North-South Runway
Nigel Finney has stated that the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed
north-south runway will be ready for public review in June 1997.
40 • MSP Mitigation Committee
The MSP Noise Mitigation Program was first reviewed by the State Advisory Council on
Metropolitan Airport Planning (SACMAP) on December 17, 1996. By the conclusion of
this meeting, consensus was not reached. SACMAP representatives then met again on
February 10 to prepare a formal comment for the Legislature. In addition to the MSP
Noise Mitigation Program, written comments by public member Suzanne Sandahl will
also be forwarded to the Legislature. Comments were made in regard to:
1. Monitoring the noise insulation process;
2. Developing noise mitigation and capital improvement prioritization;
3. Linking Airport growth to noise mitigation efforts;
4. Requiring the MAC to cooperate with affected cities in development of noise
mitigation plans;
.5. Developing ground level impact models;
6. Ensuring community stabilization;
7. Developing enforcement mechanisms to ensure that airport operations will comply
• with noise standards; and
8. Complying with environmental laws requiring completion and approval of the EIS
before undertaking related airport action. [see following attachment]
The Metropolitan Council will be commenting on the MSP Noise Mitigation Program at
its meeting on Thursday, February 27.
MAC Part 150 Sound Insulation Program
Due to ventilation issues, MAC had expanded its sound insulation program to include a
more rigorous pre-testing "pass or fail" stage. The preliminary test would identify any
existing problems before construction. At this time, homes in the Minneapolis area are
involved in either the pre-construction or construction phases. The sound-proofing
process has hit a glitch in that 70% of the pre-tests conducted have produced failing
results. Details of what this may mean to the program are still hazy. There are
approximately 100 homes left in Richfield slated for sound insulation.
• New Ford Town and Rich Acres Acquisition
The most recent status report for acquisition and relocation is as follows:
1. Phase V: The open house for this phase was held on January 9 at City Hall. MAC
• and WDSCO can now acquire properties in priorities 22 through 28 of the New Ford
Town and Rich Acres acquisition. These priority blocks consist of apartment
• buildings, businesses and the church. The final acquisition will be vacant land,
parks and a playground. [see following attachment for schedule]
2. Planning for tenant and business relocation is underway.
3. Auction 8: This auction is tentatively scheduled for early March. There will be two
open house dates scheduled for the Thursday and Saturday prior to the action for
prospective buyers to view the homes.
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 March 3, 1997.
Respe fully submitted,
Jame D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
is
J
' 6700 Portland Avenue • Richfield, Minnesota 55423-2599
City Manager Mayor Council
James D. Prosser Martin J. Kirsch Susan Rosenberg Kristal Stokes
Michael Sandahi Russ Susag
February 24, 1997
Mr. Jeffrey W. Hamiel
Executive Director
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28th Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Subject: Proposed Tolling Agreement Concerning Runway 4-22 Litigation
Dear Jeff:
I understand that MAC has tentatively decided to reject Richfield's proposal that the
parties enter into a tolling agreement which would enable the pending federal and state
court litigation concerning Runway 4-22 to be dismissed. From what I can determine,
• MAC's tentative decision may be based on a misunderstanding of Richfield's position
with respect to the future development of MSP. I am writing this letter with the hope
that, by correcting that apparent misunderstanding, MAC will better appreciate why
execution of a tolling agreement is in the best interests of all of the litigants as well as
the public as a whole.
I want to emphasize at the outset that Richfield supports a tolling agreement
notwithstanding its belief that it has a strong case and is likely to prevail in both state
and federal court. The problem, however, is that such court victories will be
meaningless if, even without such litigation, MAC would not proceed with the balance of
the Runway 4-22 project. We understand that MAC does not plan to begin construction
regarding the use of Runway 4-22 for noise-shifting purposes before 1999 at the
earliest (with the actual usage of that runway for those purposes occurring even later).
Given that MAC's already limited ability to use the extended runway to shift noise will
decrease as flight levels at MSP rise, Richfield questions the need for the parties to
devote public monies and scarce judicial resources to litigating now the permissibility of
a project that will not be built for years to come, if at all.
I understand that MAC's inclination to reject a tolling agreement is based largely on the
belief that Richfield will oppose the north-south runway and that therefore, everyone
might as well learn whether or not Runway 4-22 can be used to shift noise. In light of
MAC's own distant and uncertain plans regarding the balance of the Runway 4-22
project, as well as the need for supplemental environmental review before that project
The Urban Hometown
Telephone (612) 861-9700 • Fax (612) 861-9749
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Mr. Jeffrey W. Hamiel
February 24, 1997
Page 2
could be restarted, I am not sure how the north-south runway has any bearing on the
advisability of spending monies now to litigate the adequacy of the prior environmental
review. I also question the finality of any such litigation with respect to any future
decision by MAC to try to implement that project.
But just as important, MAC's reasoning misunderstands Richfield's position regarding
the north-south runway. Richfield has made no decision to oppose the north-south
runway. Richfield has consistently stated that it cannot formulate its position regarding
that project until there is a full disclosure of information regarding the merits of that
project, the impacts of the project on affected communities, and the extent to which
measures will be taken to mitigate those impacts. All that Richfield wants is the ability
to make a fully informed decision--which is precisely what MEPA and NEPA are
intended to provide.
It would be truly unfortunate if MAC's assumption that Richfield will oppose the north-
south runway becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It would be equally unfortunate if that •
assumption causes public agencies to devote substantial resources to litigation that
would not finally resolve the fate of a project that MAC, if left to its own devices, might
ultimately decide not to pursue anyway.
Neither. of these scenarios are inevitable. The first step toward avoiding them is to
defer, and hopefully avoid, any litigation regarding Runway 4-22 by entering into the
proposed tolling agreement.
Sin
Jam D. Prosser
Manager
Copy: Jonathon H. Bloomberg, Esq.
Sherry A. Enzler, Esq.
Elizabeth Ann Peterson, Esq.
Curt Johnson, Met Council
Jim Solem, Met Council
40
•
TO: Representative Bernie Lieder
Senator Keith Langseth
FROM: Suzanne M. Sandahl
RE: Mitigation Committee Recommendations
DATE: February 10, 1997
Enclosed for your information is the document "Comments on the MSP Noise
Mitigation Recommendations."
Due to a prior commitment, I am unable to attend the February 10, 1997 meeting
of the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning. I do wish,
however, to have my comments considered and included with the committees'
report.
•
I have asked Dawn Weitzel to forward my comments to the committee.
is
COMMENTS ON THE MSP NOISE MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS
Submitted by Suzanne M. Sandahl
Public Member of the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning
I request that the State Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Planning include the
following comments with its report to the legislature.
1. Monitor Noise Insulation Process
The report provides a detailed description of noise insulation efforts including
expansion of the area to be insulated by the Metropolitan Airport Commission and
schedule for insulation. However, the report does not provide a mechanism to
monitor progress at achieving recommendations included in the report. This item
needs to be included in the report.
II. Develop Noise Mitigation and Capital Improvement Prioritization
Recommendation I, No. 9 provides that "[c]ompletion of the sound insulation
program is contingent upon the MAC maintaining a bond rating of at least A". This
recommendation appears to indicate that noise insulation may be curtailed if bond
• rating is reduced. Does this also mean that there will be a similar reduction in other
capital improvements at the airport? How will these priorities be developed? A plan
to develop priorities should be included in the report.
III. Link Airport Growth to Noise Mitigation Efforts
Part of the reason for the accelerated and expanded noise insulation effort is the
anticipation of increased growth at this airport. It would appear to be appropriate to
link general airport growth to off-site noise mitigation efforts. As an example, a goal
could be set of committing a specific percentage of all capital improvements to noise
mitigation efforts.
IV. Require the Metropolitan Airport Commission to Cooperate with Affected Cities in
Development of Noise Mitigation Plans
In the past, communities surrounding the airport have developed noise mitigation
plans in response to proposed airport improvements. It is my understanding that the
Metropolitan Airport Commission has not incorporated the community plan in the
noise mitigation plans for the airport. Furthermore, there has been no consultation
with the communities regarding the Metropolitan Airport Commission's unwillingness
to incorporate the plans prepared by these communities. It would appear
40 appropriate that the Metropolitan Airport Commission be required to cooperate with
cities and develop noise mitigation plans that are mutually acceptable to the airport
Suzanne M. Sandahl
February 10, 1997
Page 2
and to the surrounding communities. Consideration should also be given to
requesting Met Council to assist the Metropolitan Airport Commission and the
impacted cities with this effort.
V. Develop Ground Level Impact Models
A significant issue related to insulation is the recommendation that "MAC should
develop noise impact models that reflect the impact of ground level noise on
residential properties. Mitigation for low frequency noise should be developed after
consultation with independent noise mitigation experts". Exactly how will this be
accomplished and who will select the independent noise mitigation experts? This
appears to be a significant concern for adjacent cities.
VI. Ensure Community Stabilization
Community stabilization is a major component of the noise mitigation plan.
Communities surrounding the airport have apparently correctly assessed that one of
the major concerns regarding airport noise is the impact that the noise will have
upon the future vitality of those communities. The Noise Mitigation Report basically
provides that a recommendation regarding community stabilization would be
provided to the Metropolitan Airport Commission for endorsement and inclusion in
the 1997 legislative program. Several questions arise regarding this concept:
• Has a working group been established? If not, how will a 1997 legislative program
be achieved?
• Who is responsible for establishing a working group?
• Is it reasonable that the Metropolitan Airport Commission should be the gatekeeper
regarding legislative programs, especially given the fact that communities appear to
have a much larger stake in assuring that community stabilization programs are
effective?
VII.Develop Enforcement Mechanisms to Ensure that Airport Operations will Comply
with Noise Standards
The recommendations included in the Airport Operations section are by and large
meaningless. Recommendation III, No. 1 is already a requirement by federal law.
The Metropolitan Airport Commission has previously stated that recommendations
like III, No. 2, limiting activities during night time hours is unenforceable. Overall,
these recommendations do not appear provide any meaningful basis to support the
idea that noise will be reduced because of changes in airport operation. More
importantly, there is no enforcement mechanism established to assure compliance
within the standards developed.
Suzanne M. Sandahl
February 10, 1997
Page 3
•
VIII. Comply with Environmental Laws Requiring Completion and Approval of the EIS
Before Undertaking Related Airport Action
The Mitigation Committee, with clear dissension from at least one community,
supported completion of the north-south runway as soon as possible and a
timeframe was provided. The legislature should discourage the construction of a
capital improvement that requires an environmental impact statement prior to the
issuance of a Record of Decision. Federal and state law provide clear guidelines
that serve that serve to protect the environmental review process.
One of the most important elements of those guidelines is that no work should be
initiated in anticipation of a favorable outcome for that review process. Yet, that is
exactly what is occurring in the case of the north-south runway. The Metropolitan
Airport Commission should seek an opinion from legislative staff or the Attorney
General regarding the appropriateness of initiating activities including land
acquisition and termination of leases for a project prior to the issuance of a Record
of Decision. It is easy to understand the eagerness of any agency to move on with
a project that appears to have strong support from different organizations. At the
same time, it is reasonable to insist that the Metropolitan Airport Commission
comply with the letter and the spirit of environmental laws.
The efforts of the Noise Mitigation Committee are certainly notable. They are to
thanked for their diligent work given the timeframe that they were requested to act. It is
understandable, however, that some the more essential details regarding
implementation of recommendations has not been provided. Recommendation
regarding implementation, and tracking compliance are at least as important as the
recommendations themselves.
believe it is our responsibility as an oversight group to provide recommendations to the
Legislature, to MAC, to Met Council and agencies that will assure legislative intent of
the noise mitigation study, that is, to assure that issues regarding noise impact upon
communities are appropriately addressed, not only in theory but in practice.
appreciate your consideration of these issues.
0
•
02-25-1997 02:59PM FROM TO 9619749 P.03
PROGRAM PLOWGMAK I
lntaal Interview
w/Owners
rltlpr3?381 &
Environmental
tnsoecticns
Property
Owner
I
Process ; A
! -i
'PZ
Review Tenant Process
I
Offer
Meetin
? ,
t
V
aca
e
lt:ilgibitity s' Day
7 Meeting Ran: Free Property
,4eeeptanee
of Offer
t C:OSll1g1
Transfer of
`? %lle
Please note: under no circumstances will funds be disbursed to tenants prior to the transferring of owner title to MAC
•
MSP LAND ACQUISITION & RELOCATION
NEW FORD TOWN/RICH ACRES
PHASE V
SCHEDULE
Task Begin Complete
Owner Notification January 20. 1997 February 28, 1997
Owner Initial Interview January 27, 1997 March 14. 1997
Appraisal February 10, 1997 May 2, 1997
Review Appraisal March 24, 1997 May 23, 1997
Owner Offer March 7. 1997 May 30, 1997
Tenant Initial Interview April 14, 1997 July 4. 1997
Owner Acceptance April 7, 1997 September 5, 1987
Tenant Relocation Study Begins April 7, 1997 August S, 1997
Tenant Offer/90-Day Notice to Vacate May 9, 1997 October 3, 1997
Owner Closing May 9, 1997 October 3, 1997
Relocation May 9, 1997 December 29, 1997
Please note: each task has a tentative target date for beginning and completion. This schedule is subject to
change based on final date of owner acceptance of acquisition offer.
P1 W.D. SCHOCK COMPANY, INC.
5844 28TH AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55417
(612)724-8898
(800)260-7062
c
=} MSP 1994 Runway Configuration Use
VFR (92%) IFR (8%)
?0 11L
23 ?.
11R 45%
29R
29L
f 11L
e 11L 43% 4%
11R 11R
29R 29R
! 29L ??
29L ??'•
a?
?N
11L
11R
29R
29L
,?N
1%
1%
11L Z%O
11R
29RR
29L
11L
11R
29R
29L
4%°
•
r
4
is
MSP Runway Use
.r o
23% 1%
A
C
221 %
23%
22% 11L 1994
22%
11R
25%
29R
2%31 4 26%
3% 27%
rg?
29L
25%
2005
s?io
0
I•
Projected 1996 Annual Runway Use
without Extension of Runway 4-22
?S
'e.
Q?
?S%
2p e
?k
with Extension of Runway 4-22
?Q
?3x
?4x
lie
f
;n.:io„?• ,_ ?.r:r.v,`.?7.i?-.:... ?_._.. ... ,., .:5-_.._. ., <?,???•..?J•a:...:•,..artY..cti.?aa?s.?LYi???' n.=s-
=? }= MSP 2005 Runway Configuration Use
r
ate; _''
r.
If
r
17
-l _11L
24%
iR
11 L 29%
?% 11R
17 29R
29L °
?
s
31%
17 `9R
29L
L
11L 7%
1,R
17 29R
29L
1%
„L 6%
o? 11R
17 29R
29L
?• 11l 2%
22
11R
29L 'V
17 29R
Ar
January, 1997
MASAC
Technical Advisor's Report
-.? Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
...... ::
aa?=r MONTHLY MEETING - Vletropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council
0
0
Clwvnuur
Robert P..Inhn?w
lire Chwnnun:
Th(wna.. Hueg
Te((anr it Ad(! gar
Traci Erickson
.S(t(ne Se, eta-
Melhv scovronski
Althorn F-cpre ss:
Brian Bates
.4,r Twn,porl AsilK'wt n:
Paul McGraw
.4 LP4:
Charles W. Curry Jr.
Cot ul Blnume cgton:
Petrona Lee
Vern Wilcox
Cit, r,/ B.-Ile.
Ed Porter
Cat "I Eqe-
Tom Exan
City of Inver Grote Heights:
Dale Hammon
City ol.Mendota Heiehts:
Jill Smith
City ol'.Minneapoli.r:
James B. Serria
John Richter
Joe Lee
Judith Dodge -
City o/ Richfield.,
Kristal Stokes
Dawn Weitzel
City of St. Louis Park:
Robert Adrews
CiN o/St. Paul:
C. Scott Bunin
Thomas H. Hoeg
Carol Ann McGuire
Delta Air Lines Inc.:
Rich Kidwell
Federal F.rpress:
Dan DeBord
Federal Atiation Admini.vr(aion:
Bruce Wagoner
Ronald Glaub
.MAC Staff•
Dick Kelnz
kfaAA:
Robert P. Johanna
.Mestdw Nonh.est Airtink:
Daniel Sheeban
Metropolitan Airports Commission:
Commissioner Alton Gasper
MN Air National Guam:
Major Roy J. Shetka
Northuecl Airlines:
Mark Salmen
Jennifer Sayre
St Paul Chamber of Cnmmeme:
Craig Wruck
Sun Coin A(rlines:
Dale Kariva
L'mted Airlines Inc..
Bid Vantiss
Cnaed Parcel Sert a e:
Steve Walker
US. Air Forc r Resen-e:
Captain David J. Gerken
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Declaration of Purposes
l.) 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 activityy, but provides a public sounding
board and airport information outlet. The hotline
is staffed during business hours, MondaY - Friday.
This report is prepared and printed in house by
Chad Leqve, ANSP Technician
Questions or comments may be directed to:
MAC - Aviation Noise 8c Satellite Program
Minneapolis / St. Paul International Airport
6040 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
Tel: (612) 725-6 31, Fax: (612) 725-6310
ANSP HovrTPage:Kttp://www.macavsal.org
Metropolitan Airports Commission Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Contents
Operations and Complaint Summary I
Operations Summary - All Aircraft .....................................................................................1
MSP January Fleet Mix Percentage ..................................................................................... I
Airport January Complaint Summary .................................................................................. I
January Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office ....................................................I
Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary 2
Complaint Summary by City ...............................................................................................2
Available Time for Runway Use 3
Tower Log Reports - All Hours ...........................................................................................3
Tower Log Reports - Nighttime Hours ................................................................................3
All Operations 4
Runway Use Report January 1997 .......................................................................................4
Carrier Jet Operations 5
Runway Use Report January 1997 .......................................................................................5
Nighttime - All Operations 6
Runway Use Report January 1997 .........................................................:.............................6
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 7
Runway Use Report January 1997 .......................................................................................7
Carrier Jet Operations by Type 8
Aircraft Identifier and Description Table 9
Runway Use Day/Night Periods - All Operations 10
Daytime Hours ...................................................................................................................10
Community Overflight Analysis 11
Carrier Jet Operations - All Hours ..................................................................................... l l
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (I Ipm - 6 am) .............................................................1 1
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
I* Flight Track Base Map 21
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 22
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997 ...............................................................................22
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 23
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997 ...............................................................................23
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 24
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997 .............................................................................. 24
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 25
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997 .............................................................................. 25
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 26
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997 .............................................................................. 26
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 27
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A) 28
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Operations and Complaint Summarv
January 1997
E
Operations Summary - All Aircraft
Note.-.ARTS data missing ft,r 4.2 da s
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use
04 61 0.49c 16 0.1 ?c
22 .14 0.19c 324 2.09c
11 4758 29.49c 4931 31.2%
29 11370 70.1 c1c 10562 66.717c
MSP January Fleet Mix Percentage
Scheduled Scheduled ANOMS ANOMS
Stage 1996 1997 Count 1996 Count 1997
Stage 2 49.2% 43.1% 5 f.2% 46.4%
Stage 3 50.8% 56.9% 48.8% 53.6%
Airport January Complaint Summary
•
Airport 1996 1997
MSP 411 593
Airlake 1 0
Anoka 1 0
Crystal 0 l
Flying Cloud I 1
Lake Elmo 0 0
St. Paul 0 0
Misc. 1 0
TOTAL 415 595
January Operations Summary - Airport Directors Office
r?
1996 1997
Air Carrier 747 770
Commuter 295 310
G.A. 121 129
Military 7 7
Air Freight 41 45
Charter 23 24
TOTAL 1234 1285
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Pa?,.e 1
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
January 1997
Complaint Summary by City
City Arrival Departure Total Percentage
Bloomington 0 7 7 1.29c
Burnsville 0 2 2 0.4%
Eagan 78 4 82 14.517c
Eden Prairie 0 7 7 t .2%
Edina 0 1 1 0.2%
Inver Grove Heights 14 189 203 36.0%
Mendota Heights 13 9 22 3.9%
Minneapolis 44 105 149' 26.4%
Richfield 15 21 36 6.4%
St. Anthony 0 1 1 0.2%
St. Louis Park 15 33 48 8.5%
Sunfish Lake 0 6 6 1.1 %
Total 179 385 564 100%
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
Time Total Nature of Complaint Total
00:00 - 05:59 14 Excessive Noise 515
06:00 - 06:59 t0 Early/Late 46
07:00 - 11:59 88 Low Flying 2
12:00 - 15:59 53 Structural Disturbance I
16:00 - 19:59 188 Helicopter 0
20:00 - 21:59 136 Ground Noise 29
22:00 - 22:59 70 Engine Run-up 0
23:00 - 23:59 34 Frequency 0
Total 593 Total 593
•
•
Page 2 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
? 9
Available Time for Runway Use
Tower Log Reports - January 1997
All Hours
0%
53% 0%
28%
yc_?22
r
9 /
? 0
1 04
2%
5%
V 25 %
A20%
6%
s.,
04
6%
0%
0000
22
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
V 70 %
42%
%
Nighttime Hours
0%
74%
A
Page 3
T,,?,
All Operations
Runway Use Report January 997
0.1%
66.7%
0.1%
- -- ? .?
29.4 0
A
"_ _X22
c
\?_
2.0%
Runway Arrival/
Departure
Count
Percentage January
1996 Count January
1996
Percentage
04 A 61 0.4% 116 0.6%
11L A 2350 14.5% 2663 14.6%
I I R A 2408 14.9% 2802 15.4%
22 A 14 0.1% 89 0.5%
29L A 6076 37.5% 6659 36.597b
29R A 5294 32.6% 5916 32.4%
Total Arr. 16203 100% 18245 100%
04 D 16 0.1% 40 0.2%
I1L D 2323 14.7% 2780 15.5%
II R D 2608 16.5% 2865 16.1%
22 D 324 2.0% 652 3.6%
29L D .5907 37.3% 6351 35.5%
29R D 4655 29.4% 5208 29.1%
Total`.Dep. 15833 100% 17896 100%
Note: ARTS data missing jor 3.2 days
•
Pace 4 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report January 997
0.0%
W 66.9
29.1
11
0.3
C
•
2.2%
0.0%
2
E ay Ar t / Count Percentage Janua
1996 Count January
1996
Percentage
04 A 36 0.3% 39 0.3%
11L A 1588 15.0% 1811 15.1%
11R A 1497 14.1% 1853 15.4%
22 A 0 0.0% 49 0.4%
29L A 3905 36.8% 4252 35.4%
29R A 3595 33.8% 4005 33.4%
Total Arr. 10621 100% 12009 100%
04 D 2 0.0% 0 0.0%
11 L D 1434 14.1% 1733 14.6%
11R D 1711 16.8% 2078 17.5%
22 D 224 2.2% 469 4.0%
29L D 3934 38.6% 4313 36.4%
29R D 2887 28.3% 3267 27.5%
Total Dep. 10192 100% 11860 100%
Note: ARTS data missingtor 4.G aars
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa,,z 5
Nighttime - All Operations
Runway Use Report January 997
0.8%
4 % A
11
E
Runway
Dep
ture
Count
Percentage
1996 Count January
1996
Percentage
04 A 48 5.6% 25 3.2%
I I L A 85 10.0% 65 8.4%
° II R A 88 10.3% 46 5.9%
22 A 3 0.3% 33 4.3%
29L A 421 49.4% 397 51.4%
29R A 208 24.4% 207 26.8%
Total Arr. 853 100% 773 100%
04 D 3 0.8% 9 2.2%
II L D 82 20.8% 84 20.7%
I I R D 94 23.9% 110 27.0%
22 D 21 5.3% 57 14.0%
29L D 131 33.2% 85 20.9%
29R D 63 16.0% 62 15.2%
Total Dep. 394 100% 407 100%
•
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
Page 6 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
1]
•
•
Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations
Runway Use Report January 997
0.0 %
51.2%r
Runway Arrival/
Departure
Count
Percentage January
1996 Count January
1996
Percentage
04 A 29 5.4% 18 3.4%
II L A 53 9.9% 46 7.9%
II R A 40 7.4% 25 4.3%
22 A 0, 0.0% 25 4.3%
29L A 276 51.4% 298 51.4%
29R A 139 25.9% 168 29.0%
Total Arr. 537 100% 580 100%
04 D 0 0.0% 0 0.0%
11L D 38 19.3% 56 23.3%
II R D 46 23.4% 72 30.0%
22 D 12 6.1% 35 14.6%
29L D 72 36.5% 38 15.8%
29R D 29 14.7% 39 16.3%
Total Dep. 197 100% 240 100%
lv te: AK13 aala missing jur 4.z uuYN
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 7
Carrier Jet Operations by Type
January 1997
Aircraft Type Count Percentage
B707 0 0.0%
B727H 243 1.2%
B733/4/5 661 3.2%
B747 71 0.3%
B74F 44 0.2%
B757 2008 9.6%
B767 0 0.0%
BA46 0 0.0%
CL65 282 1.3%
DA 10 0 0.0%
DC 10 983 4.7%
DC87 104 0.5%
DC9H 2622 12.6%
EA30 18 0.1%
EA31 33 0.2%
EA32 2157 10.4%
FK 10 846 4.1%
L1011 53 0.2%
MD 11 7 0.0%
MD80 1031 5.0%
BA 10 9 0.0%
BA l I 5 0.0%
B727 2389 11.5%
B737 1416 6.8%
DC8 72 0.4%
DC9 5757 27.7%
FK28 2 0.0%
Total 20813 100%
IVUIe: mix (J "UM rn[JJUIK f('r Y.G UU.V3
•
53.6% Stage III
•
46.4% Stage II
•
Page 8 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Aircraft Identifier and DescriptionTable
•
is
•
Identifier ' Aircraft Description
8707 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
BAl l BRITISH AEROSPACE Ill
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
DC91L MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 HUSH KIT
EA30 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A300
EA31 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A310
EA32 AIRBUS INDUSTRIES A320
FKIO FOKKER 100
FK27 FOKKER F27 (PROP)
FK28 FOKKER F28
1-1011 LOCKHEED TRISTAR L 1011
MD 1 I MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC 1 l
MD80 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS DC9 80-SERIES
SW3 SWEARINGEN METROLINER 3
SW4 SWEARINGEN METROLINER 4
SF34 SAAB 340
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Page 9
Runway Use - Day/Night Periods - All Operations
1Nlinneapolis - St. Paul International Airport January 1997
Daytime Hours
Runway
Name Departures
Day Percentage
Use Arrivals
Day Percentage
Use Total Day
04 13 0.1% 13 0.1% 26
11L 2241 14.5% 2265 14.8% 4506
1111 2514 16.3% 2320 15.1% 4834
22 303 2.0% 11 0.1% 314
29L 5776 37.4% 5655 36.8% 11431
29R 4592 29.7% 5086 33.1% 9678
Total 15439 100% 15350 107 30789
Nighttime Hours
7Namey Departures
Night Percentage
Use Arrivals
Night Percentage
Use Total Night
04 3 0.8% 48 5.6% 51
11L 82 20.8% 85 .10.0% 167
111 94 23.9% 88 10.3% 182
22 21 5.3% 1 0.3% 24
29L 131 33.2% 421 49.4% 552
29R 63 16.0% 208 24.4% 271
Total 394 100% 853 100% 1247
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
is
Page 10 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Community Overflight Analysis
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport January 1997
r-
4
Carrier Jet Operations - all Hours
Total Percent Number of
Overflight Area Number
Arrivals Number
Departures Carrier Jet Carrier Jet Operations
Operations Operations per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 3085 6821 9906 47.690 369.6
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 36 224 260 1.390 9.7
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 0 2 2 0.0% 0.1
Highland Park
Over Eagan/ 7500 3145 10645 51.1% 397.2
Mendota Heights
Total 20813 100% 776.6
Carrier Jet Operations - Nighttime (11pm - 6 am)
Total Percent Number of
Overflight Area Number
Arrivals Number
Departures Carrier Jet
Operations Carrier Jet
Operations Operations
per 24 Hours
Over So. Minneapolis/ 93 101 194 26.4% 6.5
No. Richfield
Over So. Richfield/ 29 12 41 .5.690 1.4
Bloomington
Over St. Paul - 0 0 0 0.0% 0.0
Highland Park
Over Eagan/ 415 84 499 68.0% 16.7
Mendota Heights
Total 734 100% 24.6
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
0
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page I I
Remote N'lonitoring Site Locations
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
•
ul 7 ?
Mendota Heights
=sa??
Inver Grove Heights
?.• =tea G
^4R2
J
1
r?
•
•
Minneapolis
=S98
n' • =590 •
/ 11
47
Richfield = =#1 -8
O
9F C4
Eagan
Pave 12 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
January 1997
•
f ?
?J
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each R`IT
RMT
ID Citv Approximate Street Location Events
>05d B Events
>80d B Events
>90d B Events
> 100d B
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 1428 52 1 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 1989 990 2 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 1683 630 7 0
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1699 365 0 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 1573 865 119 2
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 1609 965 140 8
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 456 38 1 0
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 377 38 5 0
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 10 6 0 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 148 3 1 0
11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 58 0 .0 0
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 83 12 1 0
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 388 4 0 0
14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 5391 98 1 0
15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 634 46 2 0
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane 4530 2102 .14 0
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 113 16 0 0
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 206 23 0 0
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 64 0 0 0.
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 126 2 0 0
2 I Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 119 10 0 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 1725 9 0 0
23 ;Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 1535 327 108 67
24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 2769 348 36 2
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
a,.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 1 3
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
January 1997
Count of Departure :aircraft Noise Events for Each RNIT
RNIT
ID City
Y Approximate Street Location Events
>65d B Events
>80d B Events
>90d B Events
> 100d B
l ;Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 902 123 1 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 1001 301 3 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 2326 258 17 0
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 2618 1488 41 1
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 5878 2240 516 39
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street .6539 3070 1329 197
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 4042 990 114 6
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 1875 489 4 1
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 27 3 1 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 144 28 4 0
11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 87 15 0 0
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 75 31 1 0
13 :Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 1424 197 4 0
14 Eagan First Street & McKee Street 2008 517 31 1
15 :Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 1900 430 26 1
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Vilas Lane 2617 897 l 13 9
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 49 60 13 7
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 628 152 64 6
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 410 87 14 t
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 126 25 3 1
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 917 142 0 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 937 91 1 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 1563 996 138 49
24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 1007 237 46 0
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 daYs
-0
0
•
Page 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
R:`IT #1: Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. RMT #2: Fremont Ave. & 43rd St.
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/09/97 5:54:31
01/20/9713:19:49
01/04/97 13:13:06 B727
B747
B747 91.0
90.9
88.7 A
D
D
01/22/97 21:47:55 8727 88.7 D
01/28/9714:29:00 B747 88.7 D
01/31/97 8:45:22 8727 88.7 D
01/14/9712:56:49 C560 88.0 A
01/05/9716:09:04 B727 87.9 D
01/27/97 9:52:29 DC9 87.9 D
01/27/97 20:48:58 B727 87.2 D
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/15/9713:37:26 B727 95.8 D
01/03/9712:27:53 DC9 94.1 A
01/04/97 8:47:08 DC9 93.5 A
01/22/9716:34:44 B727 92.6 D
41/31/97 8:45:23 8727 90.4 D
1/04/97 7:54:55
2 0 B727 89.7 A
01/04/97 6:42:23 DC9 89.3 A
01/26/97 23:32:38 B727 89.3 A
01/27/9714:45:14 DC9 89.1 D
01/12/9619:39:31 B727 88.9 D
RMT #3: W. Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave.
Minneapolis
•
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/22/9710:07:12 B727 99.0 D
01/25/9712:24:39 B727 96.4 D
01/20/9713:19:17 EA32 95.8 D
01/21/9712:41:42 B727 95.3 A
01/03/97 21:17:42 B727 95.1 A
01/03/9710:10:06 DC9 94.9 D
01/16/97 14:00:43 B747 94.9 D
0 l/ 14/97 11:49:18 DC9 94.8 D
01/15/9713:37:00 B747 94.8 D
01/38/9711:38:26 8747 94.7 D
R.NIT #4: Oakland Ave. & 49th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level AID
01/22/9711:55:38 B727 101.4 D
01/15/9711:13:54 B727 99.4 D
01/22/9716:34:03 B727 99.1 D
01/08/97 20:19:06 B727 98.6 D
01/31/97 21:01:10 B727 98.2 D
01/22/9712:12:43 B727 :98:- 0 D
01/22/9717:36:33 B727 97.6 D
01/18/97 9:53:02 B727 96.9 D
01/03/97 9:41:04 DC9 96.4 D
01/07/97 9:36:15 B727 96.1 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Pa,e 15
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RNIT #-;: 12th Ave. & 8th St.
Minneapolis
Date Time ??/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/0-1/9719:52:31 B727 106.9 D
01/03/97 6:26:42 B727 105.2 D
01/23/97 6:46:29 B727 104.5 D
01/22/9717:01:50 DC9 104.1 D
01/22/9710:06:49 DC9 104.0 D
01/03/97 7:45:50 DC9 103.8 D
01/15/97 13:51:49 B727 103.7 D
01/04/9719:31:01. B727 103.6 D
01/11/9719:00:30 B727 103.6 D
01/22/9713:59:14 B727 103.3 D
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level
01/13/9711:48:43 8727 108.9 D
01/12/97 21:05:44 DC9 108.5 D
01/15/9711:13:31 8727 108.4 D
01/31/9718:20:59 B727 108.2 D
01/30/97 20:32:43 DC9 108.0 D
01/30/9718:28:10 DC9 107.9 D
O 1 / 16/97 9:40:15 B727 107.7 D
01/31/97 21:00:48 B727 107.5 D
01/15/9713:55:27 B727 107.2 D
01/03/97 9:24:15 B727 106.8 D
•
•
RMT #7: Wentworth Ave. & 64th St.
Richfield
Date Time
F A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
O 8727 102.5 D
01/24/97 7:12:58 8727 101.0 D
01/31/9715:49:31 B727 101.0 D
01/31/9713:40:27 B727 100.8 D
01/04/9717:40:24 B727 100.5 D
01/04/97 20:40:48 DC9 100.2 D
01/31/97 20:23:09 B727 99.7 D
01/22/97 20:18:05 B727 99.3 D
01/15/97 7:04:34 DC9 98.5 D
01/22/9716:53:30 B727 98.2 D
Minneapolis
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/15/97 7:59:13 B727 101.8 D
01/04/9713:50:32 DC9 98.2 A
01/17/9716:57:08 DC9 95.0 D
01/06/9716:53:09 DC9 93.0 D
01/04/9712:51:18 DH8 92.7 A
01/21/9712:46:05 DC9 92.6 A
01/08/9716:39:55 WW24 92.1 A
01/28/9711:28:46 DC9 90.5 D
01/15/9713:29:27 B7217 90.3 D
01/21/9712:48:44 WW24 90.3 A
,Vote: ARTS data missing for 4.2 ckgs
R`IT #6: 25th Ave. & 57th St
RMT #8: Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St.
•
Page 16 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
•
r1
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
R`IT #9: Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. RNIT #10: Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St.
St. Paul
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level AID
01/04/9713:13:33 B747 90.4 D
011/ 17/97 17:59:12 B727 86.6 A
01/21/9712:59:23 B727 86.5 A
01/04/97 6:04:04 SW4 86.3 A
01/24/97 14:27:46 DC 10 85.8 A
01/29/9716:49:56 SW4 85.1 D
01/30/9717:05:28 BE02 83.0 A
01/02/97 22:47:30 B727 82.5 D
01/21/97 7:25:31 C404 82.1 D
01/13/9717:34:23 DC9 81.3 A
JUNIT #11: Finn St. & Scheffer Ave.
St. Paul
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/03/9713:53:12 B74F 89.3 D
01/30/97 13:17:19 B727' 88.6 D
01/28/97 9:11:15 BA31 88.1 D
01/03/97 7:53:21 DC9 87.7 D
0 11 /28/97 9:07:31 S W 3 86.5 D
01/07/97 9:14:04 SF34. 85.4 D
01/25/9713:25:23 DC9 84.0 D
01/28/97 7:51:13 DC9 83.7 D
01/04/9713:13:20 DC9 83.4 D
01/04/9716:23:59 BA31 83.0 D
St. Paul
Date Time A/C
Type titax
Level a/D
01/04/97113:13:06 B747 94.9 D
01/03/9713:52:58 B74F 92.5 D
01/17/97 8:24:51 B73S 91.7 D
01/22/97 4:56:11 B727 90.7 D
01/21/9713:00:03 B727 90.5 A
01/14/97 5:48:50 SW4 86.2 A
01/18/97 6:09:51 SW4 86.2 A
01/07/97 8:06:24 B727 85.2 D
01/30/97 7:28:37 DC9 85.2 D
01/19/9711:55:31 DC9 84.5 D
RTNIT #12: Alton St. & Rockwood Ave.
St. Paul
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/17/9717:05:06 B727 97.7 D
01/13/9712:33:48 8727 93.5 A
01/05/97 22:28:55 BA31 87.3 D
01/16/9711:11:44 BE80 86.4 A
01/28/97 9:27:18 DC9 85.8 D
0 l / 13/97 18:25:42 DC9 84.7 D
01/25/9711:27:29 DH8 84.7 D
01/27/47 9:28:34 LR31 84.7 D
01/29/97 9:29:38 DC9 84.6 D
01/17/97 9:24:09 DC9 84.5 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 1.2 days
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Pa,,e 17
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RNI"r #13: Southeast End of Mohican Court
`lendota Heights
Date Time A/C
Type Max .
Level A/D
01/23/97 20:51:53 =C9 94.6 D
01/30/97 22:54:29 B727 92.3 D
01/14/9715:33:32 DC9 91.1 D
01/08/97 9:07:16 B727 90.8 D
01/30/97 20:08:39 8727 88.7 A
01/23/97 22:54:44 B727 88.2 D
01/23/97 9:21:-48 B727 87.4 D
01/04/97 6X26:05 B727 87.2 D
01/21/9713:-4-4:48 DC9 87.1 D
01/07/9717:-45:56 DC9 87.0 D
Eagan
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level -/D
01/04/9712:37:26 8727 100.5 D
01/04/9716:37:16 B727 96.8 D
01/04/97 6:45:50 B727 96.2 D
01/08/97 8:30:55 B727 95.5 D
01/03/9718:55:25 B727 95.2 D
01/23/9717:24:15 B727 95.0 D
01/04/97 8:24:34 B727 94.8 D
01/08/9716:27:15 B727 94.5 D
01/21/97 9:08:43 B727 94.2 D
01/04/9719:20:51 B727 94.0 A
•
RNIT #15: Cullon St. & Lexington Ave.
Nlendota Heights
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/10/97 10:31:27 B727 100.3 D
01/10/97 10:50:13 B727 99.1 D
01/30/97 9:35:44 EA32 97.2 D
01/18/97 21:01:24 B727 96.0 D
01/21/9710:13:'_0 B727 95.8 D
01/08/97 9:06:53 B727 95.2 D
01/24/97 5:05:15 B727 94.1 D
01/04/9719:21:36 8727 93.8 A
01/08/9710:14:35 DC9 93.7 D
01/21/9713:44:34 DC9 93.3 D
Eagan
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/21/97 9:08:32 B727 103.0 D
01/04/97 7:57:26 DC9 102.1 D
01/04/97 9:19:44 B727 101.9 D
01/04/9716:15:51 8727 101.7 D
01/08/9715:59:55 B727 101.6 D
01/15/979:49:20 8727 101.6 D
01/04/97 7:58:46 B727 100.4 D
01/15/97 9:29:33 BA31 100.2 D
01/08/97 13:41:48 DC9 100.1 D
01/04/9710:00:07 B727 100.0 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 ciavs
R.XIT #14: 1st St. & McKee St.
RMT #16: Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane
W
Page 18 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
U
•
I?
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RMT #17: 84th St. & 4th Ave. R`IT #18: 75th St. & 17th Ave.
Bloomington
D A/C
Type Max
Level 4
01/288:09:55
=C9
98.4 E)
01/28/97 8:55:45 DC9 98.2 D
01/28/9710:23:32 DC9 96.5 D
01/28/97 9:11:01 B73S 95.2 D
01/30/9713:30:22 DC9 93.2 D
01/28/9710:30:02 DC9 93.2 D
01/28/97 8:03:51 DC9 92.1 D
01/20/9713:57:12 B727 92.0 D
01/18/9714:21:42 B747 91.7 D
01/13/97 6:19:47 B727 90.6 D
R:ti1T #19: 16th Ave. & 84th St.
Bloomington
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/19/97 7:31:57 B727 102.1 D
01125/9717:41:42 B727 96.8 D
01/20/9714:02:28 B727 96.4 D
01/19/97 6:23:22 B727 96.1 D
01/25/9717:50:05 B727 95.6 D
01/31/97 22:45:47 B727 95.5 D
01/12/9710:45:37 DC9 94.1 D
01/25/9719:39:52 B727 92.7 D
01/25/9719:46:39 8727 92.3 D
01/13/97 22:49:57 B727 92.1 D
Richfield
Date Time VC
Type Max
Level
AID
01/25/97 21:1125 8727 103.5 D
01/20/9713:57:01 B727 101.5 D
01/18/97 14:21:24 B747 101.0 D
01112/9710:49:40 B727 100.7 D
01/19/97 7:00:29 8727 100.6 D
01/20/9716:01:08 B727 100.1 D
01/25/97 22:14:54 B727 99.6 D
01/19/97 6:07:03 B727 99.3 D
01/18/97 7:17:42 B727 99.1 D
01/12/978 :50:33 B727 98.8 D
RINIT #20: 75th St. & 3rd Ave.
Richfield
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/25/97 21:11:43 B727 101.5 D
01/19/97 6:07:26 B727 95.5 D
01/12/9710:50:03 B727 92.6 D
01/19/97 6:47:37 8727 90.4 D
01/23/97 7:17:59 LR35 88.7 A
01/25/97 21:33:11 MD80 88.5 D
01/10/97 8:52:59 DC8S 88.3 D
01/27/9713:07:58 DC9 88.3 D
01/05/97 12:29:19 DC 10 87.9 D
01/25/97 22:06:03 DC 10 87.7 D
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 daYs
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Pace 19
Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events Identified
RNIT #21: Barbara Ave. & 67th St.
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level AID
01/08/97 8:41:13 B727 89.5 D
01/03/97 21:03:27 DC9 89.3 D
01/23/97 9:27:57 8727 89.0 D
01/18/9714:44:47 B727 88.9 D
01/20/9718:49:26 B727 88.8 D
01/26/9713:46:07 B727 88.6 D
01/04/9710:20:09 8727 88.5 D
01/15/97 8:01:20 SW3 88.5 D
01/20/9717:21:05 DC9 88,3 D
01/26/9714:09:13 B727 787.3 D
Inver Grove Heights
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level
A/D
01 / 10/97 10:12:25 DC9 88.7 D
01/29/97 8:32:14 B727 88.2 D
01/08/9716:01:02 B727 87.9 D
01/08/97 8:31:44 B727 86.8 D
01/18/9714:53:11 B727 86.8 D
01/23/9716:19:17 B727 86.7 D
01/23/97 20:29:12 B727 86.7 D
01/03/97 20:52:34 B727 86.6 D
01/23/9716:56:24 B727 86.6 D
01/18/97 20:26:03 B7217 86.4 D
r?
•
R.MT #23: End of Kenndon Ave.
Mendota Heights
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/03/9711:34:16 DC9 103.0 D
01/02/97 21:00:30 B727 102.5 A
01/03/9715:00:30 DC9 102.1 D
01/02/97 22:00:30 DC9 102.0 D
01/05/9712:00:30 B727 101.9 A
0 l /07/97 5:00:30 DC9 101.8 A
01/07/97 7:00:30 DC9 101.8 D
01/03/9710:00:30 DC9 101.7 A
01/03/97 7:00:30 B737 101.6 D
01/08/97 7:00:30 B737 101.6 D
Eagan
Date Time A/C
Type Max
Level A/D
01/12/9714:49:42 B727 101.0 A
01/14/9710:19:06 B727 100.2 A
01/05/97 9:36:10 DC9 98.7 A
01/02/9719:26:14 DC9 98.3 A
01/15/9710:30:05 8727 97.6 D
01/12/9718:08:14 13727 .95.3 A
01/05/97 8:38:49 B727 95.2 A
01 / l 2/97 3:42:02 8727 94.5 A
01/03/9711:48:32 DC9 92.3 D
12/31/9618:04:28 8727 90.6 'A
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
RNIT #22: Anne Marie Trail
RMT #24: Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln.
(9.
Paee 20 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Flight Track Base lvIap
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System
dr J \
? 0 .,
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 21
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997
January 01 to 06, 1997
1967 Carrier Jet Arrivals
January 01 to 06, 1997 Nighttime
103 Carrier Jet Nighttime Arrivals
•
1885 Carrier Jet Departures
:c
21
i
D
42 Carrier Jet Nighttime Departures
•
Page 22
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring Systems Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997
January 07 to 12, 1997 January 07 to 12, 1997 Nighttime
1787 Carrier Jet Arrivals
•
1616 Carrier Jet Departures
•
90 Carrier Jet Nighttime Arrivals,
25 Carrier Jet Nighttime Departures
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 23
Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997
January 13 to 18, 1997
January 13 to 18, 1997 Nighttime
s
2030 Carrier Jet Arrivals
102 Carrier Jet Nighttime Arrivals
•
1975 Carrier Jet Departures
a
?; o w v
S;
L?
t ?
e
,p
31 Carrier Jet Nighttime Departures
•
Page 24 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
.=airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997
January 19 to 24, 1997 January 19 to 24, 1997 Nighttime
_ e
? 0
2007 Carrier Jet Arrivals
199 Carrier Jet Departures
O
108 Carrier Jet Nighttime Arrivals
t V i,I
?.
i
\
63 Carrier Jet Nighttime Departures
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
page 25
Airport Noise and Operations NIonitoring System Flight Tracks
Carrier Jet Operations - January 1997
so
January 25 to 31, 1997
2830 Carrier Jet Arrivals
2721 Carrier Jet Departures
January 25 to 31, 1997 Nighttime
i
1 ! //
,
\ -1
134 Carrier Jet Nighttime Arrivals
u
O v'?;4 0 \ n
a
G
b
c ,
v,
36 Carrier Jet Nighttime Departures
Page 26 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
is
Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events - Aircraft Ldn dB(A)
January 01 to January 31, 1997
Noise Monitor. Locations
•
•
?J
Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12
1 i7.9 57.8 61.9 67.2 74.5 79.2 67.0 66.1 53.1 63.2 55.6 63.0
J 52.3 44.4 57.5 63.4 71.8 77.8 65.6 52.9 53.5 -51.4 45.8 52.0
3 60.4 60.7 67.3 68.1 76.7 75.9 67.7 65.0 44.9 58.8 54.2 50.0
4 63.2 61.6 67.4 67.3 77.2 77.1 69.8 6.1.3 51.7 55.2 45.8 48.9
5 59.4 59.3 63.1 64.6 73.4 75.9 67.7 57.0 43.4 50.1 57.9 56.9
6 56.2 52.3 57.6 60.5 71.3 75.1 66.5 60.2 46.2 40.2 47.7 48.4
7 58.1 44.7 57.5 59.7 67.2 71.6 61.3 57.4 45.0 51.7 44.7 50.1
8 55.4 49.0 62.1 63.5 71.8 74.6 61.9 57.6 40'.1 57.9 47.3 58.6
9 61.0 45.1 60.8 56.3 67.6 63.3 * 51.8 43.0 46.5 44.1 47.1
10 54.3 48.0 57.0 60.5 70.7 75.9 66.5 59.0 41.0 44.2 49.8 52.2
11 54.8 48.2 55.0 60.0 72.0 74.3 68.5 55.6 44.1 46.9 50.9 48.7
12 56.3 54.9 60.5 60.7 71.6 76.1 66.8 52.0 42.8 46.7 41.3 47.4
13 54.3 45.2 55.6 58.5 68.2 73.8 64.2 49.1 48.1 48.0 47.3 53.7
14 52.2 43.2 57.9 59.0 65.3 72.5 60.0 48..1 44.2 54.5 45.2 53.3
15 58.8 54.5 63.9 64.2 72.9 76.5 67.2 61.5 41.8 52.7 54.1 49.4
16 55.1 52.9 56.2 56.5 69.3 74.4 66.5 53.5 51.2 45.0 46.5 48.9
17 56.5 52.6 57.9 62.1 73.0 75.8 71.3 57.6 49.1 48.9 43.4 56.2
18 53.6 50.0 60.6 61.8 70.6 71.7 62.7 53.4 42.6 54.7 49.1 49.4
19 54.9 47.9 58.2 59.2 69.1 75.6 63.7 55.8 51.7 55.0 49.5 57.6
20 56.4 48.2 64.7 64.6 73.1 76.1 66.3 59.2 46.7 56.5 53.1 48.3
21 57.4 53.5 64.1 65.3 67.9 71.6 52.3 59.0 49.4 57.7 53.4
22 58.8 57.0 65.2 69.6 75.6 80.8 70.4 62.0 40.6 49.3 47.3
23 59.3 55.6 63.3 65.4 73.6 72.9 63.8 58.8 48.5 58.8 52.9 50.4
24 55.5 50.0 61.4 62.7 71.3 75.9 68.5 63.2 50.1 51.0 53.8 42.6
25 56.7 52.1 59.5 59.8 72.6 77.5 70.0 51.4 44.3 48.7 47.4 50.3
26 57.2 61.3 62.7 66.3 69.5 71.9 62.9 58.6 46.3 53.8 49.7 48.5
27 .54.0 52.4 55.7 59.4 71.6 74.8 66.2 56.3 53.4 54.4 46.0 48.2
28 55.3 52.6 60.3 62.4 70.6 76.2 * 55.5 45.3 48.9 50.0 48.9
29 53.1 47.3 62.7 60.8 68.8 68.6 56.3 46.0 43.8 48.7 48.5 47.4
30 54.9 49.1 62.0 62.8 73.3 75.8 64.3 55.2 47.6 60.5 52.0 60.7
31 56.8 53.4 62.3 64.9 76.0 78.5 70.8 62.8 46.7 55.1 49.5 54.6
Mo. Ldn 57.1 54.7 63.0 63.7 72.4 75.7 66.7 59.4 45.8 54.9 50.6 54.2
Note: ARTS data missing for 4.2 days
* Less than twentY-f nir hours of dhtta arollahle
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 27
Anal Nsis of Aircraft Noise Events -aircraft Ldn dB(A)
January 01 to January 31, 1997
Noise Monitor Locations
Date #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24
1 61.7 64.5 66.1 67.2 58.6 66.2 65.9 53.2 52.2 58.7 69.6 67.3
2 51.7 59.4 58.4 65.7 49.7 56.4 52.9 49.6 42.6 50.4 75.5 66.1
3 62.1 68.7 64.7 72.8 57.7 62.9 51.3 58.6 61.7 62.1 76.3 62.5
4. 62.1 70.9 65.3 73.9 65.7 66.2 59.2 59.3 57.8 58.7 75.5 68.6
5 56.6 62.8 51.8 68.7 55.2 54.7 53.3 58.7 53.4 58.6 73.6 70.2
6 41.1 59.2 55.6 68.0 51.0 53.3 52.1 47.6 45.1 49.4 71.8 67.3
7 54.4 62.3 60.9 67.9 43.4 53.2 43.0 52.2 49.3 54.4 71.7 53.8
8 61.8 66.2 66.7 69.4 55.2 55.6 43.3 * 59:8 60.0 73.0 65.5
9 58.1 62.5 * 65.9 48.0 41.9 43.0 50.0 56.5 57.6 71.1 63.3
10 59.0 61.9 * 67.4 52.9 54.1 46.6 55.2 53.1 55.7 * 69.8
11 65.4 61.8 50.0 69.4 52.6 52.0 41.6 53.9 63.6 56.5 67.4 68.2
12 49.0 61.6 60.0 68.7 60.6 68.1 63.8 54.9 44.5 55.1 71.6 70.1
13 45.4 60.0 58.8 67.3 65.8 69.0 66.1 54.0 43.4 50.8 68.2 69.3
14 50.0 59.0 58.4 * 50.8 59.5 58.8 49.0 47.2 51.6 68.8 67.6
15 56.7 65.3 60.4 69.9 50.6 52.7 42.2 61.7 56.0 58.8 67.3 x
16 46.1 63.0 64.4 69.9 46.1 47.4 44.1 51.8 46.8 56.0 67.3 61.6
17 56.7 65.3 63.0 * 54.6 47.2 42.0 50.5 49.9 56.7 73.4 62.3
18 60.0 65.1 63.4 69.9 64.0 71.4 66.6 53.2 59.0 60.9 72.9 62.7
19 52.0 64.1 62.0 68.8 61.3 73.2 66.4 67.8 47.4 57.3 73.0 62.7
20 60.2 62.7 62.5 65.5 62.0 67.1 64.0 52.1 * 55.3 68.6 64.1
21 61.8 63.5 65.4 67.3 47.9 55.9 41.0 50.0 57.8 55.4 59.6
22 46.8 63.5 53.1 68.1 52.9 53.5 43.6 57.5 41.0 57.9 63.0
23 65.1 68.4 67.2 69.4 50.4 64.7 48.1 56.3 61.5 61.5 73.4 65.1
24 59.1 59.8 63.6 64.8 41.9 * 40.5 50.5 54.3 54.9 65.3 57.2
25 41.6 61.0 46.4 68.1 59.5 72.6 64.3 63.6 54.4 * 55.0 59.1
26 60.9 69.3 62.5 70.7 49.0 55.2 48.6 51.2 61.9 61.5 71.1 65.2
27 41.6 60.6 50.0 66.9 49.2 49.8 45.9 50.5 50.4 50.2 57.6 58.3
28 53.4 64.9 56.2 68.0 46.9 56.8 47.8 55.5 55.2 56.6 66.4 61.6
29 58.8 63.7 61.6 68.4 59.9 60.2 45.7 40.2 -57.4 58.1 69.5 61.3
30 64.9 65.0 66.7 68.8 63.6 54.3 51.5 51.2 60.1 58.9 72.5 61.4
31 51.2 65.9 56.8 70.2 64.6 60.9 65.7 57.5 51.6 60.9 62.8 63.0
717)L7 58.4 66.7 63.7 69.0 58.7 64.8 60.0 57.4 56.0 57.8 72.7 67.3
0
11
0
,vote: ARTS data missing for 3.1 ctars
Less than nvenn -(our hours ojdaw available
Page 28 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
•
m
7
O
m
C
• a
E
0
U
0
a
Q
I i I .3 w •3 ? i I
I t 3 r 3 I
O tJU
U
B C I C
C
'O I 'O I C
I N NI 'O
N 'O
N 'O 'p
N 'D I'O 'O I'6 I v
N!dIN `) NIN C C
p. C
N O. 'O
N 'O
N 00
'6 N
`
N
N
a.
N U)'.
3i 3 31 E N
3 N
3 N
3 N
3 Ni N N N, N! N
31313 3;313 w
N ._
E N U. N ._
E N U N
3 d
3 a
)
I (D 3 0)
3
N
3
N' N N. E
Ni C C. O
n'. Q. QI U N
C
I Q N
C
j Q N
C
Q N
C
Q NIN N N NIN
CICIC CI C!C
IQiQ!Q QiQIQ E -Y
O a) N
U a ?I E Y
O a) N
U m w N
C
Q N
C
Q co
N C
Q N
C
IQ N
C
Q
3
(E
I
m 3 3 L
>
= v a
0
0
3
N
'
`?° 3
°
o
I I!
N v
x c
o w
m 3
0
`° c 3
c L
X N
O N
.C
- 7
O Y C U
N I (m
C'C C!C:T T U Co N C N
•C N E Co N N
Ca.0 p
C C
Y w m
uj C
C
N
E Lp -
p > F' N
m C N N a YO
N 'O L_ 9!.S? 1 O i O r N! I
i:E N >, O U O
C
Q O C C
CO O
N O
' 3 ° O
16 _
CO
co L p U) 0
C
.
IC
7
O
C
L
m' f6, (6 m
3!715;=! Irr
' >
N
N
C -. >
3
L L L
7
40)
N
NI7 C
O
O O
N
N
C U ca
-p O l6 Q N
a y C
c
IN 0
75
O
m
3 1N•6
N
N
co
3
01-0 I
N
N I N' N I
I CI SIC iC ?I pl
m.
j
I
m N m
O_ C= a) =
N
N N
3 N 'C Q
N
C
'
m
I? N O I
CSC
R
*
NI
I C
I
'
L Co
t
G
N m
3 3=- C H
X
N 7 N jy C
I C p
..- U IS j
I C N
m ! p
I m
I
N VIM 'a :'O
I C- C. C C t p I p
3I 7' 7' ?'N! N'
m L I
C
O N N
N 7 N U
I
N C aj
N
a) a) ca .?
'O
C
0
3
N
0
N 0.
m
N C I C
jQ Co C
C
C
:3
O
C N
L
•
I
N C O a '? N
3
7
j
I'C
1C J i
C
'
I C
p
L
O: 0 0 0! C C
(NNNN
N O L N
mL3cio I
EL L J
-
O
N
V1
p
O C
-- N
I
I
O
NI O .
..
X?
J Y
Z om?ocO
C
L
N
o i Z
7o
N 0
lm
1.0r
3
T 0
m
N Mi
55!cic
0 01717
OI 0
I
?'mOm
'm
0 C a
X
NccO?
D
m 4
3
O
cc
a) .2
I
N
13'ml?a?
O CIO 7
3
0
N
0
3
d
a
7
1 0 0 -p E N O
N N
a
N 0
m p
3 N
L 1
a.al.0 -0 N.O
N
ml m mI m
C E E T
C I >
,
p
` m
? N 7
a
m
C?
m
a a) a p
3 m
m w m 1
a'
m O
U
Co
a
?p
p
a)
N i? r U 0 0 o w
I N N
a
) w
c 3 I
.
3 13 31 3 ?0 I.0 N
v Q co v
N N S )n Co -r 3
O 7
e 3 a) 13 r
O O m 3
0 °, E
0
U N O N
N
fY .._-• C a
N ja 1 7
I O p
la !!
C
N
Y
m O
C
Y O, O 0 0
C C C I C N N I
YIY IY IY'E: EI `
T ? C
a co O I
T N d
-- O .L.. N
Y
>.
Y I Y a o
Z
Y l w.
O
i
N 1 N N ... . a 0 7
ca
o cam. Y 5
L
I m O).
c
'0 N
C
E
al
0
O O O 0 01 p I
I It IL
E
'O co
N N >
1
=
m
U N U) N
?' 3
0
p.
a
6 p
O m I O 1
a N V
'
'
0
I
O •O
a c
i 1 0 N N N
m
U' SIN N L C
75
r O 3
IN CI
ca j
0
O LI -p .X..
?
C V Z
N
C •p 'O 'O I'p N
dI a)I? ?I.Ct
C! C C C h
3
O N a)1
a) -
N N m C
L ,p '` N
a)
E 'O L
d
C N
=I
L O
O N O,
.N.. 3IY C I
C C Q! a
NI
C m Y
N a3
C
o
o; C 17 .0 O N N Y N.
U! IC1 ?- w co _ EI 7 41
O axil ? ?I
Q - >m C
m m
co :
mimjm mI=,=1
l?;?l?! Q C
N U ay y o
o .- c a... LI .`
m N O C
U > E m ,? p ?I
m ml m LIm N O
? co w QI m
? d
5
1
I
I
I 1
I
?
I
I I I1 I i
I I i I j I I
I I
;
I I
j
O ?
>
i
I Ni
0! !
! I 01 O
m! m
mi vl
C
N Oi cc
N U
Oi m I >I
Q I
O CI ;
Q. Q
QI
Q. ?I
I
co
'C
O
>
Q)
L
>I -INI L
IQ O >1 ~I >
1
! ?'
i NI
LI L
tnI
w ?1
i 01
C 0-
O
c
N
co
M c mi aQ, C1 a
IN NIr1 m' U)
>
co >!
Qi -I
?
N1
y1 ?
?I ?
?i
fM?D
f?D p)
Ci
i M
CIQIQL"
O
r C
V I
c
m E
ollLc cO O
ol
Iv
j
to N
cn
¢I IT
a'
cl i
I
Q m: c
N
f
E a
o l
E
OI ?
ai
v
>
clm 0I y
(D
N TIQ ),...I
EIrj ai
>
Q p (1 ?I
a ml
N
! 7
l6 co
I
= M i
tr 10 I Zip
m O r
I I
I C
?
Ni m C
m.
C
Q I
2 'O
N
N U L
O Q'
m 0
+:IYI N.-:' T
M
>10!01 N
O
0 N
C
C V
I
LO' DI J
N
Y
E, N
m: Y' .
0 E p v 2 O I
i
W Cl) 0
21N-•'6iN' NI CO
U) O
RI DI
UI m
'
z O' co 0 1
nlcglCOlcAIUlcci ?I o w ?. mi u)I zl U
0 1
of C C
m' m C
ca C
m? C
m) C!
ml CI C'C Ci C; C! C CI
mimim mIcocc m m C
m C
m C'. C'
m! ml CI C
m m
N 'L ao MI (3)i M-,AIV' i"Tjv ice)
I N M h I.-
I M
O
CO N N N N N N M
0 i
0
m
.O
LL
0
c
N
J
a
E
O
00
Q.
Q
i
?
i 'I I !
?
16 116 '6
20
j I I
I
a
' '_ !
.
C S
L) z :
Y
i
p m
I a I N
m N N
O i
.6
O +
!m I
I L)
N iN
N
N
m
U Q m c
`O
6 iw R p (` I w N a I I I I j
I
J N •° `
,
F
W OW E0) ?
tm,
`-o 0)
` 1
!
I
z c I
U rL d W
CL W
V CL
w
D
p 1
i•o E
c'
lo o".2 c 0 U
c
0 0
$ Cg
a
y
?
a
I
I
W
w
IN O CO Iy Nis
? E
I
= CI ca
1' 0
°
a ,L
U a
I I ! -.c
, a, a U' aI a
la IL =
t =
NN
la
a I•c =
N
a L
NI
la C a
N C
i a
N •0!
alala a a
m: m. m, ml m, mI a!
m. a
d
m •°
`
> m l
m
m yl 2: `.` ?j m
iml mi m:m ° co'm m
3
3
L) m
3 C
C
im ai- C
;°
C .
a1
CI
N m
E
N C
y f0 1
NI mI N, N: m1 NI
N
3
N
N
N
y
N m
I
NI
7
d 3
C N U
d tJ
p C i
I
3i 3!
N`!
IC CI C;O m I C! a IN C._N C
im p1w p m
m 00 m
10 pI H
C s
O C I
i
' v
,
i
I
CI CIC C Ci GI C' m
Q .
ty U .
i Q !Q Qi QiU U) U` !QI Q tIY NIm N Iw N im N Q U Q D Q.Q IQI Q Q' Q Q
I? it = c c
O O
I Iy 3 m m
f6 t m dI I >
.
y
im
`
y
I
a)
I
' 93
I N
cc
4z m
(D
JL ca I
CC T
o
'
I m =
L
IQ D.
Cc =
!
'
0
I 2 c6
I` O N l9
C m 2 dj C : 7
CT
>? C
Ca
. N
d m
..N.• O m.N IN N 3 aO
C I C
U
O
(n m L I.O
`
'2
C
) C
O
CI
O I
C
O
N C
m
y ,
C CI G. C Y .L !C, a
O >,I O O O I O. (D
0
i?
_
.-.
I
ca
° ° NIA S Ic m I? i v EIS m
a; C
:3
V
?
m
=
I ial
I =
m
=
a
N
I
c d Q
d
E 1
I y c 310 m m c
:75 ?.2
l C
N
Id = y
`0 0
0 LiQ 1
S O
V)
J ra CIm I?i !d ?n Na.=1? pIN I C 0
C I CI C -
.
N a
dU ? :
;
IC CI ;= Im C
1
7 .0 E dl- N 191 L C'G? °o a
N
01 a a s N m m m
L
L 'a >+ ,.a Ia a
ta ?a
C C C m c'. c
y
C O 10 C_g O
C i
0 CI•n 7
C m m. iC,C ! a C cl yla o N O
O
'
N
a 7
O =
O 7
O
I
•
.+ 3
y
I= = 3 im ;L = O
O •CIO N'O IOI
IN: N
'N
N
N
6
Ia
c
?
y
p d,... 1 i
O m N
O C aico = m U:mL NIN
N N
I N
O
_ N /0
O m
!
, N
C
Im
m
.51
d O. N C m
=
L) W N =to o
8f
N C'.;
N
m
L
a
'
I
o
ol
o
-
C
a, m '
!o,d o N L > ?. o
o ?
m
d
N
d j
° =
L
N
0 O
N
. G
I m
L
.
.+
m
! (1)
CIN =- m
O'c mi Nl•C6 I= C.y m >.
' L
! m!
LI
N!
L
N m
I
lw
C f6
L L
.
.
. C6
-0
•
NItO'r m
ml mi E
Im
IG =
Ia I3 m °'O °=ia a'> 3 N LIN cl? c' 3
N L OIU cN
O' t 31
O, 3i
01 o 0
0 0
l o 3 "
= C
C
m m
lo ?Io ° o £'H cIN l3o, L
O =
Im IO.L
!N
N O.._ ylm.0 1`7 = U n 1N =m N C
m 0.
IN LI
y
y
Is d'
L C CI C
C a
i d >? O C
I C I C'm C = a C y Ci m
t
C
.
` I O
iL y
O m = C N.
! G l6 "' OI
d m
IC
CL)
116 > @C ITILIN Cco
im m.C E U m -.
31
L 0i 01 0 O
d m
y a C 191
N T
2 ='.O .O «;
•
0 p.?O; cO .r N
aw m O
C:
l
I
y
>'
m l m
Vi
•.D ? r •m ?
C
m Im,> .
IU >' ?I
l mj NI m tp1 O C
C N
y ld tO
(1) Cl) O
°?
;•Cp 7i47
C
O,.r
=C
:
O
o IL
.= 8
d
C CD LIO mltly Im O :C C6 C,!
N N -'? 75: 1L) ?I? ?? c m? m mcl Cca
1
mI
mI I
m
°
i? Z .L..•
m 'o Ri
?c
:
.9 0
m
C
c=o °im;m m o ,m N1C6I
m L:L
ml
U tI ?iQ -:g 3 ?:
? °c ?IQ ?;?;? voii2 t'Q a L°>' ? ?l ? ° IH > 5 N d °;?:? ? ?ItA N H a.?
1 is I I !
o I I ! ' c1C
U1Oj
I
I
Ic O
>
>
O 5
>
I I Q> alc
I
< CD
a; ,
Y,
I Q
L Rio; > <
N
L ! >
I
j Q'
r
Q
C4
cc a Flo
0 V r
"
I lm
L
.
Q
> j_ COI CO I I L O- CD; C COI
lo
r
°>
I
co co
r
i
'C-•
r
N );
U
m
O
CL
I D, CO co
1-01 co
c
N
N ?.
m
Q.
LI to
1
LO Q
o:l rn ?
r U
?
v, ! ' a
i ml C')
!
X1
' CI)
ED I CO !
N:L p 00
I r (O r
N
6
6
00
.a.1
co
tt N
CO 1
co
nl -
F- o
8
1
a' 6. cO.rl >: r
,
C6 EI CO > n tn. O m
> 6 co mIL: y' E!c0, m
m
Q
. m
d Q
c7 L 3 QI N,? N' N
10 I
y
OI ?I • Y
M
> Q
A
L N
L 0. L'
Ei NI O fO.:, E
8
C C6 _:
?I
a
ti cnI2 C T, = c0 r! 0I O C N j ? Yia1 QI ?; E'CU' N
cis >INI N. 0• G " -1
6 (D
I CA
- Q r z >
> Ci N' m Ott' Q
EI
Ni L
f C
?, ?I?i N; 7 C'o ?'
pi >
N
m O mi
ca 01 R o
m m l v
o0 o
m
I 2D
7 ?? o' sic' t
mv O N, L O
'
zI Y .
:
NI
I?I?I COI n. 0,2 Z! (OI U ?I CO U -7 21r 1m- ?: _ WU: -D
a .G' Li.Ci Qi d L:LI L'
m m
0) .al n
m l m m
m .D
m L
m L
m d
1) I LiL:.O4 mLi .O, L0) i.Om .O
01 0)'' m !' m
Q)
LL m
LL :
mIm 0) I m
' LLI LL; I
LL LL L:L L I LL
L LL LL LL LL LL I I L_: L_ Ll
LL LLILL, LL
O
'
4 4
-010 O I r l
rir
rj I r r 1 N 04 N N C6 O
N C
'
N ' 4
IN!N N! NI NINI N
I ! I I
I i
« I i
I i I
i
I
I I I I
( i j I
I I
oI I ,
i! I I I I ! I
m
0
a
FROM : SUSAG ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING PHONE NO. : 612 866 0703 Feb. 27 1997 04:14PM P2
February 27, 1997
The Honorable Mayor
and
Members of the City Council
Subject. Proposed Meeting with Metropolitan Airports Commission
On Tuesday, February 25, 1997, 1 met with Jeff Hamiel, MAC Executive
Director; Nigel Finney, MAC Deputy Director; Tom Anderson, MAC General
Counsel; Steve Lindgren and Ernie Lindstrom. This was the third meeting
in a series of meetings between Richfield citizens and MAC
representatives. (The first meeting took place can December 20, 1996,
with Sandy Grieve, MAC Board Chairman. Richfield representatives were
Loren Law, Ivan Ludeman, Vern Luettinger, Bob Lindgren, Ernie Lindstrom,
Gave Lamberger, Steve Lindgren, John Hamilton, Mike Freeman and myself.
The second meeting was held January 23, 1997, with John Himle; Ernie
Lindstrom, Steve Lindgren and myself were present. Steve Lindgren,
Executive Director of the Richfield Chamber of Commerce, has made the
arrangements for these meetings.)
We discussed the various issues and the MAC and Richfield positio. <)n
these matters. It was jointly felt that it would be helpful to have a
meeting (later termed a workshop) of MAC and Richfield policy bodies and
staffs to discuss the several issues of contention and agree to agree,
disagree and/or to work toward a mutually agreeable solution. It is felt
that it would help to have all the parties on the same page as far as
understanding goes. It was suggested that Curt Johnson, Chair of the
Metropolitan Council, be asked to moderate this meeting.
It may not be possible to generate such a meeting with all 15 MAC Board
members; a second choice would be to have the six members of the MAC
Committee on Planning and Environment (chaired by John Himle) plus Board
Chairman Sandy Grieve. The suggested timing would be early April. The
month of March would be devoted to making necessary arrangements and
planning agenda and presentations.
I strongly urge you to support this approach and authorize me to represent
Richfield in working with Nigel Finney to plan this event. I apologize for
not being present at this March 3 Council Study Session; I am on vacation.
Copy. Jim Prosser
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 6
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of proposed changes in the Richfield City Code Section 400 to update the
City fire prevention regulations to the latest version of the State Fire Code.
Background:
The Minnesota State Fire Code is in the late stages of adoption as a uniform fire code
applicable throughout the State. The public hearing process may take three to six
months before final resolution of perhaps two items.
It is staffs preference to adopt both the Fire and Building codes simultaneously, since
they are companion tools for the provision and preservation of safe buildings.
Recommended Motion:
Discuss the amendments to the City Code Section 400 to adopt the latest version of the
Uniform Fire Code (1994) and stated references as the fire prevention code of the City.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The previous code was substantially reformatted to make the Uniform Fire and
Building Codes more user friendly -- common chapters are used for common topics,
common numbering format, etc. Although the substance of the code evolves
somewhat, the ease of comparing the UBC and the UFC is more efficient for all,
(designers, builders, inspectors), if using the same versions of each.
2. The issue of contention delaying the State adoption pertains to pedestrian walkways
(skyways). This issue has no immediate impact on existing or planned
developments in Richfield.
3. State law does allow a city to adopt equal to or more restrictive measures than the
State Fire Code. This adoption is appropriate for a local jurisdiction to undertake
prior to completion of the State code adoption process.
Alternative Recommendation:
Continue using the 1991 UFC and 1994 UBC and adopt the 1994 UFC at a later date,
after the State formally adopts it.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests first reading at the March 10, 1997 Council meeting, and the public
hearing and second reading on March 24, 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
James . Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
Richfield City Code 400.15
400.15. Screening mechanical equipment. Mechanical equipment and ductwork located on the
roof, exterior wall or grounds adjacent to a structure, other than a single family residence or to its
accessory buildings, shall be enclosed in a screening enclosure. The enclosure shall be designed
to provide a safety shield around such equipment and ductwork and shall conceal it from public
view and from view from nearby premises. The enclosure shall be architecturally harmonious
with the structure involved. Plans for the enclosure shall be shown on construction plans. The
requirements of this subsection shall not be applicable to window air conditioners or to stacks.
400.17. Permit fees: other provisions. Subdivision 1. General rule. It is the intent of this
section that the fees provided in appendix D are to supplant and supersede corresponding fee
requirements in any code or ordinance adopted by reference in this section as well as any fee
schedules provided in the state building code.
Subd. 2. Amendments. The fee schedules in appendix D supersede any schedules and
fees contained or included in codes or ordinances adopted by reference in this code. The city
council may waive the city's portion of building permit and plan review fees chargeable to
another political subdivision of the state if council finds that the action is appropriate by reason
of unusual circumstances unique to the particular project involved and that the public interests of
the city will be served thereby.
400.19. Numbering of houses and buildings: numbers required. Each owner and each and every
occupant of a house or commercial building in the city shall place on the front of each such
house or building, suitable house or building numbers, large enough to be read from the street
upon which said house or commercial building faces. Each house and commercial building shall
be numbered in accordance with the instructions of the building official. The building official
shall use the formula of two numbers for each 25 feet of frontage.
400.21. Fire prevention code. Sub- i-visi-e„ 1-. Adoption of fire prevention code. E?ieept as
pr-avi&4 in 844. 2 the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code, including the 49L 1994 Uniform Fire
Code, as amended, and the 13 volume national codes, volumes 1-13 of the National Fire
Protection Association (1996 edition) "942 @44ioi3 (herein referred to as the "fire prevention
code") are hereby adopted by reference as though fully set out in this subsection. Subsections
400.21 to 400.35 are the fire prevention code of the city.
0
Richfield City Code 400.23
400.23. Fire Division: duties. The fire prevention code is enforced by the fire division in the
department of public safety under the supervision and direction of the chief of the fire division
who is the enforcement officer. The officer or officers specifically in charge of the
administration of this code shall be known as the fire marshal or marshals and shall be given
authority for this purpose by the chief of the fire division. The chief of the fire division may
detail such members of the fire division as inspectors, working under the fire marshal or marshals
as shall from time to time be deemed necessary. The chief of the fire division may recommend
to the manager, the employment of technical inspectors who, when such authorization is made,
shall be selected to assist the fire marshal or marshals. In addition to the fire marshal or fire
marshals, the fire prevention code may also be enforced by the building official whenever
appropriate and after consultation with the fire marshal or marshals. A report by the fire marshal
shall be made annually and transmitted to the manager; it shall contain all proceedings under this
section, with such statistics as the chief of the fire division may wish to include therein; the chief
of the fire division shall also recommend any amendments to the code which, in his judgment,
shall be desirable.
400.25. Prohibition of storage of flammable liquids outside above around tanks, bulk storage of
liquified petroleum gases, and storage of explosives and blasting gents. The storage of the
substances defined in sections 79.501 and 82.105(e) of the fire prevention code in the manner
described therein, is prohibited within the city.
400.27. New materials, processes or occupancies which maw require permits; committee of
review. The manager, the chief of the fire division, the building official and the fire marshal
shall act as a committee to determine and specify, after giving affected persons an opportunity to
be heard, any new materials, processes or occupancies, which shall require permits, in addition to
those enumerated in the fire prevention code. The fire marshal shall post the list in a
conspicuous place in his office and distribute copies thereof to interested persons.
400.29 Permit fee. The annual fee for any permit required under the provisions of this section
are as provided in appendix D. The permit fee shall be paid to the clerk; and shall not be
prorated for any portion of a year. Permits are issued on a calendar year basis.
400.31. Establishment of fire lanes. Subdivision 1. Orders establishing fire lanes. The fire
division is authorized to order the establishment of fire lanes on public or private property as may
be necessary in order that the travel of fire equipment may not be interfered with, and that access
to fire hydrants or buildings may not be obstructed.
Subd. 2. Signs and marking of fire lanes. When a fire lane has been ordered to be
established pursuant to subdivision 1, it shall be marked by a sign bearing the words "No Parking
- Fire Lane" or a similar message. When the fire lane is on public property or a public right-of-
way, the sign or signs shall be erected by the city, and when on private property, they shall be
erected by the owner at his own expense.
0
Richfield City Code 400.3 1, Subd. 3
(Rev. 1995)
Subd. 3. Parking or otherwise obstructing prohibited. After a sign or signs have been
erected in accordance with subdivision 2, no person may park a vehicle or otherwise occupy or
obstruct the fire lane.
400.33. Other prohibited acts. Subdivision 1. Protection of fire hoses. No person may drive
any vehicle over a fire hose, except on specific orders from a member of the police or fire
divisions of the city, and then only with due caution.
Subd. 2. Parking near fire equipment. No person may park any vehicle or place any
material or other obstruction within 20 feet of the entrance to any fire station or within 10 fee of
any fire hydrant or fire cistern, or park any vehicle within 300 feet of a place where a fire
requiring fire fighting by the fire division is in progress.
400.35. Imminent hazards. Whenever the enforcement officer determines that there has been a
violation of any one or more provisions to which this section applies, and further finds (i) that by
reason of such violation it presents an imminent and serious hazard to public health, or to the
physical and mental health of the occupants therein, and (ii) that the repairs or improvements
required to remove such hazards do not appear reasonably possible within a time which will be
adequate to eliminate such hazard, the enforcement officer shall follow the procedures contained
in section 320. (Amended, Bill No. 1995-6, Sec..5)
•
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 5
Agenda March 3, 1997
Issue Statement:
Discussion of proposed changes in the Richfield City Code Section 400 to update the
City building regulations to the latest version of the State Building Code. The proposed
deletions and amendments to Section 700 are to remove provisions in the City Code
that are in conflict with the State Plumbing Code.
Background:
The Minnesota State Building Code has been adopted by Minnesota Statutes Section
16.851 as a uniform building code applicable throughout the State. From time to time,
the codes, appendices, standards and supplemental materials adopted as references
are revised.
Recommended Motion:
Discuss the amendments to the City Code stating the latest version of the State
Building Code.
Discuss the deletions and amendments that are in conflict with the State Plumbing
Code.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The Uniform State Building code has been adopted and is to be enforced throughout
the State.
2. Formal adoption in this manner with clearly stated references avoids conflict and
confusion.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Staff requests first reading at the Council meeting on March 10, 1997, and the public
hearing and second reading on March 24, 1997.
Respectfully submitted,
Jam D. Prosser
City Manager
JDP:cak
0
Richfield City Code
CHAPTER IV
BUILDING, HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION REGULATIONS
Section 400 - Building Code
400.01
400.01. Scope of chapter. The purpose of this chapter is to provide minimum standards to
safeguard life and limb, property and public welfare by regulating and controlling the design,
construction, quality of materials, location and maintenance of all buildings and structures within
the city and certain equipment specifically regulated herein.
400.03. Adoption of Minnesota State Building Code. Subdivision 1. Building Code. The
Minnesota State Building Code, one copy of which is on file in the office of the city clerk, has
been adopted by Minnesota Statutes, section 16.851 as a uniform building code applicable
throughout the state. Such code is hereby conformed as the building code of the City of
Richfield and incorporated in this chapter as completely as if set out in full.
Subd. 2. Adoption by reference. The 1995 edition of the Minnesota State Building Code,
as amended, adopts by reference certain codes, appendices, standards and supplemental
materials. The following codes, appendices, standards and supplemental materials are adopted
by reference and incorporated into this code as if fully set out at this point:
A. The Minnesota State Building Code includes the following chapters of Minnesota Rules:
0 1. 1300 Minnesota Building Code
2. 1301 Building Official Certification
3. 1302 State Building Construction Approvals
4. 1305 Adoption of the 1994 Uniform Building Code including Appendix Chapters:
a. 3. Division 1, Detention and Correctional Facilities
b. 11, Div. I & II
C. 12, Division II, Sound Transmission Control
d. 29, Minimum Plumbing Fixtures
5. 1307 Elevators and Related Devices
6. 1315 Adoption of the 1996 National Electrical Code
7. 1325 Solar Energy Systems
8. 1330 Fallout Shelters
9. 1335 Floodproofing Regulations
10. 1340 Facilities for the Handicapped
11. 1346 Adoption of the 1991 Uniform Mechanical Code
12. 1350 Manufactured Homes
13. 1360 Prefabricated Buildings
14. 1365 Snow Loads
15. 1370 Storm Shelters
16. 4715 Minnesota Plumbing Code
17. 7670 Minnesota Energy Code
B. The following optional appendix chapters of the 1994 Uniform Building Code are hereby
adopted and incorporated as part of the building code for this municipality.
1. Appendix Chapter 31, Division I1- Membrane Structures
2. Appendix Chapter 33 - Excavating & grading
C. The following optional chapters of Minnesota Rule are hereby adopted and incorporated
as part of the building code for this municipality.
MN Rule 1306 Special Fire Protection Systems with Option 8
Subd. 3. Building Official. For purposes of this chapter, the term "building official"
means the chief building official of the inspection division of the department of public safety.
Subd. 4. Permits required. It is unlawful for any person to perform work regulated by
this section without first having obtained a permit to do so, and paid all applicable fees contained
in appendix D.
400.05. Plumbing. Subdivision 1. Administrative authority. For purposes of this chapter, the
term "administrative authority" as used in the Minnesota Plumbing Code herein adopted means
the building official.
Subd. 2. Permits required. It is unlawful for any person to perform work regulated by
this section without first having obtained a permit to do so, and paid all applicable fees contained
in appendix D. Permits required by this section may be issued only to persons duly licensed by
the State of Minnesota.
Subd. 3. Fees. There is no fee for licensing of plumbers in the city. No person may
practice or engage in the business or trade of plumbing within the city unless such person is the
holder of a valid and current license from the State of Minnesota.
0
Richfield City Code 400.05, Subd. 4
Subd. 4. Water softening devices. No person may engage in the business of installing,
leasing or servicing water softening devices which shall be connected with, or used in connection
with, any water pipe or main connected with the water supply systems of the city, or any private
domestic water supply therein without being licensed to do so by the State of Minnesota.
Installations and connections of water softening devices to any pipe or main connected with the
city water system shall comply with applicable provisions of the Minnesota plumbing code.
400.07. License and permit fees, heating and ventilating, air conditioning and refrigeration. No
person may engage in the business of heating, cooling, ventilating or refrigeration construction or
installation unless licensed to do so by the city after demonstration of competency and submittal
of certificate of insurance and a bond in the amount of $1,000. The annual license fee for heating
and ventilating, cooling and refrigeration construction and installation is provided in appendix D.
No person may perform any heating, cooling, air conditioning or refrigeration work regulated by
this code without first having obtained a permit to do so and paid the fees set by appendix D.
400.09 State electrical license. Subdivision 1. Unless otherwise provided by state law, no
person may practice or engage in the business or trade of electrical construction and installation
within the city unless such person is the holder of a valid and current electrical contractor's
license from the state. Unless otherwise provided by state law, no person may perform any
electrical work regulated by this code without first having obtained a permit to do so. The fees
required for permits issued pursuant to this subsection are contained in appendix D.
Subd. 2. Permits to owners. Notwithstanding the requirements of this section, permits
may be issued to persons who own and occupy single family dwellings for work performed
within or on said dwellings pursuant to sections 400.05, 400.07 and 400.09.
400.11. Building and construction permits: issuance and procedure. Subdivision 1. Procedure
upon application. The procedure for issuance of building permits shall be as provided in U.B.C.
chapter 1, as amended in MN Rules 1305.0106.
Subd. 2. Other permits. If any other type of permit is required for a building or structure
besides a building permit, such as, for example, an off-street parking permit or a special use
permit, the building permit may not be issued until the building official is satisfied that other
required permits (i) have already been issued, '(ii) will be issued at the same time, or (iii) have
been authorized and will be issued.
Subd. 3. Plans and specifications: retention. When a building permit is issued, the
building official shall return one set of the plans and specifications to the applicant and one copy
shall be kept in the office of the building official as designated in the current records retention
schedule.
0
REVISE SECTION 700.05 BY DELETING THE FOLLOWING SUBDIVISIONS
SUBD. 7, 9, 10, 12 AND 15 AND RENUMBER ACCORDINGLY
vCLCTLxS7Slh1 -CC 7Vd R?7G1III+ T cscl cr `o v isxr--nmix?c
o 'r'xt,v C,4TS]i'C1S2'1 ? v. eard ''t1'' ' es pcxxr o,-,,,rr :?.,.. c;t l,ox,.
-?5?-
l,' 1, L, 11 1, „tl d' 1 d ,t 1, l,o < "d° +1,0
r°"P°cxc` dvn
?xxxvironscxl cTJ?r'roPxaT°cr°irl'@:o S.,...,.,.,......., .,, .,
pefmit """" 1 sha l be displayed _,_,,,+;1 t-he ; plotod
1, 1
'
1 b d
'1 o ° , 1-,.,;ld;
OZ t where
OO
y
L.
ld' staa " "t t?'° v of-another- ..
ii
i
°
ui
`<
sCi
e ?7lpTI
SriTT rrvi
CC
R i
n ?, Ps x
o
y
ra
x
+ tL,
4
d
L. o
'ld'
d +b'o <" 1
"'1° ?;do
«od
q v b,,;ld;,-,
So o«t & " P#R
Al
6844604-1
0-
-
Old 1' 'ld' v afi
1'0 _"..
@d i v
-
-
o..t;„ ;+>^ R@ w 1,.,,;1.1; „1 . ho the
i t
ti 644a and *A;** b n
he baildiff iair-ofnefits of this
to fae@t Al r-e
af@ > an
s@etion- wiaffi
ff y
a g q
>
4
9'ld' 1,.,11 1'° .,f <._d,.+
°°t"" l,o x,
. < east if- en o sb@st"s eoa 4eat
i
e
_ (
) J
, p
p
?
? ? @
°+ ;" " 4
i ?6
L
csc?xxv:x?rpv ?Iziii?33H 33 S?zz®6 8`Ve 5 p p
rea
,
>;tt, l
3
r + kr
ded joints be 1°g""«od b
e
i
ma tke ";t
o °° where the
y
(
)
-
pe
oa
-a p
y bi
#00 i44 41
d t
d
e b
ildi y
164d ofanstable
round
t4o
o
amag
y
a
ng 8 , so g
,
:b
ildi
h
t that ffqflfR@ta4i
e
t i
n
ail
i
e
@?Ee
4 e famor-ia4 ma
be aGeo
t
u
ng
e
p
eas
f-o
s
p
p
,
a
d n.ll o nd b
1.,, d ,.+n1.10 °+° b
+1'° `"t<. "" y
p
<„"°r
y
e
) R, ;1'1;" be laid ot;,,rt_e@SSP881 " .,,.,d Pt;.. +
Pf-024difig Pipe ..t. +ool . rfn od ,-ntn_olab <<44;^1" PiA vast d;, ..tl< on +40 eafier-OW
@a a cased-.
(1) joints and eanneetiens shall be i:nade gastight aad wateftight.
-??)-Lead shall be min @a@ pexfg afid saUlk@d tight NO VaFRW4, Of- W Oth ,+;rb
pvrrrrrccvtrvircriv7eiircinn'rc°vri"az-'a'r"rcix u4cx-cxxv7vxxxc xxcc., .,.,..ff .....,,...». »..» wj,t,r-e...».
(4) Ma4er-i .,1 &r- hot „ o.a „+s sla-All ,,..+ 5848 „fora fitly to .aos+r the o o .f toe ; „+
v
appr- A"Rd
Suled. 1 -5. Miniffpam pafeel size. Ne bailding sewer- or- eeis-neet-i-A-H *_A_ tthe 64), sanitafy sewer- System fRay
> lots,
pxwvsa rpccrvvr "f ig'c?cvcc'cr`riiacxx vx r°o.,., th......., feet.
REVISE SECTION 700.13 AS FOLLOWS
700.13 Application for service - city water system. Subdivision 1. Procedure. Applications for service
installation and for water service shall be made at the Inspections Division on printed forms furnished by the
City. The application shall contain the name of the owner, the name of the street upon which the property
fronts, the official street number assigned to the premises as shown by the records of the city and the signature
of the applicant agreeing to conform to the rules and regulations that may be established by the city as
conditions for the use of water.
REVISE SECTION 700.15, SUBD. 7 AS FOLLOWS
Subd. 7. Service pipes. gver-y senziee pipe most be 1.,;,a 4 -. ntlx waviRg to nu? =ffetlo sq +14.
+ f +. length .,n ; 'o?? , 1, as co oxo vcxxcx by to pr-ev@.,+ r„ ar,+„rocaco o by s°++1 ent. The service pipe must be placed not
idiu cc°or
less than seven and one-half feet below the surface and in all cases so arranged as to prevent rupture by freezing.
Service pipes must extend from the curb box to the inside of the building; or if not taken into building then to
the hydrant or other fixtures which it is intended to supply. A shut ^ff Ar. ^+1,or stop e9ek with waste full way
valve, of the size and strength required, shall be placed close to the inside wall of the building, well protected
from freezing.. Copper tubing shall be used up to and including two inch services. Joints on copper tubing
shall be kept to a minimum, with not more than one joint used for a service up to 70 feet in length. All joints
shall be left uncovered until inspected. All services over two inches shall be cast iron. Connections with the
mains for domestic supply shall be at least 3/4 of an inch.
REVISE SECTION 700.15 SUBD. 8(3) AS FOLLOWS
(3) All meter installation shall have a stop and wa full way valve on the street side of the meter.
On no case shall there be more than 12 inches of pipe exposed between the point of entrance throughout the
basement floor and the full way valve. A full way valve shall also be installed on
the house side of the meter.