07-06-98 agenda~~~
CITY OF RICHFIELD
MONDAY, JULY 6, 1998
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
7:00-7:30 P.M. ANNUAL MEETING WITH COMMUNITY SERVICES
COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 32
II. 7:30-8:00 P.M. PRESENTATION OF 1997 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL
FINANCIAL REPORT
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 33
III. 8:00-8:15 P.M. DISCUSSION OF RYAN DEVELOPMENT STUDY OF
PENN AND SIXTY-SIXTH STREET (PASSS) AREA
RELATED TO PREPARING REDEVELOPMENT
PROPOSALS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 34
IV. 8:15-8:30 P.M. DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF AIRPORT RELATED ITEMS
STUDY SESSION LETTER NO. 35
8:30 P.M. ADJOURNMENT
AUXILIARY AIDS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES ARE AVAIL.A-BLE UL'ON
REQUEST. REQUESTS MUST BE MADE AT LEAST 96 HOURS tN ADVAI~iCE rt0
THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DIRECTOR AT 861-9702.
July 1998
City of Richfield
une ugust
M T W T F S S M T W T F S S ~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
29 30 31
7:00 PM City Council Study 7:00 PM Human Rights
session Commission
7:00 PM Special Community
Services Commission Meeting
with City Council
(immediately following the special
C will continue th
ir
meetin
g,
e
meeting in the Heredia Room)
6:15 PM Special
City Council Mtg.
7:00 PM City Council 7:00 PM Planning Commis- 4:30 PM FOWL Board
i ~ Meeting
~ sion Study Session Meetinq~
'
Lc0
Wood ke Nature Center
7:00 PM Friendship City
Commission
5:00 PM RCHSPC
~ 7:00 PM HRA Meeting
~~
7:00 PM Advisory Board
of Health
~~ 7:00 PM City Council
Meeting
~ o~°. 7:00 PM Mayor's Hour
s ~ a
. 4~
7:00 PM Planning
Commission
Printed by Calendar Creator Plus on 6/24/98
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 32
Agenda July 6, 1998
Issue Statement:
Annual meeting with the Community Services Commission.
Background:
The City Council meeting with the Community Services Commission is one of a series
of meetings between the City's Boards and Commissions and the City Council. The
purpose of this joint meeting is to provide an informal opportunity for commission
members to inform the City Council of recent and current issues. It also provides a
forum for an open dialogue between the City Council and the commission. The primary
item the Community Services Commission would like to discuss is the Multi-Purpose
Community Facility.
Recommended Motion:
There is no action recommended.
Basis of Recommendation:
The Council has provided an opportunity for the Community Services Commission to
meet jointly with the Council to discuss topics of mutual interest and concern. Any
discussion which might ultimately lead to an action would have the consideration for
specific action scheduled for a regular Council meeting.
Alternative Recommendation:
None.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
This joint meeting has been scheduled for July 6.
submitted,
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 33
Agenda July 6, 1998
Issue Statement:
Presentation of the 1997 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR).
Background•
The City's 1997 financial audit has been completed by the firm of Deloitte & Touche.
Data on year-end 1997 was presented previously to the City Council in April as
prescribed by City Charter.
This presentation by the auditors is meant to be an informal discussion of the 1997
year-end report. Formal receipt of the financial report was presented at the City Council
meeting on June 22, 1998.
Recommended Motion:
No formal action is being recommended at this time.
Basis of Recommendation:
1. The financial audit and formal report of the 1997 fiscal year have been completed.
2. Presentation of the report at a Study Session provides an opportunity for more in-
depth discussion of the report as well as trends and comparisons identified by the
auditors.
Alternative Recommendation:
The Study Session discussion of this item could be omitted and presented at a regular
City Council meeting.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
No action is required.
~ ctfully submitted,
L. evich
g City Manager
SLD:cak
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 34
Agenda July 6, 1998
Issue Statement:
The City has authorized Ryan Development to undertake a study of the Penn and Sixty-
Sixth Street (PASSS) area for the purposes of preparing redevelopment proposals.
The study will .include an evaluation of existing conditions in the area and suggestions
for new development opportunities and renovation potential.
The issues are:
• how much land is going to be involved in redevelopment;
• how the residents, property owners and businesses in the area will be involved in
the planning process; and
• the use of tax increment financing (TIF) to assist the financing of redevelopment and
renovation in the area.
Background:
Results of the Ryan Development study will likely include proposals that call for
redevelopment of the entire block depth along Penn Avenue. The traditional half block
development format envisioned in 1989 is no longer workable. In some places, the
extension into the next block (east of Oliver Avenue and west of Queen Avenue) may
be necessary to incorporate new commercial uses, a buffer between the commercial
and residential uses, or for new housing consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
These proposals will have an affect on the adjacent residential uses. The preferences
of the adjacent residential users must be assessed.
Staff and Ryan representatives are having discussions with the Mediation Center which
would be hired to assist in determining resident preferences. The process will be very
similar to the one used in the Interchange West area.
The Mediation Center will be involved in helping residents and business people
participate in the creation of redevelopment plans. The Mediation Center will help
residents decide what information they need to make decisions on how far commercial
development should extend, if at all, into the existing residential areas.
As part of the communication process with residents, the City needs to indicate why this
project is important and the residents need to clearly understand that commercial
redevelopment will occur. Residents of the area will not be asked whether the
commercial area ought to be redeveloped. However, it would be beneficial to have
input from residents as to any problems they encounter with the existing commercial
areas. This could be part of the Mediation Center's process.
It is expected that there will be a limited role for businesses located in the area in the
planning process. Those businesses need to know that the City is committed to
redevelopment of the commercial area. They also need to have their questions
answered and receive information about the project. The Mediation Center could
interview businesses to ascertain what information they want to know about the project.
The PASSS area has long been recognized as an area where redevelopment activities
are needed to improve the economics of the area. In 1989, PASSS was established as
a Tax Increment District. However, actual implementation activities have not
progressed until very recently when Ryan expressed an interest in doing redevelopment
in the corridor. Because no action was initiated within four years of the establishment
of the initial tax increment district in 1989, the project lost its tax increment project
status. The area has to be re-established as a tax increment project in order for tax
increment financing to be used.
Since the establishment of the district in 1989, little has changed to suggest that tax
increment financing should not be used. There are still many small parcels of property
that make it virtually impossible to assemble a site large enough to do modem
commercial development. Building conditions have continued to deteriorate, and there
are now several building vacancies (Embers, Color Tile, and in the building housing the
HUB Hobby Store.)
A basic principal which will be part of the feasibility process is that tax increment
financing would be made available on an as needed basis for plan implementation.
Recommended Motion:
Discuss the planning elements identified in this Study Session Letter and any other
thoughts the City Council may have about the process.
Basis of Recommendation:
The 12-month evaluation and planning process is in its formative stages and input from
the Council at this time is appropriate.
Alternative Recommendation:
Delay discussion until a further date.
Discussion/Decision Mode:
Discussion at this time would be helpful to staff.
R pec ully submitted,
1
ven . De ich
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
~~ ^~ T~
~---~'
. ~ ~------~-- r '---
_,~_1
~~
~~ i_____;_~ ~
~_
-y---"1 ~~~ ~"~-~
_. '~_
APPENDIX A
PASSS AREA BOUNDARY
www~crnwu uuN
;• ~ ~~- ~_
J
Area not
designated as either
commercial or higher
density residential in
Comprehensive Plan
J ~- ~~ ~-~
1 --i~
1 i ~~~
i I ~~1
500 0 500 1000 Feet
6-2488
Q
N
CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
Study Session Letter No. 35
Agenda July 6, 1998
Issue Statement:
Status of airport related issues.
Background•
Recent developments regarding airport issues include the following:
• Runway 4-22
Oral arguments were held on June 10. A decision will most likely be made in the fall of
this year. Steve Pflaum argued that MSP's attempt to redistribute noise on a more
equitable basis failed to analyze alternatives, exaggerated noise relief for North
Richfield and South Minneapolis, and does not address long-term operational impacts.
• Closing of Standish Avenue
MAC has now stated that Standish Avenue will be closed on July 15.
• Proposed Runway 17-35
Richfield's City Council approved the noise mitigation proposal at its meeting on June 8.
It was included in the City's comments on MAC's EIS of the proposed runway. A copy
of Richfield's comments and the mitigation plan will be included in an updated version
of Council's Low Frequency Noise Briefing Book. Staff will have the revised briefing
book available by the August Study Session.
The City of Richfield held a joint press conference with the Friends of Minnesota Valley
on June 15. The joint meeting was held in coordination with the release of comments
of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the expansion of MSP International
Airport. Steve Pflaum and Pam Dmytrenko spoke in behalf of Richfield and Nelson
French spoke to the Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge concerns. Both parties agreed
that MAC's EIS on airport expansion was inadequate. Television media mainly picked
up the story with Channel 4, 5 and 11 broadcasting the joint conference on that
evening's news. [Press Release - Attachment A ,Executive Summary of Richfield
Comments -Attachment B]
On June 16 Sandy Grieve, Chairman of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, sent a
letter to Mayor Kirsch stating that, "I appreciate the action taken by the City of Richfield
to prepare a mitigation proposal to deal with these [noise impacts] issues. As you
know, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has felt that such a proposal is an
important first step in bringing this matter to resolution." He also requested that two
MAC members, two Met Council members, and two Richfield City Council members
meet to discuss the mitigation plan. A date has not yet been determined.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife is currently negotiating with the MAC and FAA over their
mitigation plan. It is anticipated that many more meetings will be necessary before an
agreement comes forth. A federal Record of Decision can not be made until an
agreement is made between the agencies.
• Minneapolis
The City of Minneapolis and the MAC have developed an agreement that a third
parallel runway will not be built between now and 2050 without the approval of the City
of Minneapolis. In addition, Minneapolis endorses construction of the new north-south
runway and specifies that the new runway would be operated at its maximum capacity
to distribute airport noise more evenly to other surrounding areas.
Some Minneapolis' residents are up in arms over a recent SW Journal news article
within WCCO's Channel 4000 site. ["More Noise Than You Knew" -Attachment C]
Here is what two Minneapolis community members on a neighborhood a-mail system
had to say about the article, "This month, reporter Mark Engebretson gets out his
calculator and discerns that jet take-offs and landings at MSP will increase in at least
SW Mpls despite a new feeder runway that's supposed to siphon a lot of traffic over
Bloomington/Richfield. Is the info accurate? Do you feel screwed over? Are you
surprised at all?" Another resident stated that, "Not only are there more flights over my
neighborhood, west Kingfield, but they start earlier in the morning and end later in the
night. I thought the state had cut a deal with the airlines to limit the morning start time
and the evening end time. Life will become real hell when NW boosts its freight
business -then it will be around the clock."
The reason why these comments were singled out are twofold:
1) Minneapolis' residents are still being lead to believe that anorth-south runway will
relieve them of noise by rerouting traffic off the parallel runways. Little emphasis
was made on the fact that the runway is being built to increase capacity and the
increased operations would have an additional impact on Minneapolis in the form of
low frequency noise.
2) MAC states that a majority of cargo operations on the new runway will take place
during the day. Not only is there is no assurance of this statement, present
operations show that complaints continue to rise regarding nighttime cargo
operations.
• Richfield CARE Team
The CARE Team has been working very hard to inform residents about what airport
expansion would mean to residents in Richfield. Not only have they spent hours
fielding phone calls from questioning residents, they've begun a tireless crusade on
letter writing and meeting with anyone who may be able to make a difference. The
CARE Team will even be participating in the Fourth of July parade! The CARE Team
continues to actively seek residents who can help out will their effort to uspread the
word." The grassroots group has set goals and tactics... now they only need warm
bodies to implement their plans of education. If you talk to community members who
would like to have their voice heard by the MAC and .other state agencies and
representatives, please refer them to Audrey Duffee, 866-9765. [Press Release -
Attachment D, CARE Team EIS Comments -Attachment E]
• MASAC Meetina -Runup and Ground Noise Study Review
The MAC continues to analyze ground noise data taken during April. It is unclear when
information will be given to MASAC. Roy Furhmann, MAC staff, stresses that the study
that took place was not an analysis of low frequency noise -rather, the study reflects
noise impact of ground operations. This is an interesting statement, and staff looks
forward to determining if measurements were taken on an A-weighted scale or the
correct measurement of a C-weighted scale.
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 July 6, 1998.
Respectfully submitted,
!C
Steve . Devich
Acting City Manager
SLD:cak
.J
. - ->
Press -Release.- City Malnager`s~0 ices ~~ ~' ,
For more information, call:
Dawn Weitzel
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
Voice: {612)861-9700
FAX: {612)861-9749
For Release: June 15, 1998
Date: June 15, 1998
FLAWED EIS FOR NEW RUNWAY IMPERILS RICHFIELD RESIDENTS
AND WILDLIFE REFUGE
RICHFIELD, MN -- Residents of the entire metro area will pay the price for an
inadequate Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for aNorth-South Runway at the
Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, officials told a news conference Monday.
"The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is responsible for identifying and
mitigating all environmental impacts for a new runway," said Attorney Steven Pflaum,
of McDermott, Will & Emery, Chicago, "yet major impacts on metro area facilities and
resources are left unresolved in the E'IS."
Pflaum; Pam Dmytrenko, a Richfield Planning Commission and School Board Member;
and, Nelson French, Executive Director of the Friends of the Minnesota Valley Wildlife
Refuge, spoke at the news conference at Wood Lake Nature Center in Richfield.
Richfield and the Friends of the Minnesota Valley Wildlife Refuge each submitted
comments on Monday to the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) on their Final EIS for the North-South Runway.
~Dmytrenko said metro area residents should take notice that some of the losses that
will result from aNorth-South Runway if environmental damage is not mitigated,
include:
The loss of approximately 1,500 metropolitan area affordable housing units (in
Richfield);
The loss of 200 acres of metro-area parks and recreational facilities, including
the most used golf course in the metropolitan area.
The loss of about 2900 residents, 1300 homes, 490 students and $5.5 million in
tax base to one of Minneapolis's most stable first-ring suburb.
The Twin Cities will lose a unique, and uniquely valuable, outdoor recreation and
environmental education facility in the Long Meadow Lake and Black Dog Lake
units of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. Thousands of inner city
and suburban students will no longer be able to receive nature education at this
location due to impacts from the new North-South runway that the FEIS
concedes will substantially impair use of that facility.
The Twin Cities Best Girding location (per City Pages Twin Cities Best Ratings)
will be lost to the impacts of the airport expansion. Birdwatching activities which
commonly occur in the Long Meadow Lake and Black Dog Lake units of the
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge will be disrupted due to aircraft noise
from the new North-South runway.
"Right now the EIS does not provide mitigation for these significant environmental
impacts," said Pflaum. "Instead it just calls these `unresolved' issues. There is no plan
nor funding to compensate for these losses. This fundamental flaw in the EIS imperils
Richfield residents--as well as MAC's legal ability to proceed with the project."
A Richfield noise study found that, with the new runway just 600 feet from residents,
low aircraft frequency ground noise will make more than 1,300 homes in East Richfield
uninhabitable.
Richfield has repeatedly and from very early on been bringing the low frequency noise
issue to the MAC, but despite the City's persistence, the issues still have not been
seriously addressed or resolved in the Final EIS. "We've tried to sit down and talk to
MAC but these talks cannot be productive until there is a recognition that these are real
impacts on real people that need solutions," said Dmytrenko.
"We do not want our positions to be misunderstood," said French. "We are not here to
stop the expansion of the airport. We are here to ensure that there is protection from
the harmful environmental impacts of that airport expansion."
For more information, contact Dawn Weitzel, City of Richfield, 861-9716, or Amy Jo
Grieme, Friends of the Minnesota Valley, at 858-0733.
/k1'tL~GhrrKK~ ~3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO
COMMENTS OF CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA
ON FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR THE DUAL TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
AT MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
James D. Prosser
Richfield City Manager
6700 Portland Avenue
Richfield, MN 55423
(612) 861-9700
Chazles K. Dayton
Leonazd, Street & Deinazd
150 South Fifth Street
Suite 2300
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612)335-1500
Steven F. Pflaum
Chazles M. Gering
McDermott, Will & Emery
227 West Monroe Street
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 372-2000
June 15, 1998
Pervasive, fundamental flaws in the FEIS prevent that document from serving its
intended purpose of informing decision-makers and the public of the true consequences of the
north-south runway project, the feasibility of alternatives, and the nature of mitigation measures
needed to reduce the project's significant impacts. The project cannot be approved without first
revising the FEIS to correct these flaws and to determine whether approval would be permitted
by various statutes that require a showing of no prudent and reasonable alternative. The
following discussion summarizes just a few of the most glaring defects in the FEIS.
1. The FEIS Fails to Comply with the Legislative Mandate to Analyze Specified Levels
of Aircraft Operations
Many of the most important environmental impacts in the FEIS aze premised upon the
forecast level of aircraft operations. For example, noise, air quality, and traffic impacts aze all
directly related to the number of flights that the proposed runway would enable MSP to
accommodate.
The Minnesota Legislature directed MAC to analyze in the FEIS impacts associated with
four specified levels of aircraft operations: 600,000, 650,000, 700,000, and 750,000 operations.
The FEIS ignores this express legislative mandate. The FEIS purports to contain a complete
analysis of only 500,000 and 520,000 operations. The FEIS does not, and cannot, explain or
excuse its failure to comply with this express statutory requirement.
2. The FEIS Grossly Underestimates the Number of MSP Operations
The analysis in the FEIS of environmental impacts, as well as mitigation measures
needed to reduce those impacts, is distorted by being based on a unreasonably low forecast level
of operations. Indeed, 1996 MSP operations exceeded the FEIS forecast for the yeaz 2005!
Rather than revise the FEIS to address a realistic operations forecast, as is required by
state and federal law, the appendix to the FEIS contains a "sensitivity analysis" that purports to
analyze whether higher flight levels would affect the environmental impacts disclosed in the
FEIS. Among many other problems, the sensitivity analysis is fundamentally flawed because it
ignores the ability of MSP to accommodate a higher level of operations. In other words, the
sensitivity analysis purports to analyze the environmental impacts of additional flights without
addressing the ability of MSP to handle those flights, the nature, cost, and timing of any
additional facilities improvements (such as a new or lazger terminal) that would be needed to do
so, or the environmental and economic consequences of not providing the additional needed
facilities.
-2-
3. The FEIS Fails to Analyze any "Build" Alternatives to the Runway 17-25 Proposal
The heart of an environmental impact statement is its discussion of proposed alternatives.
The FEIS is grossly inadequate because it fails to analyze any alternatives to the north-south
runway other than the no action alternative. This is a flagrant violation of the National
Environmental Policy Act.
4. The FEIS fails to analyze low frequency noise impacts or propose mitigation needed
to reduce those impacts
Runway 17-35 would expose residents of eastern portions of Richfield to significant low
frequency noise impacts. The FEIS improperly fails to analyze those impacts or propose needed
mitigation. Instead, the FEIS characterizes this as an "unresolved issue" and vaguely promises to
study it further. This is clearly inadequate. Because those impacts would be produced by the
Runway 17-35 project, those impacts must be analyzed and appropriate mitigation measures
must be developed in the FEIS.
-3-
Welcome to the Southwest Journal
Page 1 of 3
Searching for a
sprrecific article?
L~~
Search
l~i'u`s
Opinion
Schon)s
8ttsin~
N;+~ilhbcanc~x~d5
Crime 8c ~afc~
55 & Up
Arts
Calendar
More noise than you knew
[an error occurred
while processing
this directive]
Pcoplc~
About SWJ
MSP's new N-S runway was pitched as a [an error occurred
"noise reliever." But for most of the 11th while processing
and 12 Wards jet flights will climb -and this directive]
nobody told the residents.
By Mazk Engebretson
Jet departures over parts of south Minneapolis will
increase at the same rate -over 17 percent - as
general airport growth at the Minneapolis-St. Paul
International Airport, even with the addition of the
north-south runway.
That news conflicts with the city's stand regazding
the north-south runway. Mayor Shazon Sayles
Belton consistently has called the north-south
runway a noise relieving runway for Minneapolis.
However, the new runway will actually create
inequity in the way jet noise is distributed over
Minneapolis by adding substantially more flights
over Lake Nokomis and parts of the 12th, 11th, 10th
and 8th wazds (see accompanying map).
According to runway use plans developed by the
Metropolitan Airports Commission, residents who
live under the flight path of the existing north
parallel runway will see -and heaz -increases in
jet flights between now and 2005.
Meanwhile, those who live under the flight path of
the existing south pazallel runway -which includes
the most southern portion of the 11th Wazd and the
13th Wazd -will see a significant reduction in jet
traffic.
Construction of the north-south runway will begin
this yeaz and is expected to be completed by 2003.
The City Council officially endorsed the runway in
1996. and again at its June 12 meeting.
http://www.wcco.com/community/swjournaUarticles/nws/nws-980625-131742.htrnl 6/30/98
Welcome to the Southwest Journal ~ Page 2 of 3
-. ,
The figures were calculated by the Southwest
Journal and Dean Lindberg, a member of the
Metropolitan Airports Sound Abatement Council.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission's runway
use plan was used along with MAC's high-forecast
projection of 2.03 percent annual growth percent
through 2005.
Nigel Finney, senior planner for the MAC, said the
Journal's figures appeared accurate. "Fundamentally,
I think you're right," he said.
Finney said the runway plan takes into account wind
conditions and is believed to be the most effective
way to operate the airport once the north-south
runway is constructed.
Overall, Minneapolis will see a 2.5 percent decrease
in flights. That's because the new runway will send
jets over parts of Bloomington and Eagan for the
first time.
However, Minneapolis still will have by faz the
most households in noise-impacted azeas. Of the
13,000 dwellings in the azea that MAC has agreed to
soundproof, 10,000 of them - 78 percent - aze in
Minneapolis. Further, residents and some city
officials feaz the new north-south runway will
contribute additional ground noise in azeas already
impacted by the north parallel runway.
Jan Del Calzo, the city's consultant on airport issues,
said the Journal's numbers sounded valid, but she
added, "The truth of the matter is nobody really
knows until the north-south runway is in and
operational."
However, Finney said that the FAA has made
commitments to the airport plan used in the
Lindberg/SWJ analysis.
Del Calzo acknowledged that the differences in how
the two pazallels will be used was not well
publicized, saying that people involved concentrated
on decreasing impacts to Minneapolis as a whole.
"Why is it news to anyone?" said Julie Idelkope, the
mayor's point person on airport issues. She said the
information on the two runways has been included
in MAC documents since 1991 or 1992. When
asked if the city provided the information to the
public in document form, Idelkope said she didn't
know.
Idelkope maintained that Minneapolis will receive
noise relief, and she cited other city work on the
http://www.wcco.com/community/swjournaUarticles/nws/nws-980625-131742.htm1 6/30/98
Welcome to the Southwest Journal Page 3 of 3
airport as positive, such as getting guarantees on ~-
operations of the north-south runway and
prohibition of the third parallel runway.
South Minneapolis legislators were caught off
guazd.
"This is news to me that they're going to be doing
that, and I don't agree with that all," said Rep. Wes
Skoglund, who represents the azea that will receive
the increase in overhead flights. "The azgument [for
the north-south runway] has always been relief.
That's always why it was being pushed....There
ought to be less traffic on both [pazallel runways]."
"Why isn't city planning analyzing this and laying it
out for everyone?" said Rep. Jean Wagenius
(DFL-63A). "The city cannot make those decisions
[endorsing the north-south runway] without letting
the public know exactly what would happen."
"I have said all along that the north-south runway
was specific flight relief for the 13th Ward and most
of Southwest. I was keenly awaze of this," said
Councilmember Steve Minn (13th Ward). "That the
chair of the [House] transportation committee
[Wagenius] didn't know, that's a pretty embarrassing
statement about her understanding of airport
operations."
(Published: June 25, 1998)
http://www.wcco.com/community/swjoumaUarticles/nws/nws-980625-131742.htm1 6/30/98
~~6!'15l19'35 ~7:e'4 61245r61L6 rig-;t~;~ tiJV ~1 rHU~ ui
f ~~~j(t/t~ n`~C'~~`
~~~~~~~~
NEWS RELEASE FQR IMMEpIATE RELEASE
June 15, 1998 Contact: Audrey Duffee (866-
9765) or Robby Fernandez
(869-0951)
Citizens to Comment at Joint News Conference on
final Environmental Impa~et Statement for North-South Runway
RICHFIELD, MN--Wood Lake Nature Center itt Richfield is the site for a joint news conference
on Monday, June 15 at 1 pm with the City of Richfield and the Friends of the Minnesota Valley
Wild Life Refuge. Monday marks the last o$'icial day in a 30-day public comment period on the
Final Environmental Impact Statement {FEIS) for the construction of a new north-south runway
at the MSP Airport.
Members of the Richfield CARE Team, a citizens' group formed Iasi April to work at preserving
the R3chSeld community from the adverse impacts the new runway would cause, will have an
information table at the press conference and share the Team response to the FEIS.
In a letter to the Metropolitan Airports Commission, DARE Team members call the FEIS
inadequate:
"By essentially ignoring and leaving the major noise issue unresolved, citizen participation is
the dacumeatatioo process is ef~eetively shut out, violating the disclosure intent of the
National Environmental Follcy Act."
It is anticipated that almost 2900 residents from eastern Richfield will be lost due to intolerable
noise from the north-south runway MAC intends to construct only bOQ feet frrom residences.
"It will be en tuifortunate social and economic Ioss for the Twin Cities to allow Richfield's current
high living standards to deteriorate tom unmitigated noise impacts due to the proposed Airport
expansion," says Charles Starner, CARE Team co-chair.
For more information about the press conference, the CARE Team or its response to the FEIS,
call Team members Audrey Du$ee {866-9765) or Charles Starner {869-0721).
w ,~~ ~u~~c rte" .
O: T Ll Il M/M• ~ /i • I M
ti C~!'1 rn.~ti1~1' b
~.
- .
The Richfield
,
~~~ .~.s
,
:._::
~: ~::
.. ..~3~~i _
•. .: :1F~~Y
-•,
~ ~•~
~
'
~
~,
~
,~pa' ~ ~
•
•
r~
•i'^
i7
Gering Citizens Concerned Abont 8ichfield's Environment
June 12, 1998
Ms. Jenn Unruh
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 28~' Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN SS4S0
Dear Ms. Unruh:
The members of The Richfield CARE Team would like to present the
following comments on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS):
CARE is an organization of citizens concerned about Richfield's future. We
are disappointed that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the
Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) are treating adverse, low
frequency noise impacts on Richfield from the proposed airport expansion as
insignificant. We are equally disappointed that the FAA and MAC chose not
to resolve this noise issue in the FEIS. We know these noise impacts are
major and must be addressed prior to making an FEIS implementation
decision along with appropriate mitigation measures provided to offset the
impacts. By essentially ignoring and leaving this major noise issue
unresolved, citizen participation in the environmental documentation process
will be effectively shut out which violates the disclosure intent of the National
Environmental Policy Act. Consequently, we urge you not to make an
implementation decision until the low frequency noise issue is fully addressed
in the FEIS and appropriate mitigation measures developed.
As residents living in a .community next to the airport, we know firsthand how
airport noise can adversely affect our lives. A troublesome experience was
New Ford Town, where the residents there felt compelled to leave their
The Richfield CARE Team • 6S 1 S -18~ Avenue • Richfield, MN S 5423
The Richfield ,...::::,
~~:;' ~
Caring Citizens Concerned Abont Richfield's Environment
homes due to intolerable airport noise. From these types of experiences, we
also know that locating an airport runway closer to Richfield will effectively
make a large portion of Richfield uninhabitable as a residential area. We need
neither arbitrary standards nor inexact noise modeling to tell us this.
We expect to lose almost 2900 residents (approximately 500 are school age
children) from eastern Richfield due to intolerable noise from the proposed
airport expansion. The loss of these residents with their accompanying
investment in our community, and along with the adverse, high frequency
noise unpacts over the rest of Richfield, will greatly diminish the high quality
of life that makes Richfield a desirable city to live in. Richfield is currently an
established, economically strong and safe community for families and
businesses. It will be an unfortunate social and economic loss for the Twin
Cities to allow Richfield's current high living standards to deteriorate from
unmitigated noise impacts due to the proposed airport expansion.
Again, we urge you not to make an implementation decision until the low
frequency noise issue is fully addressed in the FEIS and appropriate
mitigation measures developed.
Sincerely,
Charles Starner
CARE Co-Chair
The Richfield CARE Team • 6515 - 18~ Avenue • Richfield, MN 55423
2
1~lttropuutan .-~ir~x~n, Lummi„wn
Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events
May. 1998
Count of Arrival Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
RMT
ID
City
Appronmate Street Location Events
~~ Events
>SOdB Events
>90dB Events
>1tlOdB
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 4145 57 t 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 4071 735 5 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 2136 856 83 0
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 4284 1526 7 0
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 2474 1329 66 0
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 4907 3960 1252 4
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 6 0 0 0
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue 8c 43rd Street 18 2 0 0
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 99 57 3 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue & Bowdoin Street 105 90 20 0
11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 21 5 0 0
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 17 6 1 0
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 41 3 1 0
14 Eagan Fast Street & McKee Street 3975 59 1 0
15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 146 11 2 0
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Ylas Lane 2009 930 10 0
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 131 63 0 0
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 136 42 0 0
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 14 1 0 0
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 8 0 0 0
21 Inver Grove Heights Bazbara Avenue & 67th Street 193 2 0 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 1434 6 0 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 1169 11 1 0
24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 3579 61 0 0
Note: ARTS data missing for 1:5 days.
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 13
Metropolitan Airports Commission
Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events
May 1998
Count of Departure Aircraft Noise Events for Each RMT
RMT
ID
City
Appronmate Street Lacahon Events
~~ Events
~SOd13 Events
~90dB Events
>100dB
1 Minneapolis Xerxes Avenue & 41st Street 590 192 6 0
2 Minneapolis Fremont Avenue & 43rd Street 606 278 22 0
3 Minneapolis W Elmwood Street & Belmont Avenue 675 410 49 0
4 Minneapolis Oakland Avenue & 49th Street 1192 614 90 1
5 Minneapolis 12th Avenue & 58th Street 1624 464 53 6
6 Minneapolis 25th Avenue & 57th Street 2169 1897 1067 259
7 Richfield Wentworth Avenue & 64th Street 302 110 5 0
8 Minneapolis Longfellow Avenue & 43rd Street 1121 446 64 3
9 St. Paul Saratoga Street & Hartford Avenue 58 35 11 0
10 St. Paul Itasca Avenue 8c Bowdoin Street 82 68 49 8
11 St. Paul Finn Street & Scheffer Avenue 81 41 11 1
12 St. Paul Alton Street & Rockwood Avenue 17 6 1 0
13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 2402 535 25 0
14 Eagan First Street 8t McKee Street 1703 677 93 8
15 Mendota Heights Cullen Street & Lexington Avenue 2711 679 38 0
16 Eagan Avalon Avenue & Ylas Lane 1180 432 61 5
17 Bloomington 84th Street & 4th Avenue 3249 1467 332 25
18 Richfield 75th Street & 17th Avenue 4803 4387 2688 418
19 Bloomington 16th Avenue & 84th Street 4667 2944 1136 62
20 Richfield 75th Street & 3rd Avenue 572 144 16 2
21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Avenue & 67th Street 1205 305 1 0
22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 753 113 1 0
23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Avenue 3396 1986 711 44
24 Eagan Chapel Lane & Wren Lane 1352 392 6 0
Note: ARTS data missing for !.S days.
Page 14 Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs
11Ctrupuiit.~n .-~irpurt, ~ucunu,.wu
Operations and Complaint Summary
May 1998
Operations Summary -All Aircraft
Runway Arrival % Use Departure % Use
04 173 1.0% 125 0.7%
22 117 0.6% 7269 41.4%
12 9521 53.0% 6111 34.8%
30 8148 45.4% 4049 23.1 %
MSP May Fleet Mix Percentage
Stage Scheduled
1997 Scheduled
1998 ANOMS
Count 1997 ANOMS
Count 1998
Stage 2 42.0% 30.9% 44.8% 41.5%
Stage 3 58.0% 69.1% 55.2% 58.5%
Airport May Complaint Summary
Airport 1997 1998
MSP 995 1490
Airlake 0 0
Anoka 2 9
Crystal 1 4
Flying Cloud 2 7
Lake Elmo 1 0
St. Paul 1 2
Misc. 1 1
TOTAL 1003 1513
May Operations Summary -FAA Airport 'h~afiic Record
1997 1998
Air Carrier 843 803
Commuter 305 333
G.A. 143 166
Military 8 10
TOTAL 1299 1312
Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs Page 1
:Metropolitan Aitporti Commi„ion
Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport Complaint Summary
May 1998
Complaint Summary by City
City Arrival Departure Total Percentage
A le Valle 1 4 5 0.3%
Arden Hills 3 1 4 0.3%
Bloomin ton 11 213 224 15.2%
Burnsville 4 88 92 6.2%
Ea an 28 109 137 9.3%
Eden Prairie 2 7 9 0.6%
Edina 0 2 2 0.1 %
Falcon Hei hts 0 4 4 0.3%
Inver Grove Hei hts 7 ~ 39 46 3.1%
Ma le Grove 10 15 25 1.7%
Ma lewood 1 0 1 0.1 %
Mendota Hei hts 6 107 113 7.7%
Minnea olis 194 286 480 32.6%
Minnetonka 0 3 3 0.2%
Oakdale 0 1 1 0.1 %
Prior Lake 0 6 6 0.4%
Richfield 18 161 179 12.2%
Roseville 0 2 2 0.1%
Sava e 7 6 13 0.9%
S>» Louis Park 4 1 5 0.3%
St. Paul 72 31 103 7.0%
South St. Paul 0 4 4 0.3%
Sunfish Lake 0 13 13 0.9%
West St. Paul 0 2 2 0.1%
Total 368 ll05 1473 100%
Time of Day Nature of Complaint
Time Total Nature of Complaint Total
00:00 - 05:59 150 Excessive Noise 1078
06:00 - 06:59 55 Earl /Late 380
07:00 - 11:59 31.7 Low Fl in 10
12:00 - 15:59 252 Structural Disturbance 2
16:00 - 19:59 216 Helico ter 1
20:00 - 21:59 217 Ground Noise IS
22:00 - 22:59 191 En ine Run-u 2
23:00 - 2 :59 92 Fre uenc 2
Total 1490 Total 1490
Page 2 ~ ~. Aviation Noise & Satellite Programs