Loading...
02/04/1987 - Airport Relations Commission CITY OF EAGAN AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE AGENDA WEDNESDAY FEBURARY 4, 1987 7:00 P.M. I. ROLL CALL AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES II. ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS III. COMMITTEE UPDATE IV. OLD BUSINESS A. MAC Noise Budget Ordinance Public Hearing B. FAR Part 150 Noise Abatement Study V. NEW BUSINESS VI. DISTRIBUTION A. MAC Capital Improvements Comments B. SMAAC Correspondence VII. ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: CHAIRMAN GUSTIN AND ALL AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM: ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT JON HOHENSTEIN DATE: JANUARY 28, 1987 SUBJECT: AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE MEETING FOR FEBRUARY 4, 1987 A meeting of the Eagan Airport Noise Committee is scheduled for Wednesday, February 4, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the Eagan Municipal Center Conference Rooms A and B. Please contact Jon Hohenstein at 454 -8100 if you are unable to attend this meeting. The following discussion is intended to provide background on those items to be reviewed at the meeting on Wednesday. I. MINUTES A copy of the minutes of the Eagan Airport Noise Committee meeting of January 14, 1987 is enclosed on pages /`fo2- for your review. These minutes, subject to any change, require approval by the Committee. II. ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS At its January 20, 1987 meeting, the Eagan City Council made the following appointments to and concerning the Airport Noise Committee: 1. Dustin Mirick, Otto Leitner, and Gary Campbell were appointed to two year terms on the Airport Noise Committee. An alternate position was created with Joe Harrison being appointed to serve in that position for a one year term. As with other advisory committees and commissions, the alternate receives all information, packets and courtesies of a regular member except that he or she may only vote in the absence of the one of the regular members. 2. Dustin Mirick was appointed as the MASAC representative with John Gustin and Tom Baker as first and second alternates respectively. 3. The City Council determined that it was not necessary for it to appoint a chairperson for the Committee, that responsi- bility being transferred to the Committee membership. At its last regular meeting, the Committee had recommended John Gustin to the City Council for appointment as chairman. Given the Council's decision, it would be appropriate for the Committee to reconsider this matter as an official action as opposed to a recommendation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To confirm John Gustin's election as Committee Chairman. In addition, City Administrator Tom Hedges will be present to review City Council policies for its advisory committees and commissions. Committee members are encouraged to take this opportunity to discuss with City Administrator Hedges the general posture of the City Council as it relates to noise issues. III. COMMITTEE UPDATE IV. OLD BUSINESS A. MAC Noise Budget Ordinance Public Hearing Enclosed on pages c -3 °4-y you will find the comments for the Noise Budget Ordinance public hearing delivered to the MAC hearing officer by Committee Chairman John Gustin. Staff will be working on written comments for submission prior to February 6. Committee members are encouraged to review the comments presented and offer additional comments as appropriate for inclusion in the City's written comment to the MAC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS MATTER: To provide additional staff direction for Noise Budget Ordinance comments. B. FAR Part 150 Noise Abatement Study Enclosed on pages ,1 you will find a copy of the correspondence from stiff�to Mark Ryan of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, pertinent to the land use compatibility of the Part 150 Study. Essentially, staff was unable to respond in terms of certain impacts due to the lack of final contours for the study. MAC staff has indicated that those contours are forthcoming but that the merger of Northwest and Republic has required additional work to correct for the integrated schedule that the airline now flies. The City of Eagan has reserved the right to make further comment and address actual impacts upon receipt of those final contours. V. NEW BUSINES A. Report on Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor Meeting Representatives of the cities of Eagan and Mendota Heights will be meeting on the corridor issue on Wednesday afternoon, February 4 in advance of the Airport Noise meeting. Staff will be prepared to address the outcome of that meeting and to provide an update on the presentation before MASAC. VI. DISTRIBUTION A. MAC Capital Improvement Program Comments Enclosed on pages to 3/ you will find the Metropolitan Council request for commen s pertinent to the 1987 and 1988 Metropolitan Airports Commission Capital Improvements program and staff comments in that regard. Please review both and be prepared to offer any additional comments you may have. B. SMk Correspondence Enclosed on pages �j�— ? JSyou will find the latest correspondence from the South Metro Airport Action Council. Staff has taken a membership in the group, both as a means of maintaining a metropolitan cooperation on the noise issue and to monitor the activities of SMAC. Airport Noise Committee members and their neighbors may join SMAC as well if they are so disposed. The packet of information includes a SMAC membership application. VII. ADJOURNMENT The Committee will adjourn no later than 9:00 p.m. A inistrative Assistant cc: City Administrator Hedges City Attorney Hauge Enclosures JDH /jeh MINUTES OF THE AIRPORT NOISE COMMITTEE Eagan, Minnesota January 14, 1987 A regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Noise Committee was held on Wednesday, January 14, 1987, at the Eagan Municipal Center at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Chairman Tom Baker, Dustin Mirick, John Gustin, and Carolyn Braun. Absent were: Otto Leitner, Carol Dozois and Joe Harrison. Also present was Administrative Assistant Jon Hohenstein. MINUTES Chairman Baker acknowledged that the Committee was without a quorum at its December 10th meeting and that it would be appropriate for the assembled members to take action on the minutes of both November 14 and December 10. Upon motion by Mirick, seconded by Gustin, all members voting in favor, the minutes of said meetings were approved. ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS Administrative Assistant Hohenstein reported that there were three terms expiring on the Airport Noise Committee, those being the terms of Dustin Mirick, Otto Leitner and Joe Harrison. He further stated that all three had indicated their desire to continue on the Committee and that additional candidates were being considered by the City Council. He stated that the appointments would be made at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting on January 20, 1987. Chairman Baker indicated that he wished to continue to serve the Committee in some capacity but that he would prefer that someone else fill the positions of Chairperson and MASAC representative. After discussion, upon motion by Gustin, seconded by Braun, all members voting in favor, it was recommended to the City Council that Dustin Mirick be the primary MASAC representative with a term of two years and that John Gustin and Tom Baker be appointed as first and second alternate respectively for one year terms; and further, that John Gustin be recommended to the City Council as Chairman of the Airport Noise Committee for the remainder of his current term. NOISE BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING Administrative Assistant Hohenstein outlined the staff position on the noise budget and requested direction from the Committee in that regard. Mirick suggested that members attend not only the Eagan informational meeting but those in Richfield and Minneapolis as well, in advance of the public hearing. Hohenstein asked if it would be appropriate to draft comments, indicating that the City supported the general concept of noise limitation but felt that the Runway 4/22 extension not be included in the present consideration until its environmental impact could be assessed. The Committee gave general support to the drafting of such comments. Upon motion by Mirick, seconded by Gustin, all members voting in favor, it was recommended that the City reserve a slot at the Noise Budget Ordinance public hearing and that brief comments be prepared for a presenter to be designated at staff discretion. DISTRIBUTION The Committee briefly reviewed those items distributed to them, including Minneapolis Star and Tribune article regarding a request to operate the Concorde at Minneapolis /St. Paul Airport, an article regarding the formation of a new air traffic controller union and the MASAC membership list and bylaws. No action was necessary or taken on these items. EAGAN MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR Administrative Assistant Hohenstein introduced and reviewed information pertintent to the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. He indicated that the MASAC meeting to consider the item had been postponed from January 27 to a later date at the request of the city of Mendota Heights. He reported that Mendota Heights had taken official action to direct its staff and MASAC representatives to work with the City of Eagan to determine a cooperative position on the matter and that staff was preparing for such a meeting. He stated further that the corridor issue had attracted new attention and that the Airports Commission appeared to be taking the City's actions seriously. He further stated that the best approach would be to address the means of placing the worst noise impacts at the middle of the corridor to prevent unnecessary debate of the location of actual operations. Hohenstein reviewed the pertinent points of the proposed presentation. He said that the City Council had directed staff to focus on the failure of the Airport and the FAA to follow proper procedure to notice the City of intentions to change procedure, the dependence of the City on the old assumptions in its land use planning, and the need to recognize the relationship between noise contours and corridor boundaries. The Committee indicated that packets should be prepared in anticipation of distribution of information to MASAC members and that staff should continue to cooperate with the city of Mendota Heights in approaching the matter in a concerted fashion. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by acclamation at 9:15 p.m. JDH Date Chairperson Secretary a MEMO TO: JOHN GUSTIN AND DUSTIN MIRICK FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT DATE: JANUARY 23, 1987 SUBJECT: EAGAN COMMENTS FOR NOISE BUDGET ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING The City Council has directed Staff to reserve a slot at the Noise Buget Ordinance public hearing for City comments. They have further asked that a representative of the Airport Noise Committee make the presentation. At the last City Council meeting, you were approved as Airport Noise Committee chairman and MASAC representative, respectively. Therefore, it would be appropriate if one of you would present the enclosed comments at the public hearing. Please look them over and get in touch with me on Monday to confirm your willingness to present. I appreciate your attention to this matter. Ad nistrative Assistant Attachment J H /mc 3 NOISE BUDGET ORDINANCE PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Chairman, Members of the Commission, Ladies and Gentlemen, My name is and I speak on behalf of the City of Eagan and its Airport Noise Committee. On behalf of the City, I appreciate this opportunity to speak and I will keep my comments brief. Let me begin by saying that it is Eagan's position that the general concept of noise limitation is positive. We recognize that the airport is a polluting industry whose impact on its neighbors must be mitigated. We also realize that the aiport is an important industry to our region and that any attempt to curb its impacts must be responsible and reasonable. If it is to be implemented, we believe that a noise budget should set standards which are subtantive, yet incremental and achievable on the part of the industry. The City of Eagan does not have the expertise to comment on the appropriateness of the proposed budget method or alternative noise level reductions. Therefore, we believe that it is essential that the Metropolitan Airports Commission engage both the airlines and state regulatory agencies in its discussion of the Noise Budget Ordinance to determine what, if any, level of implementation may be feasibly undertaken. We realize that the MAC staff has requested comments on the part that the proposed Runway 4/22 extension could play in the noise budget impact. The City of Eagan believes this discussion to be premature in light of the fact that environmental studies on the runway extension have yet to be completed. Without the results of such studies, it is impossible to analyze the relative costs and benefits of the proposed extension, but it is obvious that such impacts would be substantial. Therefore, in the absence of environmental documentation, it would be inappropriate to assume its positive or negative impact on the noise budget and it should not be emphasized as part of this discussion. As a final comment, it should be remembered that the aircraft noise impacts southeast of the airport depend as much on where the aircraft operate as on the total noise energy produced. Unlike most sides of the airport, simple noise reduction without attention to operational standards could leave the Noise Budget Ordinance without any impact or benefit in our area. The Eagan - Mendota Heights corridor will be addressed in another forum, but the City wants the MAC and the FAA to understand that attention to operations must be a part of the package of strategies used to abate noise throughout the region. If this ordinance is found to be good for the region, it should be strongly considered, but it must also be a part of a larger system of noise abatement elements, of which adherence to the Eagan- Mendota Heights corridor is one. In conclusion, the City of Eagan appreciates this opportunity to speak before this public hearing. City Staff will forward written comments to the MAC within the coming week. Thank you very much. AN ����� city of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 P PHONE: (612) 454 -8100 THOMAS EGAN JS A. SMITH January 22, 1987 CELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator MARK RYAN, AIRPORT PLANNER EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION City Clerk P 0 BOX 11700 TWIN CITY AIRPORT, MN 55111 Re: MSP Part 150 - Land Use Compatibility Study Dear Mark: This letter shall respond to yours of December 23, 1986 pertinent to comments on the draft working paper. Please accept the following comments for your consideration. Please assume that all previous comments forwarded to you by the City should be incorporated herein as if repeated in their entirety. Page Comments 2 The working paper indicates that corrective measures will be focused in high -noise zones, areas close to the runway ends, and those developed in urban uses. It would be appropriate to give priority as well to existing incompatible land use whose long -term designation is Noise Compatible. This would give priority to certain pockets of residential development located in the Eagan- Mendota Heights corridor. 3 It is not possible for the City to comment on the appropriateness of the compatibility criteria without benefit of contour maps to show where theimpact of the criteria would apply. The City of Eagan has already instituted long term planning changes within the contours established by the Metropolitan Council as a part of the MC -MAC proceedings of 1981. The Metropolitan Airports Commission indicated at that time that certain long term assumptions could be used for comprehensive land use planning. The airport has since changed those assumptions without benefit of addressing its land use impacts. Therefore, current operations do not square with the long term planning contours within which the cities must operate. Unless the legitimacy of the earlier land use compatibility process is recognized, the City can no more make long term planning decisions based on the current contours then they can those established in 1981. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY MSP -Part 150 - Land Use Compatibility Study January 22, 1987 Page Two Page Comments 4 The Eagan City Council agrees to the need for a higher priority to be given to public facilities such as schools, hospitals, nursing homes and churches. 8 Again, it is impossible for the City to comment on the application and impact of land use management strategies without benefit of the finished contours. Moreover, the contours which have been presented as preliminary do not utilize the same assumptions as the 1981 Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport Noise Abatement Operations Plan or the 1981 MC -MAC contours currently used in the Metropolitan Development Guide/ Policy Plan Aviation Chapter. Essentially, this issue needs to be more adequately addressed before any indication of impacts can be developed. Previous comments by the City considering the general concepts of preventive and corrective strategies should be incorporated into these comments as if they were repeated in their entirety. 10 -11 The Priorities section should articulate the freedom to target chronic or unique impacted areas for corrective relief where such will serve to support the integrity of otherwise compatible land uses. 12 In the absence of Appendix B, the opportunity to interact and relate to other communities' and agencies' comments is limited. While the City recognizes that even these comments will become a portion of Appendix B, the inclusion of comments to date as a partial appendix would have provided a higher level of interaction. The nominal group approach being used in this portion of the technical review does not serve the best interests of the airport and the public. Under the Technical Review Screening section, it is asserted that technical review comments have been integrated into the screening process and that Figure IV - 1 summarizes that screening. As the City has indicated in the past, the matrix does not completely reflect the City's position on certain matters and, further, it ignores entirely the City Council's stated position on corrective elements. Specifically, Eagan has indicated that zoning performance standards, acquisition of developed property, purchase assurance and the soundproofing of private residences may be appropriate for the community under circumstances MSP -Part 150 - Land Use Compatibility Study January 22, 1987 Page Three Page Comments qualified by the City Council and within parameters established by the City Council in light of land use planning assumptions currently applied throughout the community. 18 The City of Eagan is substantially in compliance with the Metropolitan Council land use compatibility standards contained within the aviation chapter. Financial and social impacts of such compliance are nominal at the present time. Planning and implementation costs could increase if the current operational assumptions are used, however. Due to the differential impact of operational scenarios within the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor, slight changes in operational assumptions can have significant impacts on land use compatibility. Because of the use of the Ldn descriptor in the original noise contours distributed in earlier drafts of the working paper, the land use restrictions included in the Part 150 Study appear to be less restrictive then those currently required by the Metropolitan Council. However, it would be necessary to review the final contours before providing an accurate estimate of impact. 19 The largest portion of the corridor area in Eagan is compatibly zoned or has a long range planning designation for compatible zoning. As the area develops more fully, most costs will be absorbed by developing parties. As with land use planning, much of this work is already done. However, the magnitude of costs and benefits associated with this issue could vary substantially depending upon the final contours established. In the absence of same, it would be premature to estimate financial costs, however the social costs of a substantial modification to the assumptions used to develop the City's land uses adjacent to the corridor could be significant. 20 It is our understanding that current building and insulation standards often meet the noise level reduction criteria indicated in the working paper. Again, the City has and will continue to meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council with respect to land use compatibility planning and through its efforts has met the intent if not the letter of the model ordinance to date. Substantial changes.in the assumptions on which noise zone planning are predicated could change the areas to which the standards would be applied, implying certain costs to builders in those areas. There will of course be nominal costs T7 MSP -Part 150 - Land Use Compatibility Study January 22, 1987 Page Four Page Comments associated with adoption of the model ordinance and in training inspections personnel to observe additional criteria. 21 The City of Eagan anticipates minimal costs relative to a public information program. However, it is essential that operational standards remain consistent so the public information dessiminated to city residents can likewise be consistent over time and between agencies. 22 Nominal training and administrative costs related to a potential building code revision could be anticipated by the City. 23 The City of Eagan has several public buildings in the vicinity of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. The relative location of the final contours will determine the number of such buildings included. There is one private elementary school and one public elementary school within or within reasonable proximity of the anticipated location of the contours. 24 In its recommendation of the acquisition of developed property be considered as a possible corrective action for land use compatibility, the Eagan City Council insisted that it retain final authority in any and all acquisition programs undertaken in this regard. The City currently has roughly 150 dwelling units whose Comprehensive Guide Plan designation is commercial or industrial and lying within the operational corridor provided for the airport. While it will be necessary to review the final contours to determine how many of these units lie within each of the respective contours, it is anticipated that none of them will lie within the Ldn 75 contour. All such units are single family homes. The median value of a single family home in Eagan in 1986 was $84,110. Most homes here described would fall at or near that price range. The social costs of such a program would depend upon the extent of its application. The impact on the free standing structures would be relatively minor. However, there exists a single family subdivision of approximately 120 homes which makes up the bulk of the incompatible land use in the corridor proper. Any attempt to acquire this property would require careful coordination with the Eagan City Council to determine the appropriateness of such a program and to mitigate any unnecessary social impacts. There are also several MSP -Part 150 - Land Use Compatibility Study January 22, 1987 Page Five Page Comments residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the traditonal corridor which could be significantly impacted, depending upon the assumptions used in the study and the contours which are derived therefrom. 24 The Eagan City Council does not regard the acquisition of these neighborhoods as a viable alternative. And insist that operational means be explored to improve the compatibility of that portion of the community where adequate compatible land use has been provided immediately adjacent. 25 Before a final determination of impacted areas can be provided, the final contours must be made available to the City in regard to purchase assurance impacts. It was noted above, there are roughly 150 dwelling units which represent incompatible land use within the context of the Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan in the area of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. In addition, there are roughly 190 dwelling units in two neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the corridor whose homes may be impacted by changes in operational assumptions relative to this study. Breakdowns of dwelling units within specific contours will depend upon the shape of the final contours and their relative location. 26 Again, the number of dwelling units per contour depends largely on the location, shape and size of the final contours. In their absence, the City can only make the general comments above and reserve its right to make final comments upon receipt of the final contours. I hope these comments are useful. I look forward to receiving the final contouring from Howard Needles to allow us to respond more fully to certain of the elements above. Please let me know if you have any questions about any information provided herein. Sincerely yours, on Hohenstein Administrative Assistant JDH /jeh 4 0 jtah O O Metr opolitan Council ' 4 5 4 300 Metro Square Building dlll Seventh and Robert Streets ,;;; St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 ' e,. t . Telephone (612) 291 -6359 N'IN CVC -' January 6, 1987 To Whom It May Concern: RE: Metropolitan Airports Commission • 1987 Capital Improvement Projects 1988 Capital Improvement Program Received 12/18/86 Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 14027 -1 The Metropolitan Council has received the Metropolitan Airports Commission 1987 Capital Improvement Projects and 1988 Capital Improvement Program,for review and comment. The Council will be reviewing this in the next few weeks and would welcome any comments you may wish make. Any comments should be sent within one week. • Thank you. Sincerely, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ohn Rutford Referral Coordinator An Equal Opportunity Employer to tvt catith Pou 4: METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION P. O. BOX 11700 C MINNESOTA TWIN CITY AIRPORT • MIhN_ 55151 December 16, . 1986 OFFICE OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR • PHONE (612) 726 - 1892 Mr. Steve Keefe, Chair LIETE..;:'OLI:AN C 11P(tt . Metropolitan Council 1 R t + 300 Metro Square Building �n t 7th and Robert Streets r " St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Metropolitan Airports Commission 1987 Capital Improvement Projects 1988 Capital Improvement Program Dear Mr. Keefe: The Metropolitan Airports Commission, at its meeting on December 15, 1986, approved the Capital Improvement Projects to be accomplished in 1987 along with a 1988 Capital Improvement Program. I would like to call your attention to the fact that the approval format by the Commission has been revised compared to previous years. A separate program is now being approved for each of the succeeding two years. The first year's projects (1987) have been approved for implementation; the second year's (1988) have been approved for preliminary planning and further evaluation such that they can be more accurately defined, both in scope and estimated cost, and submitted to the Commission in late 1987 for approval for implementation in 1988. The documentation necessary to encumber Federal funding for the eligible 1988 projects will be initiated in conjunction with the preliminary plans, etc. The Metropolitan Council approved the Commission's 1986 -87 Capital Improvement Program in April, 1986, with certain exceptions. However, due to modifications since that action, the 1987 projects are being presented along with the 1988 Capital Improvement Program. A copy of each year's program, which includes a short narrative of each project, along with sketches indicating the areas of construction are attached. The relationship of the 1987 -88 projects to a five -year plan is indicated on our five -year Capital Improvement Plan (1989 -1993) which is also attached for your information. We would appreciate a timely review of this material by the Metropolitan Council in order that your comments can be incorporated into our applications for Federal aid. If you should desire further information, do not hesitate to contact our office. S ni ere y, r' Je ey W. Hamiel -1 Executive Director OFFICE LOCATION -6040 28th AVE. SO. -WEST TERMINAL AREA - MINNEAPOLIS -SAINT PAUL INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT l 1987 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS M_T,-, O TAN CCU I M Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport Rz.rt.:;r'f;L FIELD & RUNWAYS • --- Pavement Rehabilitation - Aprons, Taxiways, etc. - $1,500,000 This is a continuation of a program to replace sections of concrete paving in the aircraft operational areas that have deteriorated to a point where main- tenance is no longer a viable option. This years major emphasis will be rehabilitation of apron paving in the vicinity of the Red Concourse. Previously approved by the Commission. Watermain Construction - $650,000 This project involves the construction of approximately 12,000 lineal feet of 18" watermain from 28th Avenue, near the MAC General Offices on the north side of the airport, to 24th Avenue, adjacent to Air Cargo City on the south side of the airport. This segment of watermain will complete "the loop" which will alleviate pressure drops currently being experienced and reduce the susceptibility of interruption in water service. Emergency Access Roads - $100,000 A project to provide an access road in the approach area to Runway 11R for use by emergency vehicles. Previously approved by the Commission. Site Preparation - $300,000 This project will provide remote storage areas for the rental car companies operating at the airport. The construction of the new parking structure may require the rental companies relocate their ready car areas to their existing storage /maintenance areas. The remote storage areas will provide space for the vehicles displaced by new operational procedures. Consideration has also been given to work required to accommodate the pending taxicab convenience center. Previously approved by the Commission. -- - Bituminous Construction - $500,000 A project to construct 10' wide bituminous shoulders on approximately 25,000 lineal feet of taxiways to enhance operational safety. Currently, the larger aircraft's engine blast tends to pick -up debris from the turf area adjacent to the taxiways and deposit it on the taxiway surface. The shoulders will alleviate the situation. Run -up Pad Rehabilitation - $750,000 One of the Commission's 27 Point Noise Abatement Program items submitted to Governor Perpich in May, 1986, included a commitment to "enforce and opti- mize the MAC night -time run -up policy ". To this end, an agreement was reached whereby the Commission will control of the former Northwest Airlines run -up pad., All airline run -ups will be conducted from this loca- tion within prescribed criteria. This project will replace approximately 11,000 square yards of severely deteriorated 14" concrete pavement (1/3 of the blast pad area) with 16 -18" pavement, reseal existing pavement joints and repair and paint the blast fence. off' - 1a. • Miscellaneous Construction - $250,000 It is proposed to continue the Commission's annual program of a miscella- neous construction project for the field and runways which consolidates various incidental items beyond the capabilities of our maintenance crew, or projects too small to be accomplished independently. The items typically involve bituminous resurfacing, fencing and security gates, signage, etc. Previously approved by the Commission. ENVIRONMENTAL Noise Monitoring System - $500,000 This item is another in the Commission's 27 Point Noise Abatement Program sub- . mitted to Governor Perpich. The Commission will proceed with installation of a permanent off - airport noise monitoring system'.°A series of microphones will be installed at appropriate locations in the surrounding communities feeding into computer equipment that would record and aggregate noise levels at each monitoring location. The monitoring system will provide a con- tinuous indication of noise levels in the community, and will allow iden- tification of variations in flight activity at particular locations. This system should provide more complete and continuous coverage than the por- table monitoring equipment currently in use. When the monitoring system can be tied in to the FAA terminal radar system, additional data will be available which will greatly enhance the usability of noise monitoring information. The inifial phase of the system should be operational by September, 1987. The latter portion of the program will be an on -going effort. Noise Suppressor - $6,000,000 Minnesota Statutes require the construction of a noise suppressor to reduce run -up noise. Noise monitoring data collected is being tabulated, analyzed and . presented in a report to the Legislature for consideration and further direction on this item. Previously approved by the Commission. Land Use Modifications - Expenditure To Be Determined The Part 150 Land Use Program is currently underway and will culminate in a program for off- airport land use compatibility. Phased activities consistent with this program will be incorporated into the Capital Improvement Program in Spring, 1987, following the completion of the Part 150 Study. SELF LIQUIDATING FAA Office Facility - $3,000,000 The FAA has requested the Commission construct an approximate 35,000 square foot office building and associated parking area that would consolidate the numerous FAA departments currently located in various buildings in the West Terminal Area. Previously approved by the Commission. • NWA Hangar Facility - $40,000,000 Northwest Airlines has requested the Commission finance the construction of a two bay hangar addition to their main base facilities necessitated by their acquisition of additional 747 -400 aircraft. Green Concourse Moving Sidewalks - $4,000,000 This project will provide for the installation of moving sidewalks, similar to those installed on the Gold Concourse, to facilitate passenger movement on the concourse. The current concept would entail a new 15 -20' wide enclosure the length of the concourse that would allow construction to occur without compromising the use of the existing space. Previously approved by the Commission. LANDSIDE Lindbergh Terminal Interior Rehabilitation - $1,000,000 A Lindbergh Terminal Interior Design Standards and Guidelines Study was recently completed with a major priority to incorporate a "Minnesota Image" into the Lindbergh Terminal building. The result was a document that established a framework for interior spaces and finishes that will improve the character and amenities of the physical facilities for the traveling public. A phased implementation schedule is proposed to accomplish the study recommendations. This project will involve painting of the folded plate ceiling, the installa- tion of chandeliers (identical to those used in the north terminal addition) in the ticketing area, installation of cove lighting at the edge of the center mezzanine to accent the folded plate roof structure, resurfacing the red, orange and yellow -green glazed brick with neutral ceramic wall tile, application of vinyl wall covering to the structural columns and waiting area walls along with appropriate electrical and mechanical revisions. • Regional Terminal Walkway Rehabilitation - $20,000 In 1984, a wooden walkway /enclosure was constructed from the Green Concourse to the Regional Terminal to provide a basic "out -of- the - weather" passageway for the traveling public. The structure was to be an interim facility pending stabilization of the airline industry when a constant need /usage could be defined and a more permanent facility provided. Difficiencies are apparent in the existing structure and it is proposed exhaust fans be installed for improved ventilation and carpeting be applied to the floor to provide a constant surface. It is proposed the structure be further evaluated during 1987 and a recommendation regarding further work be submitted for 1988. Transportation Center - Terminal Buildin and Plaza Revisions - $1,950,000 - Tunnel 1,300,000 In order to provide a weatherproof passageway between the terminal building and the parking structure, a tunnel from the basement of the terminal building to the parking structure elevator tower will be completed. The structural portion of the tunnel was constructed at the time the parking structure was built and it is proposed the interior be finished under this project. The project will include vertical circulation within the terminal • building between the bag claim level and the garage entrance into the tunnel, and in the parking structure elevator tower from the lower level to the ground level. The project will also incorporate an enclosed waiting area on the plaza between the inner and outer roadways to protect passengers uti- lizing taxicabs or limousines from adverse weather conditions. It is expected that in future stages this ground transportation center will be substantially increased in size, with the potential for relocating some ground transportation functions from the terminal building to this facility. Approved by the Commission in 1985, however, the project has been put on hold pending the completion of a ground transportation analysis regarding utili- zation of the inner and outer roadways. That study has been integrated into the Master Plan Update study. This item is programmed in the event the study determines it is a viable project. Emergency Power System Improvements - $600,000 The existing emergency generator for the terminal complex has reached capa- city and is of dated technology. This project will provide additional equip- ment to insure adequate coverage in the event of a major power failure and will be sized to allow for future development. Previously approved by the Commission. Blue Concourse Electrical Substation - $125,000 The existing electrical substation has reached its capacity and must be - expanded to provide for future development on the concourse. The expanded substation will also provide an improved emergency system for the concourse. Lindbergh Terminal - Miscellaneous Modifications - $250,000 To keep abreast with the changing requirements in the terminal facilities, it is necessary to update and remodel areas periodically. This may be a series of individual projects to meet the requirements of various tenants, however, the items will be consolidated into a single project when possible. Previously approved by the Commission. Transformer Disposal - $300,000 There currently are seven existing electrical transformers in use in the terminal complex that contain PCB's. Under existing regulations, these must be removed from service and disposed of by the year 1990. The replacement and disposal may be handled as a total project or the transformers may be removed from service as conditions dictate, stored and disposed of under a separate project. Previously approved by the Commission. Short Term Parking Lot Modifications - $100 The construction of the second multi -level parking structure requires modifi- cations be made to the existing short term lot entrance and exit to ensure continued operations during the construction period. Previously approved by the Commission. • l5 Parking Structure and Skyway to Green Concourse - $26,000,000 This is the second stage of the planned parking structure development and will provide an additional 2200 parking spaces in a seven level structure. The design will be identical to the existing structure and will tie into the existing stair and elevator towers. An integral part of the design will be a skyway connector from the Green Concourse to the new structure similar to the skyway that has been constructed from the Gold Concourse to the existing parking structure. This will provide the traveling public a direct access to the parking facilities rather than going through the Lindbergh terminal. Previously approved by the Commission. Parking Facilities Access Road - $700,000 With the second parking structure due to be on -line in the immediate future, coupled with a long standing concern regarding vehicular congestion and safety in the vicinity of the existing parking lot entrances from the inbound roadway, a study was initiated to suggest alternative methods of accom- modating the traffic. It would appear a separate lane /road for parking traffic beginning at the overpass bridge leading directly to the parking facilities is the appropriate direction to follow. This road would include a bridge over the terminal recirculation route, thus eliminating an existing point of conflict. The new road would also provide a single exit point from the inbound roadway for parking which should alleviate the indecision and congestion that exists at present. Parking Structure Surface Sealing - $500,000 The existing multi -level parking structure, constructed in 1979 -80 requires periodic surface cleaning and sealing to ensure the integrity of the concrete surface and structural members is maintained. This project will provide for those activities. Remote Parking Lot Expansion - $350,000 The completion of the HHH Terminal apron and removal of the temporary taxiway needed during construction operations will allow the remote parking lot to be expanded by approximately 600 spaces. This additional space will help offset the spaces lost during the construction of the second parking structure. Elevated Roadway Rehabilitation - $100,000 This is a continuation of a phased program to insure structural integrity of the roadway and to correct reoccuring maintenance problems on the facility which was originally constructed in the early 1960's. This years project will involve the cleaning and sealing of the roadway surface along with application of new sealant in various pavement joints. Previously approved by the Commission. Roadway Modifications & Rehabilitation Inbound /Outbound - $300,000 This project will consist of surface repairs, followed by a bituminous overlay to the entire inbound /outbound roadway system except for the sec- tion previously reconstructed (parking exit booths to overpass). /6 HHH Terminal - $250,000 . • The improvements�in9 accomplished at the HHH terminal in 1986 -87 l require the roadway serving the facility be extended to the south ap r mately 250' to coincide with the buildin 's lighting will be improved and existing g configuration. Exteriorp oxi- tion with the new constructiong pavements rehabilitated in conjunc- 70th Street - $450,000 A 200 (ction o 7f 0th Street east of the intersection with 34th proposed to be reconstructed, with curb drainage in the area and provide a positivetmeansato delineate t e and control access to the adjacent properties, ate the roadway Post Road - $250,000 Post Road, from —I494 interchange west to the Van Dusen facility, been experiencing increased levels of activity over the past years has p Ye development in the southwestern quadrant of the airport and is deteriorating to the point where rehabilitation is necessar ars due to way be widened to 2 -12' lanes with 2 -8' shoulderslandsovverrlay sed thGading and ditching would also be accomplished to improve drainage. Grading Terminal Complex Landscape Development - $200,000 This is a continuation of the airport beautification program initiated 1985. This project will consist of placing berms, lt ion in on both sides of the outbound roadway from the Lin plantings � the overpass. Partial funding of the project costs is expected from the Airport Foundation. Previously approved by the Commission. Infor mational /Directional Si na a Adjustments - $100,000 It is anticipated there will be signage adjustments needed throughout t he terminal complex as a result of the planned construction activities, such improved exit route signage, terminal building directory updates et items may be consolidated into a single project or divided into s ch as: jects as necessar � etc. These Y. Previously approved by the Commission, eparate pro- Service Vehicle Stora e Area - $100,000 The Gold Concourse addition project provided space on e concourse for Allied Aviation's fueling operations east end of office. cte will pave an area north of the concourse and eastoftheoutboundProaoadway in t which Allied's service vehicles can be located. HHH Ter_ minal Improvements - $775,000 The construction project to provide expanded ticketing, space at the HHH terminal will be completed under a ed a dug during 1987. A follow -on to that project will be the installationof schedule (with handicapped access), new signage and seating, jet loader West Ter_ m_ l Area Rehabilitation - $225,000 A project or projects to modify, remodel or rehabilitate MAC owned to meet the needs of the various tenants and general :ilities, facilities This years project will focus on roof rehabilitations /repairs• , eviously approved by the Commission. l / _ • 1987 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport FIELD & RUNWAYS # Pavement Rehabilitation Aprons, Twys., etc. $1,500,000 * Watermain Construction 650,000 # Emergency Access Roads Runway 11R 100,000 * Site Preparation 300,000 * Bituminous Construction 500,000 Run -up Pad Rehabilitation 1,000,000 Miscellaneous Construction 250,000 * Subtotal $4,300,000 ENVIRONMENTAL Noise Monitoring System $ 500,000 Noise Suppressor 6,000,000 * Land Use Modifications To be added to the CIP during Spring, 1987, upon completion of the Part 150 Study Subtotal $6,500,000 SELF - LIQUIDATING FAA Office Facility $3,000,000 * NWA Hangar Facilities 40,000,000 Green Concourse Moving Sidewalks 4,000,000 * Subtotal $47,000,000 • /1 LANDSIDE Lindbergh Terminal Interior Rehabilitation $1,000,000 Regional Terminal Walkway Rehabilitation 20,000 # Transportation Center Terminal Bldg. & Plaza Revisions 1,950,000 Tunnel 1,300,000 Emergency Power System Improvements 600,000 * Blue Concourse Elect. Substation 125,000 Lindbergh Terminal Miscellaneous Modifications 250,000 * Transformer Disposal 300,000 * Short Term Parking Lot Modifications 100,000 * Parking Structure & Skyway to Green Concourse 26,000,000 * Parking Facilities Access Road 700,000 Parking Structure Surface Sealing 500,000 Remote Parking Lot Expansion 350,000 Elevated Roadway Rehabilitation 100,000 * Roadway Modifications & Rehabilitation Inbound /Outbound 300,000 HHH Terminal 250,000 70th Street 450,000 Post Road 250,000 Terminal Complex Landscape Development 200,000 * Informational /Directional Signage Adjustments 100,000 * Service Vehicle Storage Area 100,000 HHH Terminal Improvements 775,000 West Terminal Area Rehabilitation 225,000 * Subtotal $35,945,000 Annual Total $93,745,000 * Previously approved by the Metro Council # Eligible for Federal or State funding • /7 • J il F- O 0. CC W -- -j..... ; l. f I g g _ o ,_ , ‘., 12.1.2102 72424 "111 co • \i 11 '�` � e g X • CC > .r Z L. / Cr �" W ' W Z - _ W I Z � W Tea W .fir }— '• J W J ' /, - _ W € ` .. � i ��\ 1 Z ¢ 2 S \ - _ - 0 t1 W " � _ f N t - C.7, . co Z li .---- , / ' ,, < Z 1 —1 /1:1/XCC 1 p ... . 0 , . 2- X i z , 4 • '*:. k - __-. - ....,• -/ , C1:1 0 LL y Z � �� \.! n 6 /r i �'� o its W L 2 < ,, ., , _. . , ,-,,, f // � +`� r ...7_, cr 1 \` �C„5 n `� s %•'' ; .97,,,,:::::,.„,,, a ` , W • N, \ < - til III LLI 1 /7 9 '' : • i . NS iti Ci) I I 1 1 . /./p (,_ .., i := ;ili < — - . \r" =it- 0 0..J . --z. , / ',:;_-_ j .."... Q ; ;P . _ ; :_ . ' . / '� /� - - JIB ' , '-• a� - - ti d - r a }� CO �_ >y p :i i i ''VZ CD CD SS , \ co t • ,_. . _ : / 1 1 c- r . • �.=� -___ _ — _- _ . .. ... . „ . .Z z _. _ ..„._._ .• ..,,_ . 0U• \ �� ' " - a� ..- - 1988 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport FIELD AND RUNWAYS Pavement Rehabilitation - Runway 4 -22 - $10,000,000 Runway 4 -22 is experiencing continuing, gradual deterioration from age and use; a major rehabilitation is expected to be necessary in 1988 to restore the runway to a safe operating condition. Alternative methods of rehabilita- tion are currently being evaluated and a more detailed rehabilitation program and costs will be available for consideration when the CIP is updated for the 1988 construction season. Previously approved by the Commission. . Taxiway Realignment - $750,000 The westerly section of Taxiway E currently angles in towards the terminal building which results in reduced wing -tip clearances and congestion for aircraft operations into and out of the Green and Blue Concourses. Straightening the taxiway will alleviate this condition. Previously approved by the Commission. This project was approved for construction in 1986, . however, due to operational constraints anticipated during construction, it has been determined least disruptive to accomplish the work in conjunction with the Runway 4/22 rehabilitation. 'Runway 4 -22 Extension "=$7,000,000 This project provides for a 2,750 southwesterly extension to runway 4 -22 and associated taxiway and is currently being evaluated as a part of the Master Plan update process. In the event the Master Plan update determines the extension to be a viable project, it is programmed currently with the reha- bilitation to minimize disruption in the communities adjacent to the airport. During completion of the rehabilitation and extension, the runway would be unavailable for use which will have substantial impact on aircraft operations over south Minneapolis. Rather than schedule the rehabilitation one year, the extension the following year and subject the communities to the resultant aircraft noise, it is felt that both projects can be accomplished concurrently under an accelerated schedule. Environmental documentation will be required for this project and the results of that study will be subject to further approvals prior to the extension progressing. : Previously approved by the Commission. Emergency Access Roads - $200,000 A project to provide an access road in the Runway 22 approach area for use by emergency vehicles. Previously approved by the Commission. Site Preparation - S100,000 This item is programmed in the event incidental site preparation is necessary for existing or new tenants at the airport. • • • • Miscellaneous Construction - $250,000 It is proposed to continue the Commission's annual program of a miscellaneous construction project for the field and runways which consolidates the various incidental items beyond the capabilities of our maintenance crew or projects too small to be accomplished independently. These items typically involve bituminous resurfacing, fencing, etc. SELF LIQUIDATING F.I.S. FACILITY - $12,000,000 Northwest Airlines has requested the Commission finance the construction of a Federal Inspection Services facility within the Lindbergh Terminal complex to accommodate their transatlantic flights. They feel this facility would be a definite benefit to the traveling public in that it would provide for more timely processing and transfer of connecting passengers. LANDSIDE Lindbergh Terminal Interior Rehabilitation - $1,150,000 • This will be a continuation of the program initiated in 1987 and will pro- vide for the installation of additional neutral colored ceramic tile over the the existing glazed brick, new carpeting and solar shading on exterior windows. • Regional Terminal Walkway Rehabilitation - $50,000 It is proposed this structure be evaluated as to its need and level of ser- vice to be provided, which will determine the extent of rehabilitation required. Boiler Plant Modifications and Burner Improvements - $1,500,000 The existing boilers, burners and burner controls in the boiler plant are 25 years old and are in need of improvements to update the facilities to present efficiency standards. It is anticipated a complete review and analysis of the current equipment will be completed in 1987 to determine the total extent of improvements needed and that this item be further refined when the CIP is updated for the 1988 construction season. Previously approved by the Commission. Transportation Center - Terminal Building - $600,000 - Skyway $1,500,000 This item provides for the installation of vertical circulation (elevators and escalators) in the terminal from the bag claim level to the mezzanine and the construction of a skyway from the terminal to the parking structure ele- vator tower for improved public circulation purposes. See Transportation Center item in the 1987 Capital Improvement Projects listing pertaining to the ground transportation study. 'J a Terminal Complex Sprinkler System - $1,600,000 . Information received from our fire insurance underwriters would indicate a considerable savings could be realized in fire insurance premiums if the ter- minal complex were protected by an automatic sprinkler system. It is pro- posed a study be conducted to determine the coverage areas, cost implications and pay -back ratio. Basement Concrete Restoration - $300,000 A project to address leakage problems and structural deterioration in the terminal basement under the inner roadway is currently underway. A similar problem exists under the tug drive area in the baggage make -up area. It is proposed the present projects effectiveness be evaluated and the extent of the tug drive area be more accurately defined. Lindbergh Terminal - Miscellaneous Modifications - $250,000 To keep abreast with changing requirements in the terminal facilities, it is necessary to update and remodel areas periodical' may hp a series of individual projects to meet the requirements of various tenants. however. the items will be consolidated into a single project when possible. Elevated Roadway Rehabilitation - $100,000 This is a continuation of a phased program to insure structural integrity and correct reoccuring maintenance problems on the elevated roadway which was • originally constructed in the early 1960 Roadway Modifications and Rehabilitation - $300,000 This category provides for modifications to or rehabilitation of terminal complex and airport roadways for improved vehicular circulation. The road- ways will be inspected during 1987 and recommendations regarding specific projects will be prepared. Terminal Complex Landscape Development - $225,000 This is a continuation of the airport beautification program initiated in 1985. This project will focus on a sculpture to be located at the intersec- tion of the inbound and outbound roadways in addition to plantings, lighting and irrigation in that area. Partial funding is expected to be provided by the Airport Foundation. Security /Alarm System Modifications - $300,000 This category will provide for the installation of closed circuit TV cameras at various locations in the terminal complex to provide increased security. In addition, certain sections of the existing alarm and emergency phone system in the terminal and concourses is rather dated and the equipment is being evaluated for rehabilitation. Previously approved by the Commission. West Terminal Area Rehabilitation - $100,000 A project or projects to modify or remodel areas to meet the needs of the various tenants and general public utilizing these facilities. • • e • 1988 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport FIELD & RUNWAYS # Pavement Rehabilitation Runway 4/22 $10,000,000 * # Taxiway Realignment 750,000 * # Runway 4/22 Extension 7,000,000 # Emergency Access Roads Runway 22 200,000 * Site Preparation 100,000 Miscellaneous Construction 250,000 Subtotal $18,300,000 ENVIRONMENTAL Land Use Modifications To be added to the CIP during Spring, 1987, upon • completion of the Part 150 Study Subtotal - 0 - • SELF - LIQUIDATING F.I.S. Facility 12,000,000 Subtotal 12,000,000 LANDSIDE Lindbergh Terminal Interior Rehabilitation $1,150,000 Regional Terminal Walkway Rehabilitation 50,000 Boiler Plant Modifications & Burner Improvements 1,500,000 * # Transportation Center Terminal Building and Plaza Revisions 600,000 Skyway 1,500,000 Terminal Complex Sprinkler System 1,600,000 Basement Concrete Restoration 300,000 Lindbergh Terminal. Miscellaneous Modifications 250,000 - Elevated Roadway Rehabilitation' 100,000 Roadway Modifications & Rehabilitation 300,000 Terminal Complex Landscape Development 225,000 Security /Alarm System Modifications 300,000 * West Terminal Area Rehabilitation 100,000 Subtotal $7,975,000 Annual Total $38,275,000 * Previously approved by the Metro Council # Eligible for Federal or State funding t 1— O Y CC 1 V , 8 t Q I Nl7wNw = VII‹ 0 MMOM 7n.. Y Z LU CO W /' CO W - �- t— - oo Z cc gm U • • att D to o W +� r v •' CO Z ii. : . 1 �- .,�! CO .1 cr W r / � t o '. -- i . J \---- Q ' • -J • ice-° • ` • \ Q UJ ) UZ 4,7 UJ .... N. / , ,1„...k j,, ir - ., "w"'( ./...--''' ■, ',... ., 1 ?� 1 l �_ . ^� 1 I t t i i X JIM � . i i -, 1 +�T�_�t'Q�\ , Vii•\ _ — — — — LT.r � i 11= „ _ �! _LIT � : 1 1 / II ' I'- r te--; I � N — � .r A A 11 �r /%c ' � F� ` i4� :, II �j _ '/ `�}�: I 4-i . .0 !, 1 L ` ` — - , / - 4e., 1= `` ? is �. —, r Nr . T z ' UJ C \ .\ • �:.t. - . •^ •� S t•'i x- -- - . O - O - O - p -•C • s� -- r -0-- O .. a O O - Co O O .. • - Er- - - - - O O O t .. _ _ >.� - 2 .• .__ _ O O h 117 _ _ y • VI O H 1- • . • Col CO CO O O O O - . • O O O C • . • O O W • O O O 7. O Y7 107 • • O 117 N P� CC • CL • .r J • . O O O O O p O C y ' O O O O • _ C . Li O - O O O O • O • CO li, on 0. iCi .•• N 07 O ••.• - alma n m . • . O- • PT r O• O O O - C - O O Ca O O O CT O O O _ a- O O O co C • an N r• CO •■ C LO - .r L O - • 7 If A d • V • = v . y .0 0 C. 0 C. 0 O O O O O O 1- O O O 0 0 O O .... •■• O O S O O O O O • O O 'O O O O •- W CC CO O tf7 O 0 0 ICI O O O O ••.• 0 to m O 1• O • CV ••• N M . 0 •r O O • C CC CC a PS CO w r r • _ Li CL G• r •••• J7 o_ o 0 • O O co O O co O O. O O , O co O O O 1••• O O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 C. O O Z CO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O • J 4.1 CO .• .. 4. .• .• ••• 4. 4. 4. - - .. 4. C= 1 • - O O O 0 0 0 0 O - 0 O O O O O 1.• W LA O h O O O O Y7 O 0 0 - O O O O O - • W O 1fi .O ..• 17 147 CO N 17 I7 O K7 O O O O Cl... C •e .o-. ••• •• ••• ••• - C c o .r • .0 •.o P O Li C� CC M. • • . s a :a o 0 o O 0 • . .. ..• 0 0 = 0 0 = • AI . a 1. M . C 0 . •O O J O• _ 1•- G 1_ W Z w 0 •17 W W O_ V 0 O O 0- L 0 C •• .•+ • CC C A 0 0 0 111 co .•• U W 0 = d Z O. •r • 0 0 O.s .0 0 .•• 0 C CC C ••••• u O •• 0 01 y y .. >. O W CO •R .d •, 0 •LC r ..• J 0 u. y 0 > >• 0 3. •••• S r. W 0 u U CC 7 •-•. In CO ++ ++ y 0 Z Si = 7 7 L = y = •. + ow= 0 .+ .0 0 Cr L 1.1 N ... • 0 �+ lift ... 111 0 an .O Ld C 0 ..• > 51 = X J - d.0 W Cr K 0 W = L Y1 U U •r+ M •e ?. N ... W 0 0 U ..J 0 L 1.. N • CO A A ... L C to v. Z 0 X N .- o O u 0 CC •.. La CC 0 O.. 0 Z U. 1.1_ .•. 0 C. Y- 0 -+ C r•• ..... PO N V ) . 4 .•- N ._ 0 r. 1..... 0 0 C 7 0 r W N ••• N W 01 0 0 7 M 07 0 J ••••• d = I. 5. 1. u U . • Z .5 0 •• CC \ m 0 P. ... 6 ti 0 1- C 0 G U •O 0 O L0 = A N y M > u > T•• LL A - 1- 0 0 m O -•. CA LL O [O O d C C fO ,.•. >•• S = LO 11 •r C Li N 0 .A 1W 1. 0 s A Z L. O. 0 0 ft 7 W •= d d O O S r - = C • A O C/ fy f1 7 ••• Z ••• fL 1.. 7 7 d 7 1 U . IO J 0 Z > C Q •[ = x y OI C Oa O 0 0. •O a 7 w .O II Z y • -. C O O 0 . J C =^ • C. -I C 4. r- CC 1.. = W tO m CC = Z Z J Lf. 1.. Z L. CD • C W 0 J • 2 4. S W • Z . W N _ �� (9 62 � 1 - • o 0 o C: 0 00 0 0 0 0 co - o ta! o o 10 as . 0' • 0 0 0 0 N 0 ti .., .r '- .. pa . ' ' n . • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 O • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - a 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 • 0 In -. r N In .•. N -• N In 0 0 1.• 1 L. S. a+ T. to 1- p., O - _ 0 0 0 0 0 • O - O 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 O V7 0 N - Mf r . • • N • O O 0 O 0 0 0 Cr. 0. 0 O O O O O - I on n O 1 0 0 0 Ill N - ••• N . • 10 • N Cr. • • 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O • O - O O 0 O 0 ... O O O O O O O O O O In In . In In 0 CO {n N N O_ CO • . N 1- . • O O 0 0 0 0 0 O - 0 0 _ O 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O O 0 0 O 0 0 0_ 0 0_ 0 - 0 O - O_ O O_ O_ • O - O O O 0 0 0 O O O u 0 • O to V7 0 OD I1") In 0 0 0 0 0 In O O N O O R I• N to In - on .O M N .- M N h •- O• N_ 0 IT .. . . - ..s ••• ... .... t� co N • M M O 0 O 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0 O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 O O O 0 0 O O O 0 0 0 O O O O O_ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 O 0 _ O - O 0 O O 1n 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O In in IP) In A n O N IA O O N 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 O O IA V7 10 0 O O I•• N < < ry co O P I-, .O -- CV H -• 0 I. In M 3 N' N N ..•. ..- A N P e-- 0 P a- ..-• .. ••• •• -0 10 M N h O- L • N N A -. N 0 .+ ..I 0 .0 - 0 M 03 = v w s O a +J 0 .... L 0 0 O M ti O ! G c +1 u u - C 0 G C N :e 0 01 - -r 0 c .J 0 ..1 0 ... ..1 e/ C.3 0 0 ••.. 0 .. 1e W 0 'fl M Oa A .. > M . 0 0 0 0 .a GI CC 0 ... •• - ... 0 r ••• = 0 01 1e 0.. 0 .0 w .- _ L. ! o .•+ •.• a1 Cr. 0 W ^ 0 0 e9 -. - ... G W W A a -. L . 0 0 C. 0 01 .0 re r C N 01 0 0 LJ ID ••• 0 •.. T. 1e ••• cc ••• 1e .0 0 >. 0 > .0 W 0 1C 1e ... a 01 O. U n co .0 .0 tJ L Cm O O 7 C ...- .+ O W C .• 1e O ... 15 .' .- L 1e C1 C W 51 L H 1e CC to O .e .0 to -. W C-3 0. CC G L •• 0. 0 T - .• W W L. W 01 7• L > 0 .e ! 0 1e I1 01 10 ... C 0_ • C 1N ... -s 0 L tL L 10 0 W L .• 11 W = Z 0 Li 0 ... A A O ..1 .0 O 0 e1 o Z G C .. 0 1 - 1 1.1 •• W MI .e •- .e LJ C= W 0 1e C •..w .+ L r .c C •• ! •... VI ••• .0 1.J ••• 0. VI 0 O• C1 • L .•• 0 O L •••• ... L 1e 0 W L r 0 W U V. x .e e1 •• ! A 0 C1 • .... •-• ..• 0 1e W N Y 01 . .•• = . - . ..J G 0 W. 0 - C ..1 0/ L 01 C L .. _ • 4-4 N O. C .0 u A ..Y C13 W 0 1e N .• O > .0 -.• W 0 = .■. co 7- W ••• M CT V1 l. C r J W V. y 0 A G .e ..1 .••1 W C. 0 4 51 3 - 15 15 0 51 0 4 51 0 0 L 7- t") W 0 0 •e v t.) - at . W C O. • L L J >- .e 0 .5 t17 0. L W •- •••- W 0 O .a W W L Y1 . O 0 q v 0 W 0 01 111 C N IN V1 -.- = C L W W '! .- L ... w .. 0• X ... a -- .■. ! ..• •• - d U Z N L. C 1e U ..+ U C C •• ... N ... O.. 1. 4.1 W N 0 L. .• •.•. CT ! C O L W CL 0 0 •.. 111 .■ 0 0 W IS .O A A 0 1••• L O W 0 -. •0 0 O tL 5 ■•• L L LJ L .t 0 03 ..-• W-0 O 0 .0 .e 0 U 0 1J ►• .e 1e C4 C.) O W ! .. 1e .+ L CC O ! L 1e Li O 6 W C • 0.0 O 0 r .. m > u.0 ■ L to ►t to .e = L y 0 0. .- ! O Cr. u 0 -- y L 0...- .. u C C• L 04 d •O C W to C •-- .+ 7- MI L L. L 0 V .e O • W 10 1e 0 0 0 L 0 1•• C. O• Cr• W a 7 1•- Ie N .+ W L W W C 1 C C 0 0 1n el W W C S C C.3 W ..r 0 C C m + . 1e 0 .0 .• C la •••• Li 01 I••• 0 >..- ! O• a M 1e Z a = .+ V1 . L L 1.- C) . d c W a - = W 0 .t CI W L W C L .! .t .0 0 T. •O C= 0 0 IM O > •• C1 .- .e 1- 1••- to V b w o 0 N O L . L ! W 1e . = d L .r .. L= M . Q) L W L W O L W .e ! •• L. 1e .e 10 W -• 0 W - C CO W W C to ...I C c0 C= 0. n•. F.' CO W 0. J H. u7 a. LL CL C W cc N N =_ . = C C- -r./).1 . , . - ,.'d • .7• - . f i i _ , •._, ; - . . i .t., ^ .- --e_2,..- i A C C 1-ko -i . v1 � ' s j r 7 • — M _ ';'4 ` O• u `4. fi...t x''J -, • o o > CO*: o , o , o v �. .. :.a, a. j1- .2 ff : i - • 7 "7•;;;..7. Y¢: 0 ..C. . �+�•rv O O • O .e. O N O ��. O � . s ' is:k .Y ` 7 c ° F ' �" 7� r�' F° .1 } ...... „� s _i.•. _ .r A^ .s: .- _ ` 5., O - r. 0 - CI r : • 0 - .a... ' • v •{•. .. M . ci y . �, `' . Y y , ”' } - : - .1 4 ::; . .e 1. e r. .,..G r ^.. A, 7 _ s a.. - 1 _ n y . - . ' , F'L -t 's v+ t � 1+ ° • a• 4 �4 i .a• .f "t '!S�• d ▪ •G -wr:+ N t.....7.-" , .,.1•, _ a O HMt , 0 0 0 z ..• - 0 0 .+ t . 0 1 ... . • t " 1"�h c- g :.,44,3”. 1 fK 0 0 - 0 0 S .. co O s - co • t _ co Z - ' .. - I••. r • O 0 0 0 0 o. 0 0 = O O W • IA . YY 0 - • 0 . OC . • • - Z • • r J d O- w .., v- • 0 co O O 0 Ca 0 co . O G 0 0 ' Y7 N • O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 O O O 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 • O O 0 O O O O in h O O O O O O O C W Q 03 0 0 0 0 N N 0 O 10 co O IP7 0 •■. 7. CD CO 0 N ... .r — .•, 11'7 ti an r. ... co, N C 0 0 •'• .. N L.7 = O.. . 0 0 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ■ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 J W t1 ) '" r _ .. .. .. _ .. r .. .. .. 0 0 0 VI 0 U7 l9 co 1f7 0 1 In SO 0 0 0 SO 11'7 0 Q L La fa 0 0 0 N 0 - Cal N IA ^ 0 1— 1+ 0 0 11'7 1. f - 0 . - . > W fa If7 In M h .O N N •a• M M M 11 . 'I' CC 0 0 .�.. N M N M 03 0- C • 7C CL. . N /a ai A o .1 .. r. O O 0 o r■ r. r. .. • C O CO N 7 co • • 0 A o .0 aI .. C O • C 0 • .. • CC 0 0 r. ZI CO CI CT G r ,, 1-• 0 • W 0 •o W CO >' .� u CO 0 al d ..r A V M • C C f, > 7 .. 4 •O 4.• a I- as 0 .. Q. .• NO G A CC o 0 0 0J c c o c as re o rr a, aC 16. o a. .0 ac o 0 . ►. 0.1 O. 1.. . 0 .• d .. N .. O 0 Ili O . .. 0. 7 Z O ... 7 ..., a, r. fL o ... .a - OS ... S 0 R u >. . r. 7t 1n r 7 W 1-■ .il 4.. W .•. 1. W •+ 111 y 1..1 0 Ca. CO = m t .0 W .7/ G G i1 *ZS d . a O 7 M-0 L. Cf..r 1.J 1- r O w .a 0 CC 0 0 N r• 0 .•• • C oil .ti Z ... O. u D 0 Z Cl. .0 0 J.0 CY r. 1` u1 0 y 0 Z �- •••-• s. o .O 0 .a .. a1 0 W L. C1 aI L 0 .•. 0 0 0 • 111 d la C. = 0 C > a. ti CC C 0 1 C 0 C O b la- CY ▪ 0 Z N r. s .-• .. O r. .. O. 1■- -. O. C..1 0 A C 7. 0 Q d 0 cr c d .. Y1 O 0. 0 0 Z c 0 Z Z ti G. 1 C . C 7 0 OS C 7 L. . J 0 7 a. • . a. O a. .. 0 0 LL +• f. 0 O G 1..1 z co /a 0 aI N 7 7 O Z 1 W CO CI Z O. N J 0 r 03 as r Z C C C L' "a 7 0 O. Q Z > O CC L ■ CO > CC Q> > so. o ... C N i_ W d 0 A o I.. •w Z _ If Lt. F•• .a 7 6 A 7 7 ... .a d J Z X. o Cd 4 6 CL V �,_ CO O.. CO G L1. CO C C J CO U. ' CC CO I V 6 (I) ' y £ • • y1 1"... • w 0 O ' -...-- O .„ .. . r '. O ,..",•..1,.....r.... y O "(' 'i O ex -•" O . ,"�' O • `' ?S'�y rr •s , `� • - !!Y -� P ' t - : . O O .,:I.•. - J .. •v; .i.._ O O t... O J'- O ...t 0 .411 co ,.s ':S'I..?`.I.6I . • sf' t ' "• a . O O O O O • _ E * „ z� -• r P7 r9 O • .4 ' _ > o r o 0 x•�' , o e• •o 0 - . ...� .•. C • • • • II7 n • _.... - .. CO O 0 n• O O _ O. 0 V > O O s: • LL .... > O. y IO _ h 7. O O W IA r O C c N o. _ is o 0 .. Y =:. _ s I•- c c , o o c o . P. o 0 O W O Co V r O s . O • • • • -. ..•• C _ A WP . >' .Y .J N • • I • a O Os • a O o to _ o 0 CT. o o m I u o 0 .+ > c I 11 v • .. .. I o 0 C. N N d W I.•1 M _ • L C r N .. s ... em .r C = N G O I L L O .+ Z A O - O W 0 O O O O ~ c y O O O O Z • 6 =¢ L> {A O O O ▪ > CD CO I. d M1 CY ea •... O P /L 0 0 . J � C. M N WI Q C: C v a a n c -. • a Y. t w . I t P- .0 -+�,. o o 0 c• 0 • P- o o c• • = o 0 0 0 c= ∎-• o o N c o = W m P7 P7 O P W Cl. O .••• P • •• • _ CC CC O ••. CO L7 d CC • .0. N ' a a . I . N • ... M vs C] J •O A C: J Q .:. .... el .... W ¢ 0 y . O W O Z .0 o I- P_ ¢ 7 7 J • N iA W O c C: x cc E .a ¢ C ID 0. cn • z • cn .+ ►• c L) W W IN •a O. • O O CC ... . • 0_ C > cm O W . .• O WV .. . . A III C ao. W 0 C! L Il I.•• ..• Q W C: > O in O. O C. N 0 L C: C m C ? • O W M N W Z a t r J O. •.• W 7 •. J W • L iL Cr L. W • . • •s 0 ¢ u C • W d. Z J .Z 4 . Y CC. i • ¢ W J 6 = • • /� . , s ,, iv, ''.% city of ecigcin 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 mayor PHONE: (612) 454 -8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A SMITH 1C ELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Council Members January 14, 1987 THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Clerk MR JOHN RUTFORD, REFERRAL COORDINATOR METROPOLITAN COUNCIL 300 METRO SQUARE BLDG ST PAUL MN 55101 Re: Metropolitan Airports Commission Capital Improvements Program Dear Mr. Rutford: Please let me take the opportunity to make several comments pertinent to the Airport Capital Improvements Program which you forwarded to us for our review. The City of Eagan is generally in support of those items which tend to better monitor and address the noise situation in the vicinity of the Minneapolis /St. Paul Airport. Specifically, the noise monitoring system and noise suppressor listed in the 1987 program addressed concerns raised by the City in the past. Specifically, the availability of adequate noise monitoring data on a continuous and simultaneous basis will allow for a more equitable distribution of noise impacts if properly applied. The run -up suppressor is likewise of interest to the City although we have been left with the impression in the past that the MAC has no interest in implementing this element. If an effective run -up noise suppressor can be constructed within the foreseeable future, it will address numerous concerns raised by City residents. In the alternative, the acquisition of the run -up pad by the MAC from Northwest Airlines may address this issue as well if it results in the MAC being better able to enforce its run -up policy. If this is to be considered as an alternative to the suppressor, the City would strongly encourage the Metropolitan Council to require specific definition by the MAC of the means by which they intend to optimize the policy. If a satisfactory means were available, the City would be generally in support of this capital expenditure. THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY / ii0 • MAC Capital Improvements Program January 14, 1987 Page Two The 1988 Capital Improvement Program raises a significant issue for the City. The Runway 4 -22 extension project requires the strictest of environmental reviews due to its potential to significantly alter the noise impact pattern in the vicinity of the airport. Without adequate environmental documentation, it would be difficult to determine whether or not the change in the noise situation would be positive or negative. The City has been anticipating an opportunity to review the environmental data related to this proposal for many months now and, in its absence, cannot in good faith support this proposal. This does not preclude the possibility that the City may assume another position after review, but certainly no affirmative position can be taken in its absence. The City reserves its right to make additional comments in the future. Thank you for this opportunity to provide this input. Sincerely yours, Jon Hohenstein Administrative Assistant JDH /jeh � South Metro Airport Action Council 5157 Thirteenth Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 (612) 823 -0694 • LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT Dear SMAAC Family: A year of hard work and major accomplishments are behind us now and the fight continues in 1987 to end noise pollution in our neighborhoods and homes. In 1986, we lobbied the legislature to establish a moratorium on construction at MSP. We pushed for a MAC task force on noise and actively participated in develop- ing a "noise budget" ordinance. We introduced noise planks at the IR and DFL state nominating conventions. We logged a record number of noise complaints to MASAC, and we pushed hard for a new MAC Chairman to replace Ray Glumack. Along the way, we made many friends. The City of Minneapolis is actively pursuing measures to defend us against interests that would just as soon bulldoze all the homes within a five mile radius of the airport. Local, neighborhood politicians are poised to fight in the Minnesota Legislature to bring even more pressure against the MAC. The Citizen League and the Metropolitan Council are actively studying the feasibility of a second airport. The challenges in 1987 will be even greater. There will be more "noise" bills introduced during this current legislative session, and there will be MAC's crucial note on the proposed "noise budget" ordinance - voting deadline: April 1, 1987, and implementation deadline: June 15, 1987. Get Active - Since the fight continues, your continued support is vital. Attend "Noise - Budget" Public Meetings Two informational meetings about the proposed "noise - budget" ordinance will be held to explain the proposal and answer any questions: Date: January 22, 1987 Time: 7:30 - 9:30 pm Place: Alternative Site #1 Nakomis Community Center 2401 East Minnehaha Pkwy. Alternative Site #2 Richfield Community Center 70th & Nicollet A formal Public Hearing will be held on Wednesday, January 22. See enclosed flyer for details. Volunteer Your Time and Talents Please renew your SMAAC membership today and give more if you can. SMAAC not only needs your financial support, it needs your active support as a volunteer. SMAAC's most effective calling card, in attacking the bureaucracies standing in our way, are the motivated and single - minded volunteers who attend meetings, write letters and recruit other members. Need volunteers for the following jobs: Telephone Callers To notify 10 -20 members about important SMAAC meetings, rallies or legislative committee hearings. Call Norma Theisen 866 -1784 or Eileen Scully 824 -9735 Newsletter Distribution To help organize monthly mailings. Call Sue Hageman 823 -3973 To hand deliver flyers to homes on your block. Call Gordon Dooley 822 -2954 or Eileen Scully 824 -9735 Attendance at Legislative Committee Hearings Neighborhood legislators attended SMAAC's general meeting in December and outlined their 1987 legislative strategy. The moratorium bill will be introduced again this session, along with several bills to place statutory limits on the MAC and make them more accountable to the legislature. One bill will mandate a state noise budget if the currently proposed ordinance fails to gain MAC approval. Legislature oversight of MAC's budget will be the goal of another bill. Call Loren Simer 789 -2724 If you already have joined SMAAC, please past this leter and application to one of your neighbors who is not a member. SMAAC MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION NAME ADDRESS PHONE CITY & ZIP VOLUNTEER? AREA OF INTEREST Mail to SMAAC; 5116 Columbus Ave. S.; Mpls, MN 55417 (824 -9735) 33 0. 0 yy . . r x r ,. . /" t� i V r 9 " �' Rv A k (r \ \ c _ . , yj ,�. z41"' . ' ♦ , VDl �V i y c 1i { t • ,,,, a +3 -' . .. � 1k J `,,,.. c <` < « c < � .; , .v1 .: y - '. iii < <a <c/� c�< h .p, f 'F'�, 5 '.. Q W - I~ (�� ,t ,'.^', ,' v L" c'. - , Ai< c c�C v, � �r k it ? r .r • �� '„7 � j a *;W '. y r 'i; f v "Fi� r, r•S . ? `<� c 1 l r C ,�..r '4 i ` A. !- 1 a) e G O .; '. rje {� 1. < <a « <�c� < ° F.^ i s r c ..„......<...• ccc tr W a • o l0 e V W r k�'" h i ` \ \ � <i <« x' p. c = a' ,jr 1 4` � , ; � 4 C g H eel '6 C ' W E Z • � ', ' `5 ±1 tTvir•".ty • q `. ti ; tx t . } t T N 3 • O C ¢ � 1 -. 17 C N _ ....• � / -t wi ` „c , e 0 . rz8.E 8 h e re,) oo ° oo ,. w o i,• = b e m c C d C � 1p Q) 4) U c s.. = ° e r �F +a , y s r .Y C) t O. o; a) p c y N o V U1 y f•' . n •d � , ” o � p it C N e 3 V c .+ 9 r- L. O "' N a) e a) ea G y c O R i ' -t 1-,. 11 � 0 � . 0 V 0 U o oo r 0 .0 7 rn .. :? . b w c i.. 'O � o �'• y c = Iv �.. «o) •v r p `) $Q•c�a`"ie C �� �' c ��) �� V g '� ° g - v C "c 8 e _ a) h to h �� y ^ � 5 u ea E a • a c g u...u g ^E $ woPs O , u .. a.....ea a = a r f • i f,,$. �.- ° 0 1... O o gg c c — c c t a) el Q Q�«-Q o x; CO >_ ro trb .• u 3 O o -E• b T ct ° c O o r n i "/y i v c . c ° a ca 'c,,. i O y N 7 ° U U O : , .+, E . .., . '= O r c ° e 0 u ., c F i t y: K ; .,1 F} o- 5 ,< { R '� , ` � h ° r"'Ot i V • . cu 0 Cam. L am b l . a .0 .( 3 c e NU'•„ V ... ,.� } ; 4 ,, ',* ,. 6, e F a) a E"Q u `.. l,7a)> E.oOE ,{' "• t. ,,, €' 4 v �� v 44 V 8 tTo > ° g '3 e� oNA e E E ' eo •e Uiv �]C r, ,p.. 1.1 ca CL) : Q °z� 1 S.0 0 0 s °���' �:. p 2 aaQ ,.' k r''.'`2:+ ? [ ':."hs4 P7.r'� ° ..i o ! '� , O y in ° W 7 d O L O `v � . y g. 52 ' .o Vi G, •b ° V ° y O C 6 tu.g • ,V,. W 1 •' 4.. ,65 a Q c ca Cn c. a) . u y t ' c 4 c .0 a O Cn y p Oa U N W ;7 1.+ /A 2 ,�pQQ: o u ao c e y) o E = es . ?o� 0 E 0 >, o ° = ,�,U �" 0 4 ° . ` - m . r/ - .rJ y M U a...0 U - cU N `•y y ,„ „ c •e A _ .c L O' V � ' . � Ad O d -p eu t • o C . a 9. * 0 'fl+ O Q D w �� E c. O c p.� y O.� O f ... 3 c E c p, W Q •s ' e eau p C . a y ' = p e ca ?. a =1 w s ,0 ° 0”" w m v o eo E ;c E�' o u • ea ►: e e 4 a) 71 ea a° •° Z 2 w�/ EX V � 1 ° a c o . a^ c 3 '0 3 -yea : �ov «� : j o • .+ Q � �. V W N .0 e O d ,p R7 � 0) . • •ey c « 'C v, U � ea W D4= V G. . F C •� `� ed '$ o a E E � ) c o or ea Wu ' u .��c u ° e � cEa u E y V 3 3 a� E v Z'ea h u v �.5" ° s.) ^ ^ , Q , «�' a y e a o; o .., 1111... . =o0i Qs .c UU1 !il ai >1fl c ° Pitl „IC - e o '° a) 3 v N Q ° ..a «O O. s � co u e3 ;oil O ea u Q ., •v ea , .5. oo a T? :1 s e ao " e _ r °) n u u ea v, °o v inC 49 ° .s .E 2• E .°Q c� E -� E .� - •o 'c O E:; • u v o•v_._. u rn^ c u . o a) F - c c a e— - o � 2.4 .75 i5' o v 8..- ea W °'-_0 ea"' 3e.. o o h c,c o c:,' �c n eoU • ,..,1 c o.� .c e�. � "= ooca a � • o E o �` � 0 R. e 'o v • .. ai o 5 = •c air u Le V E as a 65 „t _ ° . ea a: oo '� •,. ., A a) , u ,.: a eO c = u ce, s c o ea O boo a t u u la u „ ,.. h 4 �..,U y ! u > a•v F: ° u E .E' y e° `•a8 g.y I. " c° , •; e- ti y et 7 2 v, y « 5 o u o c °)Q ,. .. o `' v u c s N: . c E "" c (]. c w OA—.. • y a .., in > ca ca H C C O ca y ,.-. 3 •�•a �" . e Q ,, E t °►- s ea . y 0 Cr u a a c a a� =... .+ u ° u .... o : d > = a .. ©� ° 3 a, E Q C Er ;, t') •. c u u > .c u 1.s a ,a ).c 3 O u •° c > V yv Tt ° E e F" o e."41 : v ." H a) 0 o c ' u a .E oo E..r ew a) e u .T; p a � = C # • ° > o U ea •6" - 'o c ='h 3 E V. ` o ° u . ." o > h E y O ,� • V ca As ,.. V a) is ca U • .!- • ; c , r ' 4 . Airport Noise — Budget Ordinance Public Hearing Proposal: The proposal now before MAC is for a two -step noise reduction process. The first step represents a roll -back to the average noise level experienced at the airport in 1984. This requires an 18 percent reduction in "noise • energy" generated at the airport measured from August of this year, to be accomplished by June, 1987. The second step is a rollback to the average noise level during the first six months of '84. This equates to a 22 percent reduction from the August baseline, to be achieved by June, 1990. When: Wednesday, January 28 Where: MAC General Offices 6040 28th Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 726 -1892 Time: 1:00 - 5:00 p.m. 7:00 -11:00 p.m. Be There! Give Your Support To SMAAC Testimony 7:00 p.m. Wes Skoglund State Representative - District 61 B • 8:00 Dave Koehser w ; SMAAC Board Member on "Noise Budget" Committee ;;' • 8:15 Rick Jellinger President, SMAAC r , South Metro Airport Action Council Richard Jellinger, President 5157 -13th Ave. S. Minneapolis, MN 55417 • � �•�;,f " (612) 823 -0694 Note: Number after your name on mailing label indi a last year for which you paid membership dues " ' 3