Loading...
10/10/2006 - City Council SpecialAGENDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING TUESDAY OCTOBER 10, 2006 5:30 P.M. EAGAN ROOM -CITY HALL I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD P. ~ III. RECEIVE ORFIELD NOISE MONITORING ANALYSIS P a- IV. RECEIVE UPDATE ON PREPLANNING EFFORTS TO ENSURE CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS -MANAGE THE PANDEMIC EVENT ~. ~,Q V. REVIEW PROPOSED BURNSVILLE /EAGAN CABLE TELEVISION (BECT) 2007 OPERATING BUDGET ~~ VI. RECEIVE AND UPDATE ON THE 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Information Memo October 10, 2006 Special City Council Meeting III. RECEIVE ORFIELD NOISE MONITORING ANALYSIS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To accept the noise monitoring analysis report and request a review and recommendation by the Airport Relations Commission. FACTS: ^ Elliott Dick, Orfield Laboratories, will present and discuss the results from the phase I- phase II noise comparison study. ^ Wyle Laboratories conducted the initial noise study in June 2005, prior to the new north- south Runway 17/35 opening. ^ The city hired Orfield Laboratories to perform the follow up noise study, post-runway opening. That study was completed in June 2006. ^ The raw data collected during the phase II study showed little, if any, change from data collected during the pre-runway study. Orfield was hired to compare and analyze results from Phase I and Phase II studies. ATTACHMENTS: Attached without page number is a copy report from Phase I -Phase II Comparison Study. Agenda Memo October 10, 2006, Special Eagan City Council Meeting IV. Update on Preplanning Efforts to Ensure Continuity of Government Operations in the Event of an Pandemic ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: No Formal Action Required FACTS: • At a May 2006, listening session, the Eagan City Council received a briefing about the need for city staff to begin developing a continuity plan in the event of an Avian Influenza Pandemic. • A committee of city staff members has been meeting regularly and is in the process for developing a plan for future council consideration. It is anticipated the council would be able to review the plan in December, 2006. ATTACHMENTS: Memo from James McDonald, Chief of Police, to the Mayor and Council regarding Avian Influenza planning efforts. Attachments on pages 2 through ~ . a City of Ea~aIl FOLIC ~ MORANDIIM DATE: October 5, 2006 TO: Eagan Mayor and City Council Members FROM: James S. McDonald, Police Chief SUBJECT: Planning Update in the event of an Avian Influenza Pandemic Purpose At a May 2006, Eagan City Council Listening Session, the Mayor and Council received a briefing outlining the need for staff to begin planning a city response to a potential Avian Influenza Pandemic. This document will attempt to update the mayor and council on planning initiatives. Brief History and Current Status of Avian Influenza As described previously, Avian Influenza (flu) is a virus that is highly contagious and mainly effects birds. The current Avian Flu, identified as HSN1, has been found in Africa Asia, and Europe where it has caused the death or destruction of an estimated 150 million birds. The virus is generally "species specific," but has crossed the "species barrier" and infected humans. Although there are an extraordinary high number of casualties in birds, there have been a low number of human deaths related to the virus. Statistics compiled earlier this year note there were approximately 148 human deaths reported world wide. The humans who died from the HSN1 virus had lived in the undeveloped countries of Asia where farmers lived/worked in close proximity to poultry who had the disease. Although, it is difficult for humans to get the HSNI virus directly from birds, it is believed humans inhabiting an environment where they butcher infected fowl or come in contact with bird feces are at a higher risk of contracting the disease. Transmission of the HSN 1 virus from human to human is very unlikely. However, if the virus were to mutate, or "re-assort" with another virus that is readily transmitted between humans, a stage will be set for a worldwide pandemic. It should be noted, health officials are studying a case in Indonesia where a human to human transfer among family members may have occurred. 3 Page 2) Assumptions in the Event of an Pandemic According to information from the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, the following planning assumptions should be considered by local units of government in their continuity of government planning. A. A pandemic could last 6-8 weeks and include several waves over the course of a year. B. Up to 30 percent of the workforce could be out sick during a pandemic. Absenteeism could reach 40 percent during the peak of a pandemic. People may decide to stay home to care for family members or for children when schools are closed. Fear of exposure may lead to lower rates of absenteeism before an actual outbreak begins. C. Employer flexibility will be necessary and might include staggered shifts, expansion of physical space between work stations, or allowing employees to work from home. D. Leave policies may need to be flexible. E. Employees may need personal protective equipment (PPE) to maintain priority service functions. This requires implementation of PPE policies and procedures and ensuring the required training and fit testing is done. F. Availability of supplies will be limited because of hoarding, combined with limited production and transportation limits. G. Administrative rule waivers and alternate service delivery systems may be necessary to maintain priority service functions. Local jurisdictions should develop policies for reduced service delivery. H. Community buildings may need to be used as alternate care facilities and standards of care may need to be adjusted when hospitals are overwhelmed. Local jurisdictions need to make sure they can staff existing health care facilities before establishing alternate health care facilities. (Ensure that these alternate sites can be staffed locally prior to opening. Make sure that the facility owners/operators know they are in the local plan.) I. Up to two percent of the 30 percent who fall ill may die. This rate could overwhelm mortuary and burial services. Local jurisdictions may need to assist local mortuary services. J. Assistance from outside organizations, county, state and federal government will be limited. Page 3) Current Status of City Efforts Since May, 2006, employees from police, fire, community development, human resources, public works, parks, information technologies, communications, and emergency management have been working to develop a plan that would help the city manage a pandemic scenario. While using the above assumptions along with trying to forecast the potential impacts on city employees and community members, the committee has been reviewing operations and evaluating the potential implications on service delivery in the event our workforce is impacted by a pandemic. Ultimately, the evaluations will be placed into a pandemic plan that will be reviewed by senior management. After the review, the document will be forwarded to the city council for consideration. It is anticipated the plan will be forwarded to the council for approval in December, 2006. Conclusion Although the committee is carefully evaluating service issues that may need to be managed in the event of a pandemic, it is important to realize the difficulty of developing steadfast plans when you have to rely upon a workforce that may not be available. Consequently, any plan developed will need to have some inherent flexibility to reassess any unforeseen issues that may arise. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. If this memo has generated additional questions, please feel free to contact me. Agenda Memo October 10, 2006, Special City Council Meeting V. REVIEW PROPOSED BURNSVILLE/EAGAN COMMUNITY TELEVISION (BECT) 2007 OPERATING BUDGET DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction, if any, to staff regarding the 2007 Burnsville/Eagan Community Television Budget and to direct that it be placed on a future regular City Council meeting consent agenda for formal ratification. BACKGROUND: • Community Television operates under a joint powers agreement with the cities of Eagan and Burnsville. • Equal contributions of $103,500 each by the member cities remain the same. • With the exception of a 3% cost of living adjustment and an increase in hours for part-time cablecasters (to facilitate Web streaming), the operating budget is essentially unchanged from 2006. • Capital expenditures in 2007 are up significantly, reflecting underspending on replacement in 2005 and early 2006, and the anticipated need to replace studio equipment in 2007. Capital spending was originally budgeted and approved at more than $136,000 for 2006, but by year's end staff estimates spending will only amount to $76,000. That additional $60,000 will be carried forward into 2007. • Note that should BECT later relocate to a different facility, studio systems and cameras can also be relocated. Without upgrades in 2007, BECT would likely be left without a functioning facility. • Per direction of the two city councils, the city attorneys of Burnsville and Eagan are in the process of wrapping up a 1-year lease at the current facility to preserve maximum flexibility both in terms of national franchise legislation and/or expanded partnerships in Dakota County. • The 2007 budget is modeled on normal operations. Should new federal legislation pass, staff will return to both city councils with any necessary budget revisions or reconsideration. • Even without changes by Congress, as noted on the attached chart, a plan to fund capital improvements beyond mid-2010 is necessary. While this is actually an improvement on earlier 2004 fund balance projections, much more work remains to be done. • Long-term funding, location and facility-size discussions will be a major focus of the 2007 work plan, along with generating additional outside revenue for the facility. • It may also be of interest for the City Council to note that the Telecommunications Commission received the findings of a Subscriber Survey from Dr. Bill Morns of Decision Resources. The survey was commissioned to determine satisfaction with services offered by Comcast, viewership, and value perception for community television programming. 400 subscribers were surveyed in March/April of 2006. Overall customer service ratings for Comcast were positive with 80% giving a "good" or "excellent" rating. Only 6% said customer service was "poor" ~D • As for local programming, 83% said it was important or somewhat important to have available. • City Council meetings are the most highly viewed public meetings with 7% saying they watch frequently and 48% watching occasionally. • The survey presentation is available on cable television Channel 16. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page of your packet is the proposed 2007 BECT budget • Attached on page of your packet is a chart showing the fund balance projections for BEC through 2011. City of Burnsville Burnsville / Eagan Telecommunications Commission* Five-Year Financial Plan Chg Projected 2005 2006 2007 from 2006 Actual Estimate Proposed to 2007 Budget Bud et 2008 2009 2010 2011 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Intergovernmental: Member Contributions: City of Eagan 103,500 103,500 103,500 0.0% 103,500 103,500 103,500 103,500 City of Burnsville 103,500 103,500 103,500 0.0% 103,500 103,500 103,500 103,500 Total Intergovernmental Sources 207,000 207,000 207,000 207,000 207,000 207,OD0 207,000 Operating: PEG Access Fees** 647,983 671,072 670,000 -0.2% 676,700 683,467 690,302 697,205 Other 40,350 21,600 25,100 16.2% 27,700 29,020 30,472 32,069 Total Operating Sources 688,333 692,672 695,100 0.4% 704,400 712,487 720,774 729,274 TOTAL SOURCE OF FUNDS 895,333 899,672 902,100 0.3% 911,400 919,487 927,774 936,274 USE OF FUNDS: Operating: Personnel 442,370 505,186 525,748 4.1% 541,520 557,766 574,499 591,734 Current Expenses 294,318 313,350 309,650 -1.2% 298,070 307,012 316,222 335,709 Total Operating Uses 736,688 818,536 835,398 2.1% 839,590 864,778 890,721 927,443 Non-Operating: Capital Outlay 177,337 76,000 205,000 169.7% 86,200 106,000 87,000 92,000 Total Nan-Operating Uses 177,337 76,000 205,000 169.7% 86,200 106,000 87,000 92,000 TOTAL USE OF FUNDS 914,024 894,536 1,040,398 16.3% 925,790 970,778 977,721 1,019,443 NETDIFFERENCE (18,692) 5,136 (138,298) (14,390) (51,291) (49,947) (83,169) Beginning Fund Balance 411,507 392,815 397,951 259,653 245,263 193,973 144,025 Ending Fund Balance 392,815 397,951 259,653 245,263 193,973 144,025 60,857 Other financial information: Year-end Cash Balance 596,829 601,965 463,667 449,277 397,986 348,039 264,870 Three months operating cash estimate 223,634 260,100 231,447 242,694 244,430 254,861 231,861 Projected cash balance 373,195 341,866 232,220 206,583 153,556 93,178 33,010 * Includes Community Television and the Telecommunications Commission ** 2005 adjusted for prepaid 2006 revenues v a~ c m c ~c~a g E~ m U p U p ~m C C ~ LL O (V ~ C ~ LL. I r r N ~ ~ ~ y- ~ ~ ~ _ '~ N V V ~ W p " Q fl 0. . m ~ N ~ ~ .r _ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ , o m ~ , _ N m V ~ d ti ~ ~ ~ N LL N ~ ... t0 O N O O O O O O O ~-. O . O -~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~t M N r- ~ N M 9 Agenda Memo October 10, 2006 Special City Council Meeting VI. STATUS REPORT - 2008 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To review/comment and/or provide staff with direction regarding the Plan Update. FACTS: - Earlier this year, the City Council directed staff to begin the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan. A fall check point, with the Council, was built into that process. - In Minnesota, authority for land-use planning and regulation is vested primarily in local governments. The Metropolitan Land Planning Act, a state law first passed in 1976 and amended several time since, requires local governments in the seven-county Twin Cities area to develop local comprehensive plans. - The plans must contain a number of elements, among them: o Maps and data showing current and future land use o A Housing plan o A surface water management plan o Plans for public facilities, like transportation, sewers, and parks - The Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires communities to review and update their local comprehensive plans at least once every 10 years. Local plan updates are due in 2008. - Communities then submit their plans to the Metropolitan Council, which determines if the local plans: o Conform to metropolitan system plans o Are consistent with other adopted plans of the Metropolitan Council o Are compatible with each other - Local governments may not implement any measures that would allow development in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. - Additional Council check points and opportunities for public input will occur throughout 2007. Staff would propose that the next checkpoint occur in the spring of 2007 and that a schedule be established at that point for the remainder of the review and public input process. l~ - The background attachments are presented in an executive summary form. As with the budget presentation in August, staff have a limited formal presentation and will step through the section summaries to permit the Council to review and comment on the sections as appropriate. ATTACHMENTS: (1) Executive summary/status reports, by Comprehensive Plan .section, are attached on pages through. Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -LAND USE Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Land Use Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to define the City's vision and expectations for land use throughout the City. The 1995 Amendments to the Metropolitan Land Planning Act require that local governments achieve consistency between their Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. While the Comprehensive Plan describes the vision for how Eagan should develop over the next 10-20 years, the Zoning Ordinance is the tool for achieving that vision by specifically regulating the type, scale and location of development. Certainly the overall character of the City has changed over the past twenty years from a mostly developing community to a developed community. To date approximately 96% of the land in Eagan has been developed. Therefore, significant changes in development patterns are not anticipated in the 2008 Land Use Plan. However, changes will continue to occur in response to new trends and as older uses redevelop to new uses. Status of Work to Date The Land Use Section of the current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Section has been generally reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission in a Workshop setting and planning staff will complete an inventory that will define existing inconsistencies and highlight current vacant and underutilized land for discussion in the coming months. Additionally, every residential property will be viewed in 2007 via a windshield survey that will confirm the general site conditions and use. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • An aging population (as the Baby Boomer generation works through its life cycle) will have an impact of some kind on Land Use from residential, fewer persons available to purchase boomer housing, to commercial/industrial, fewer persons entering the work force. • As commercial industrial build out occurs and existing facilities age, the need to reuse, revitalize or redevelop certain properties will become increasingly important to meet demand for business growth and/or reallocation within the community. • Eagan has benefited by diversity in its business community and has been buffered from economic cycles for that reason. The City will benefit by continuing to position itself to support commercial/industrial diversity in the future. • Changes in businesses and their products are leading to the increasing presence of a variety of home based businesses and possible interest in live-work land use alternatives. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. ~~ Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -TRANSPORTATION PLAN Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to: 1) identify existing and future transportation needs in terms of the roadway and non-roadway system; 2) influence decisions that the City is making by anticipating the character, magnitude, and timing of future transportation demand; and 3) provide for an integrated transportation system that will serve the needs of its residents, support the City's development plans, and complement the metropolitan transportation system that lies within its boundaries. In addition to guiding development of the City's transportation system, the plan fulfills the requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 473.859 (subdivision 3) requiring a public facilities plan section within a comprehensive plan to be submitted for Metropolitan Council approval. Status of Work to Date Separate Comprehensive Transportation Plans have been prepared and/or updated previously to meet the Metropolitan Council's Comprehensive Guide Plan requirements. In 2006, the consulting firm of SRF Consulting Group, Inc. was again retained to prepare this next update. To date, the process is approximately 20% complete and a final draft will be ready for formal review by February 20, 2007. Copies will be sent to adjacent communities and regional agencies for review and comment during the second quarter of 2007. There are no public reviews planned beyond those associated with the overall Comprehensive Guide Plan review. Complementary efforts that have been under taken since the previous plan update and that are currently underway including the following: • City of Eagan Transportation Infrastructure Needs Analysis (TINA) • CSAH 28 (Yankee Doodle Road) Corridor Study • Eagan/Inver Grove Heights North-South Corridor Study Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends Continued population and employment growth in the City, as well as surrounding communities, will result in increasing demand to the transportation system. Greater local and regional funding for transportation and transit improvements will need to be pursued to provide for adequate preservation and expansion of the transportation system. The community's growing desire for choice in transportation, including walkability within the City and improved transit service, will require coordinated and complimentary land use and transportation planning. Future transit opportunities include expanded transit service, Cedar Avenue BRT and Robert Street Corridor Transitway. Identification of transportation problems and opportunities in terms of roadway capacity, safety, functional classification, and jurisdiction may likely lead to changes requiring ~3 other agency approval or agreements. Some changes may provide additional financial burden to the City, while the lack of approval may limit funding opportunities. • The development of a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan/Policy is very likely to address requests for reduced speed limits, stop signs, traffic calming, etc. • Creation of a "transportation impact fee" for all future development or redevelopment to address increasing transportation system demand and decreasing funding opportunities. • Increased emphasis on securing funding sources to complete the design and construction of the Ring Road. • Use of roundabouts versus traffic control signals. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. /~ Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -AVIATION/AIRPORTS Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Aviation/Airports Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to define the City's relationship with the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in the context of both its environmental impacts on the residential community and its benefits as an amenity for both the residents and businesses in the community, because of its proximity to the City. Status of Work to Date With its update of the Metropolitan Systems Plans in preparation for the cities' Comprehensive Plan updates, the Metropolitan Council incorporated its Aviation Plan into the Region's Transportation Plan. To conform with that approach, staff proposes to incorporate the City's Aviation/Airports Section into the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Section. Aviation will continue to be a defined subsection of the Transportation Section and the update has been initiated with that expectation. In 2006, the Airport Relations Commission and City staff have begun work on several activities that relate to the update of this Plan Section. Aviation/Airports Section Update -Dianne Miller -Staff and the Commission have prepared a draft update and performed a preliminary review of issues and topics to be addressed. That work will continue in the months ahead. It is anticipated that the ARC will hold its own public input meetings prior to incorporation of the draft into the forma] plan for the APC's public review, North-South Runway Noise Monitoring Study - Orfield Labs -The City's pre and post opening noise studies have been completed and the results will be used to further define goals and policies relative to the new runway and its operation. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • The FAA's use of the North-South Runway continues to evolve. To date, it has resulted in operations different from what had been anticipated during the planning and environmental review processes. • The economic health of the airline industry will have direct, but opposite, impacts on Eagan's economic amenities and noise environment. • Continued conversion of hush-kitted aircraft to factory stage III aircraft will have a generally positive influence on single event noise levels. • The trend away from regional propeller planes and toward smaller regional jets may counterbalance some of that effect. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. /~ Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -PUBLIC UTILITIES (SANITARY SEWER) Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Sanitary Sewer Section of the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to: 1) project municipal demand on Metropolitan Council's interceptors and wastewater treatment plants; 2) specify areas to be served by the public sewer system 3) outline a program for addressing inflow and infiltration into the sewer system; and 4) set standards for private sewer systems, as applicable. The City is preparing the Sanitary Sewer Plan as a two step effort. Since the Metropolitan Council will not review a 2030 Sanitary Sewer Plan prior to receiving a 2030 Land Use Plan, the first step is to submit an Amendment to the already approved Sanitary Sewer Plan (originally submitted in 2000). In many aspects this Amendment will be identical to what will become the 2030 Sanitary Sewer Plan. Submitting the document as a 2020 Amendment allows Metropolitan Council to review the document and offer official comments. These comments will assist the City in quickly turning this document into a 2030 Sanitary Sewer Plan that supports the over Comprehensive Guide Plan submittal. Status of Work to Date Separate local Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plans have been prepared and/or updated in 1965, 1976, 1982, 1988, and 2000 in concert with the City's significant growth. In 2006, the consulting firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc was again retained to prepare both the Amendment to the current 2000 Plan and the ultimate 2030 Update. The Amendment is approximately 95% completed and will be submitted for staff review in mid October. A final draft will be ready for formal review by Metropolitan Council in late October or early November, 2006. Copies will be sent to adjacent communities for review and comment concurrent with the Metropolitan Council review. There are no public reviews scheduled beyond those associated with the overall Comprehensive Guide Plan review. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends In the 2000 Sanitary Sewer Plan there was a large discrepancy between the City's projected flows and those of Metropolitan Council. The discrepancy was due to the City's flow projections for commercial land being reasonably conservative but not reflective of the actual flows generated by typical commercial properties in the City. In order to preempt dispute on sewage flows, the current Sanitary Sewer Plan projects flows using two methods. The first reflects "current trends" and uses lower flows from commercial properties based on historical flows records. These "current trends" flow estimates will be reported to Metropolitan Council and more closely match the Council's own predictions. The second method is "system design" and reflects the higher design flow for commercial property, similar to the 2000 Sanitary Sewer Plan. The "system design" flows provide a trunk system that allows the City a certain measure of reserve capacity in the event that a high sewage generating use does appear within its borders. I C~ • In 2005, the Metropolitan Council instituted an Inflow/Infiltration (I & I) Surcharge Program to eliminate the additional capacity within its interceptor system needed to serve excessive I & I. The Met Council established I & I thresholds, and communities that exceed this threshold are required to eliminate this excess flow within a reasonable timeframe. The 2030 Sanitary Sewer Plan Update will address the City's plan for reducing I & I below the established threshold. • Flow from the Minnesota Zoo in Apple Valley into Eagan's system accounts for the majority of the current documented excessive I & I. The 2030 Plan will better define the City and Zoo's responsibility toward this excessive I & I and the related financial surcharge. • The current Sanitary Sewer Plan and its flow projections include redevelopment and build-out of certain underutilized parcels within the City. These specific modifications to the land use plan will also include the Cedar Grove Redevelopment area. • Although not yet formally considered by the Eagan Council, the City of Rosemount's previously expressed interest in extending sanitary sewer service south of 120"' Street along the TH 3 corridor has been taken into consideration in calculating ultimate flows to properly evaluate the maximum impact on the entire system. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -PUBLIC UTILITIES (STORM SEWER) Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Storm Sewer Section of the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to: 1) manage stormwater volume and rate control for flood- protection; 2) develop, operate, and maintain the public storm drainage system; 3) minimize erosion and sedimentation and 4) promote groundwater recharge. Status of Work to Date Separate local Stormwater Management Plans were prepared or updated in 1965, 1972, 1978, 1984, and 1990 in concert with the City's significant growth. In 1999, the consulting firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. was again retained to update the 1990 plan. Near the proposed completion of the plan, the City was flooded in multiple areas as a result of the July 2000 Super Storm. All efforts on the plan were redirected toward the analysis and mitigation of the Super Storm. As a result of the flooding associated with the Super Storm, the scope of the plan update was modified to incorporate the analysis of the entire City to the level of a storm event comparable to the July 2000 Super Storm. The plan was also revised to provide a more operational perspective on flood control at significant ponds within the storm sewer system. The update of the Stormwater Management Plan was completed and formally approved by the City Council on January 17, 2006. Copies will be sent to adjacent communities for review and comment concurrent with the Metropolitan Council review. No public reviews have been scheduled, although the opportunity exists with the overall Comprehensive Guide Plan review. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends The comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan identifies a concept of providing for the managed conveyance of storm water flows from southeast Eagan into and through, as well as for, the Lebanon Hills Regional Park (LHRP). The proposed concept addresses past flooding of private property within the City and a County highway (Cliff Road). LHRP consists of approximately 1,400 acres, but does not have a managed surface water drainage system in place, although they have recently prepared a draft comprehensive drainage plan to manage the rate and volume of water that enters and flows through the park. On July 6, 2004, the City Council approved a project for constructing new storm sewer from southeast Eagan (Gun Club pond) into and through LHRP by way of Marsh Lake and McDonough Lake to the public system at Pond LP-51 and the Holland Lake lift station. City staff has communicated extensively with the staffs of Dakota County Parks and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. In order to construct the proposed improvements, approval will be needed from both of these agencies, as well as permission from the Met Council to work within LHRP. In the past, Dakota County has expressed objections to the amount of their proposed financial participation. However, a sunset date of June 2007 for designated state funding ($500,000) for the improvements may encourage approval from the County. /~ • Compliance with evolving federal and state stormwater requirements (i.e. stormwater pollution prevention, non-degradation and Impaired Waters/TMDLs) will likely require additional staffing needs or consultant services. • Development of policies/regulations for new development and re-development regarding Low Impact Development (LID) (i.e. impervious surfaces, infiltration, best management practices) may be required. • Long term maintenance of ponding areas for dry & wet stormwater storage volumes and the associated access to these drainage ponds will likely need to be addressed in order to maintain compliance with new requirements. • The lack of drainage and utility easements around some lakes, ponds and wetlands included as part of the public storm sewer system may incur significant acquisition costs. • Provisions for storm sewer design and the associated easements fora "July 2000 Super Storm" event are continuing to be requested by the public. Does the City raise the "standard" storm sewer design? • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. i9 Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -PUBLIC UTILITIES (WATER SUPPLY & DISTRIBUTION) Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Water Supply and Distribution Section of the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to: 1) project the future use and peak demand requirements of the community; 2) evaluate the quality, availability and dependability of supply resources; and 3) plan for the City's ability to treat, store and distribute potable water to all users in compliance with the Minnesota Department of Health standards. Status of Work to Date Separate Comprehensive Water Supply & Distribution Plans have been prepared and/or updated in 1965, 1969, 1976, 1982, 1988 and 1996 in concert with the City's significant growth. In 2006, the consulting firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc was again retained to prepare this next update meeting the Metropolitan Council's Comprehensive Guide Plan requirements as well. The update is approximately 95% completed and a final draft will be ready for formal review by October 31, 2006. Copies will be sent to adjacent communities and regional agencies for review and comment during the first part of 2007. There are no public reviews planned beyond those associated with the overall Comprehensive Guide Plan review. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • While the metropolitan area is blessed with an abundant aquifer for potable drinking water supplies, it is limited. Ground water protection, conservation measures and alternative sources need to be evaluated to insure a reliable source for the City's future projected needs. The emergency and conservation sections of this plan will address various options and policies to encourage, or enforce as necessary, conservation measures to meet Metropolitan goals. The emergency plan outlines safety and security measures, and identifies potential interconnections with neighboring communities. • Approximately five more wells are required to serve full build out of the city. General site locations have been identified for these wells based on previous ground water geologic studies. Future wells will be developed as demand occurs. However, design, construction and permitting of a new well facility takes approximately two years to complete. Therefore, it is important to continually re-evaluate the Capital Improvement Plan in light of the latest development and re-development plans. • Several minor improvements are required at the Cliff Road Water Treatment Facility to improve operation of the facility and provide treated water to the expansion of the southeastern portion of the City. • The needs of the Sperry Water Tower are marginal for future water supply and/or pressure requirements. An economic analysis should determine if it is cost effective to keep it as part of the water system or if it should be replaced with a more conventional low maintenance antenna tower for public safety and commercial uses. a~ • Additional water storage may be required to adequately serve redevelopment of the northeast area of the city. Previous Water Supply and Distribution Plans have proposed building a second ground storage reservoir adjacent to the existing Yankee Doodle Reservoir, on existing City property. This study has determined that an alternative site in the northeast redevelopment area provides a slight operational benefit over the original alternative of the second Yankee Doodle Reservoir. However, due to lower ground elevations in the northeast area, the reservoir would likely have to be constructed as an elevated water tower. Also, a site would have to be purchased for the northeast water tower. As the northeast area redevelops, further study is warranted to: first, determine the need for additional storage, and second, determine the costs and benefits of an elevated tank in the northeast area as compared to a ground storage tank at the current Yankee Doodle site. • Several minor piping modifications and pressure zones realignments are required to increase fire flows and pressures to serve the planned redevelopment of the Cedar Grove commercial area. • Additional trunk water mains are required to serve development. These pipes are normally installed as each area develops. The largest project involves construction of a trunk water main on Cliff Road, from Lexington to Dodd Road. The purpose of this pipe is to supply the continued development of the southeastern part of the City (including the portion of Inver Grove Heights that is served by Eagan water), as well as to provide critical redundancy and looping of the portion of the system. • The Safari Pass, Fairway Hills and portions of the Park Cliff neighborhoods experience low water pressures because of higher ground elevations. Many homes in these areas have installed individual booster pumps to improve pressure. In-home booster pumps are high maintenance with a limited life and the Minnesota Department of Health discourages their use. This study has identified several alternatives to increase system pressures in these areas. Further economic analysis will determine if it is cost effective for the City to construct system facilities that would allow the in-home booster pumps to be disconnected. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. "`( Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -PARKS & RECREATION Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Parks and Recreation Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to outline a strategy for provision of recreation spaces, facilities and programs so as to encourage positive resident interaction, provide a sense of community and support economic development of the community. Status of Work to Date The 20/20 Vision, completed in early 2006, provides much of the information needed to update this section. A subcommittee of the Parks Commission has been established to review and incorporate applicable information from the 20/20 Vision into the Comprehensive Guide Plan update. Staff is working to update individual park plans presented in the 1994 Park System Plan to reflect work done to date. The Patrick Eagan Park Master Plan, currently underway, will provide a set of criteria and scoring mechanism for determining the value of potential land acquisitions. The Parks Commission has also been advised by the City Council to continue researching and discussing potential sources of funds for future land acquisitions and park improvements. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • New sources of funding for land acquisitions and park improvements will need to be secured as payments to the Park Site Fund diminish. • The City will need to weigh the value of the land as open or park space in relation to other potential uses as undeveloped land continues to become scarce in Eagan. • Programs and facility uses may need to shift in order to meet the changing demographics and social trends in the community. • Written partnership agreements with community user organizations need to be established and periodically reviewed in order to appropriately allocate City resources. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. as Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -NATURAL RESOURCES (WATER QUALITY) Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Water Quality Section of the Natural Resources Element of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to: 1) provide for adequate protection, preservation and enhancement of water bodies, wetlands, ground water recharge areas and wildlife habitat; 2) control runoff and erosion to prevent negative impacts to the City's water quality, plant communities and natural habitat; and 3) ensure the quality of lakes, wetlands, and streams meets or exceeds regional, state, and federal requirements and community expectations. Status of Work to Date Much has been accomplished since the City of Eagan adopted its first Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) in 1990. In 1996, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recognized Eagan's program as tops in the nation. Despite a 40-percent increase in population since 1990, water quality in the top seven recreational lakes has stayed the same or improved. Ina 2005 scientific survey of City residents, 99 percent said good water quality was very or somewhat important. Despite our successes, some lakes will not meet new water quality standards mandated by state and federal regulations. To stay on top, the City must be able to evaluate, include, and adapt to changing regional, state, and federal directives for urban stormwater and wetlands management, in addition to public expectations. A major challenge is to carry out a "state of the art" water quality program-in a nearly fully developed community with existing storm drainage infrastructure-in acost-effective way, while acknowledging ever increasing demands for limited financial resources. In 2005, to help meet these challenges, the City Council retained the consulting firm of Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Assoc. to prepare an upgraded Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) and also established a 13-member Water Quality Task Force to guide development of the WQMP. The objectives of this work were to build on the successes of the 1990 WQMP; to consolidate and incorporate relevant policies, plans, and programs instituted since 1990; and to position the City to address efficiently and effectively the issues and needs of its surface water resources for the next 15 years. On October 17, 2006, the City Council will be presented a draft WQMP for acceptance and authorization of a 2-month public review from October 18 to December 18, 2006. A Public open house has been scheduled for November 13, 2006, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m, in the Eagan Room. A Public Hearing is anticipated to be set for February 6, 2007, specifically addressing wetland management strategies within the WQMP with a formal decision to adopt or modify the WQMP expected at the close of the hearing. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • Compliance with evolving federal and state water quality and stormwater requirements (i.e., stormwater pollution prevention, non-degradation, Impaired Waters/Total Maximum Daily Loads) • Development of policies/regulations for new and re-development activities regarding impervious surfaces, infiltration, best management practices, etc. • Development of individual lake management plans; associated capital improvement projects. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. a3 Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -HOUSING PLAN Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Housing Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to identify the City's vision and expectations for housing opportunities throughout the City. Well built and well maintained housing in safe, attractive neighborhoods contribute to the high quality of life in Eagan. Likewise, the provision of adequate municipal and support services and the protection and enhancement of the City's natural environment help preserve neighborhood quality and character. Status of Work to Date The Housing Section of the current Comprehensive Plan Land Use Section has been generally reviewed by the Advisory Planning Commission in a Workshop setting and the Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA) along with Maxfield Research provided the commission with a presentation of the recently completed county-wide housing study, as it relates to Eagan. Planning staff is also working with the Met Council, Census data and other sources to identify demographic trends that will affect Eagan over the next 10-20 years. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • An aging population, primarily due to the Baby Boomer generation beginning to reach retirement age in the next few years, will have an impact on housing from demand to maintenance. • Life Cycle Housing (providing housing opportunities for all ages) will continue to demand attention as the largest demographic growth population being those 62 and older. • The Dakota County CDA housing study indicates that needs for senior housing and workforce housing will continue to grow over the term of this plan. The study further indicates that it will be unlikely that conventional single family detached will be affordable for these demographic groups. • Real estate forecasts, Metropolitan Council studies and the CDA study suggest that demand for various types of attached and shared maintenance housing will continue to grow. • As the housing stock ages, maintenance and preservation efforts will become increasingly important to discourage deterioration and ensure protection of residential land values. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. ~~ Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Economic Development Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to define the City's expectations and strategy to encourage the continued investment and reinvestment in businesses, property and fixed assets in ways that will bring about the creation of permanent, high quality jobs and support a strong, diverse tax base within the community. Status of Work to Date In 2006, the Economic Development Commission was disbanded and work related to economic development activities and policies was assigned to the Economic Development Authority. As a consequence, a preliminary update of the Economic Development Section of the 2000 Comprehensive Guide Plan has not been completed to date. It is anticipated that the EDA would be asked in early 2007 to define a process by which it would facilitate an update of the plan for consideration with the remainder of the Comprehensive Plan. Alternatives for such a process include a formal study, a facilitated EDA review of the current Plan Section, survey input or other alternatives that may be deemed appropriate at that time. Jon Hohenstein will work with the EDA to coordinate the review at that time. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends • Expanding influence of information technologies in all types of businesses. The importance of high quality, redundant, high speed Internet services to businesses will be key to meeting those needs. • As commercial industrial build out occurs and existing facilities age, the need to reuse, revitalize or redevelop certain properties will become increasingly important to meet continued demand for business expansion and location within the community. • Eagan has benefited by diversity in its business community and has been buffered from economic cycles for that reason. The City will benefit by continuing to position itself to support diversity in the future. • Continued importance of transportation industries due to the City's freeway access and proximity to the airport. • Changes in businesses and their products are leading to the increasing presence of a variety of home based businesses and possible interest in live-work land use alternatives. • Increasing interest in public financing incentives for both expansions and locations of businesses will underscore the importance of the City's Business Assistance Policies. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. Comprehensive Guide Plan 2008 Update Executive Summary Plan Section -COMMUNITY FACILITIES Purpose of Section in the Comprehensive Plan The purpose of the Community Facilities Section of the Comprehensive Guide Plan is to describe those facilities that serve the public interest and contribute to the sense of community in Eagan. These include schools, libraries, municipal facilities, museums, cultural sites and telecommunications facilities. Status of Work to Date City staff will work with the school districts, county and other agencies to provide an update of this section. In the area of telecommunications, however, significant work has occurred in recent years. The work done to date will lead to discussions of how this topic is positioned in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Specific activities have included: • Technology Task Force -Tom Garrison -The Technology Task Force, assisted by Community Technology Advisors, developed a Technology Plan that addresses specific policies and action steps associated with the provision of high speed Internet to all parts of the community. The Task Force identified amulti-layered strategy including wired and wireless technologies and goals for further investigation of their implementation. • Technology Working Group -Tom Garrison -One of the recommendations of the Task Force was the creation of an ongoing Working Group to further develop the concepts and action plans associated with the Technology Plan and other emerging issues in the high speed Internet and information technologies areas. • Draft Telecommunications Comprehensive Plan Section -Jon Hohenstein and Mike Ridley -The Council authorized the hiring of Community Technology Advisors to take the next step of drafting a prospective Comprehensive Plan Section for high speed Internet telecommunications. The draft has been reviewed and commented upon by the Working Group and will be forwarded to the APC for further review as part of the Plan Update process. • As directed by the Communications Committee of the City Council, the Tech Working Group will also be addressing policy options for Eagan to obtain "world class" Internet connectivity & speeds. Examples of Emerging Issues and Trends The availability of high quality, redundant, high speed Internet service is emerging as a key factor in economic development and quality of life with health care, government and education services moving online. Many cities are examining code requirements, so-called "open trench" opportunities and other measures to encourage technology deployment and ensure businesses and homes are wired for the future. The Communications Committee of the City Council has asked for a summary of the policy opportunities. a~ • The convergence of technologies will make it important to define a policy that addresses not only high speed internet, but the relationship between the technology infrastructure and the providers of telecommunications services. • The City is beginning to make policy decisions related to its use of the conduit loop installed in cooperation with ISD 196. • To the extent that a Telecommunications Subsection relates to more than high speed internet, it should reference or take into account the emerging challenges and opportunities related to cable television and local access programming, High Definition TV and Internet Protocol TV (IPTV.). • The City will need to determine the appropriate Plan section for this topic in the future. • Other -The Council may identify other trends and issues to be addressed in the course of the Comprehensive Plan update process. a7 ~t~f.~ AGENDA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING EAGAN ROOM TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2006 5:30 P.M. I. PHASE I -PHASE II COMPARISON NOISE STUDY - Study review with Orfield Laboratories EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2006 7:00 P.M. II. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES IV. VISITORS TO BE HEARD V. OLD BUSINESS A. Communications Update B. MAC Monthly Reports - Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Analysis, Technical Advisory Report, 17-35 Departure Analysis Report VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Phase I-Phase II Comparison Noise Study B. City Comprehensive Plan -Airports & Aviation Chapter VII. STAFF/COMMISSION UPDATE A. MSP Noise Oversight Committee Update B. Home Sales & Home Sales Price Survey C. Proposed MAC Representation Legislation D. Noise Oversight Committee Airport Noise Public Input E. Next Meeting: Tuesday, October 10, 7 p.m. VIII. ROUNDTABLE IX. ADJOURNMENT Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the city of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. _ _ ~~ ,. ,° ~' -` r ~s- 1~~;--. City of Eagan MEMO TO: CHAIR. THORHILDSON AND THE EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION FROM: JASON ZIEMER, ADMINISTRATIVE INTERN DATE: OCTOBER 6, 2006 SUBJECT: AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING /AUGUST 8, 2006 The Eagan Airport Relations Commission is invited to attend the Eagan City Council at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 10, 2006 in the Eagan Room to listen to a presentation from Orfield Laboratories on the phase I-phase II comparison analysis study. The regular commission meeting will follow at 7:00 p.m. in the Eagan City Council Chambers. In order that we have a quorum present, please contact Mary Swenson at (651) 675-5005 if you are unable to attend this meeting. I. ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA The agenda, as presented or modified, is in order for adoption by the Commission. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minute of the Aug t 8, 2006 and September 14, 2006 Airport Relations Commission are enclosed on pages ~ through ~. These minutes, as presented or modified, are in order for adoption by the Commission. III. VISITORS TO BE HEARD The Eagan City Council and its Commissioners set aside up to 10 minutes at the beginning of public meetings to permit visitors to address items of interest that are not scheduled on the regular agenda. Items that will take more than 10 minutes or that require specific action can be scheduled for a future agenda. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. Communications Update - It is the practice of the Airport Relations Commission to discuss their communication initiatives each month, which include articles in the Experience Eagan newsletter, stories aired on the city's local access cable channels, and inclusions in the ARC Notebook. If any of the Commissioners have suggestions for additional communication initiatives in the city regarding airport issues, please submit those suggestions at this time. B. MAC Monthly Reports - Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Analysis/Technical Advisory Report/ Runway 17-35 Departure Analysis Report -Enclosed on pages throu h ~S is the August 2006 Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Analysis Report. Enclosed on pages ~ ~ throughs is the August 2006 Technical Advisory Report. Enclosed on pages through ~Q is the August 2~ Runway 17-35 Departure Analysis Report. The August reports are the most current reports available on the MAC Web site. It is the practice of the Commission to review the reports and discuss any significant deviations that may have occurred or any other noteworthy occurrences as reported in the analysis. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Phase I-Phase II Comparison Noise Study -Elliott Dick, Orfield Laboratories, will present and discuss the results from the phase I-phase II noise comparison study at the Special Eagan City Council meeting at 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, October 10 in the Eagan Room. Wyle Laboratories conducted the initial noise study in June 2005, prior to the new north-south Runway 17/35 opening. The city hired Orfield Laboratories to perform the follow up noise study, post-runway opening. That study was completed in June 2006. The raw data collected during the phase II study showed little, if any, change from data collected during the pre-runway study. Orfield was hired to compare and analyze results f~io-m phase I and hase II studies. The report from the phase I-phase II comparison study is found on pages~~ through B. City Comprehensive Plan -Airports & Aviation Chapter -The City of E an is in the process of reviewing and updating its comprehensive plan. Enclosed on pages through is the Airports and Aviation Chapter. Airport relations commissioners should review the goals and policies of the Airports and Aviation Chapter, and be prepared to make recommendations for the city council fo consideration. VI. STAFF/COMMISSION UPDATE A. MSP Noise Oversight Committee -190/200-Degree Heading Update -The FAA began testing 200-degree heading on June 19, 2006, reporting that the heading will work. Implementation of the new flight heading is anticipated. City of Burnsville continues pressing FAA to find a workable solution. FAA maintains position that operations is in compliance with previous environmental documentation, including west departure headings ranging between 095-degrees to 285-degrees. Tom Hansen, city of Burnsville, met with Chad Legve, MAC, and FAA regarding departure headings. Hansen reports the FAA keeping an open mind on use of Minnesota River Valley for west departure flights. Another meeting between the city of Burnsville and the FAA is tentatively scheduled for sometime in November. See memorandum on pages through ~ for more information. - Builders Guide -MAC staff provided new Builders Guide from Met Council. Guide includes new regulations pertaining to 60 DNL contours. Guide identifies 60 DNL or greater as incompatible for development of single family units. - New Flight Tract Data Collection & Reporting -MAC staff gathered information on new technologies that would improve timely access to flight tract information. It currently takes a minimum 5- day delay to get data available. Two potential solutions would provide real-time flight track mapping capabilities on the Web site, within 10 minutes. Installing a new system would cost between $300,000 to $500,000, plus annual maintenance fees. - 2007 NOC Work Plans - A reliminary agenda identifying discussion topics for 2007 was presented at NOC meeting. See page for items. Eagan staff recommended the MSP NOC review and a discuss the Part 150 pertaining to flight tracts for Runway 17/35. MAC staff suggested that opportunity is available in Assessment of Runway 17/35 Operations in 2007 work plan. ARC members also encouraged to attend NOC meetings and testify on these matters during public hearings. B. Home Sales & Home Sale Prices Survey -Commissioners requested information comparing home sales and sale prices betty en Eagan and Inver Grove Heights and Mendota Heights. The tabulated results are available on pagesthrough .The Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors found homes in seven residential neighborhoods near remote monitoring towers took longer to sell. The average sale price of homes was up, despite a dip in the median sales price. These numbers are comparable to citywide home sales during the same period. The same was true of home sales in Inver Grove Heights. Average and median home prices in Mendota Heights, Mendota, and Lilydale showed a significant jump. The information does not include reasons why homeowners put their homes up for sale. The ARC should consider having the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors conduct a follow up survey of realtors to determine reasons why homes are placed on the market. The best time for the survey would be spring 2007. C. Proposed MAC Representation Legislation -The city Noise Oversight Committee will meet on October 18 to discuss and draft legislation enabling permanent city representation on the Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Eagan Airport Relations Commission proposal includes: city membership identified by the cities inside 60 DNL noise contour; addition of seats to the board, not reconfiguration of seat assignments; and city representatives appointed by city councils. City councils will be asked to sign off on agreed to legislation in November before submitting to legislature for drafting and jacketing of legislation. D. Noise Oversight Committee Airport Noise Public Input Meeting -The ARC and public can receive updates on the NOC and its activities, operational levels, and procedures around the airport. Meeting attendees may also provide comments and voice concerns on current airport noise issues and future trends. The meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 19, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. at MAC general offices. E. Next Airport Relations Commission Meeting -The next ARC meeting is November 14, 2006 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers. VII. ROUNDTABLE Per the request of the Commission, this agenda item has been added so that commissioners have the opportunity to ask questions or make requests for future agenda items. IX. ADJOURNMENT Per the request of the Commission, the Eagan Airport Relations Commission meetings will go no later than 8:30 p.m. unless agreed upon by the Commission. ministratio Intern 3 MINUTES OF THE EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 8, 2006 A regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission was held on Tuesday, August 8, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Those present were Curtis Aljets, Steve Beseke, Jason Bonnett, Justin Countryman, Jack Prentice, Charles Thorkildson and Bret Walsh. Absent were Dean Haehnel and Tammy Mencel. Also present was Jason Ziemer, Administrative Intern. AGENDA The agenda was amended to include an additional item under Staff Report -Decision by Judge re: MAC. Upon motion by Beseke; seconded by Aljets, -the agenda was approved as amended. All members voted in favor. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Bonnett made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 11, 2006 regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission; Prentice seconded the motion. All members voted in favor. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE Ziemer introduced the item stating it is the practice of the Airport Relations Commission to discuss any communication initiatives relative to airport noise each month. He stated the September/October edition of Experience~Eagan will feature an article pertaining to the Phase II Noise Study noting a draft of the article has been prepared and is available if any member of the Commission would like to preview the article. He also noted that Phase II of the noise study will be accessible on the City's website. MAC MONTHLY REPORTS -EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR ANALYSIS/TECHNICAL ADVISORY REPORT/17-35 DEPARTURE ANALYSIS REPORT Ziemer introduced the item stating the enclosed June 2006 Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Analysis, June 2006 Technical Advisory Report and the June 2006 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report are the most current reports available on the MAC website. Thorkildson noted 94.5 percent compliance within the corridor during the month of June 2006. The Commission discussed the total number of operations to date for 2006, comparing these numbers to 2005, noting operations are down by 5,000 each month while nighttime operations have increased. The number of complaints for the month was also noted. PHASE II NOISE STUDY RESULTS Ziemer introduced the item stating noise was monitored at ten study areas over aseven-day period each. He further stated these were the same locations as in Phase I; five sites were monitored on June 12- 19, with the second five sites being monitored on June 20-27. Ziemer discussed external factors which Airport Relations Commission Minutes August 8, 2006/2 could slightly distort the results of the study such as the location of a monitor site, elevation, foliage on trees, surrounding noises; i.e. thunderstorm, construction or barking dog. The Commission discussed data within the results of the study making comparisons between Phase I and Phase II. They further discussed the levels at each location site; specifically at site locations #4 and #7 and noted these locations did not appear at the DNL levels on the contour map. The Commission stated concern over location #4 approaching a DNL level of 65. Thorkildson commented that Phase I study was more detailed and received more information. He stated he would like to have a representative from Orfield Labs speak to the Commission comparing Phase I to Phase II. PROPERTY VALUE STUDY - HUMPHREY INSTITUTE Ziemer stated, per the direction of the ARC, Martha Krohn from the Humphrey Institute was contacted regarding a proposed study on the impact of airport noise on property values and identifying a student or group of students who maybe interested in conducting a study as a professional research project. He stated Ms. Krohn will forward this information to an associate dean, but we probably will not hear back until after school resumes. UPDATE 190 DEGREE HEADING -JULY 19 NOC MEETING Ziemer introduced the item noting the letter of June 2, 2006 from the FAA to NOC stating the necessity of the 190-degree heading because of weather and safety and that traffic cannot be directed further west to the 230-degree heading because of inadequate separation with arriving aircraft on Runways 12R and 12L. Ziemer further stated the FAA does not view the use of the 190-degree heading as a change in procedure. Ziemer noted the Noise Oversight Committee continues to ask the FAA for additional information. Thorkildson noted the new runway has been operational for 9 - 10 months and they are still not using the flight tracks to capacity. He stated because of this, they need to re-open the Part 150 Program. Ziemer stated this issue would be brought before the Noise Oversight Committee and will update the Commission. APRIL DEPARTURE OPERATIONS Ziemer noted that Commissioner Thorkildson had requested information regarding a noise event on April 20, 2006 which appeared in the Apri12006 Technical Advisors Report. Thorkildson stated this event tripped five RMT's within approximately a minute. Ziemer stated he contacted Carl Rydeen, MSP Control Tower Manager, for additional flight information and will update the Commission with his response. NEXT MEETING: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 14 Ziemer stated the next ARC meeting will be held on Thursday, September 14, due to the Primary Election on September 12, 2006. Airport Relations Commission Minutes August 8, 2006/3 MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT NOISE DVD Ziemer stated, per the request of Commissioner Countryman, the DVD produced by the City of Mendota Heights regarding airport noise will be available for viewing next month. DECISION BY JUDGE RE: HOMEOWNERS LAWSUIT AGAINST MAC Ziemer introduced the item noting an article appeared on the Star Tribune Web site today entitled "Noise suit against MAC gets judge's OK as class action". The Commission discussed the Order noting the motion for Class Certification was granted. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Beseke, seconded by Bonnett, the meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. All members voted in favor. The Commission directly went into a workshop to discuss proposed legislation re: MAC representation. DATE SECRETARY W MINUTES OF THE EAGAN AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 2006 A regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission was held on Thursday, September 14, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Those present were Curtis Aljets, Steve Beseke, and Charles Thorkildson. Absent were Jason Bonnett, Justin Countryman, Dean Haehnel, Tammy Mencel, Jack Prentice and Bret Walsh. Also present was Jason Ziemer, Administrative Intern. I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION It was suggested to move New Business item B. to the end of the agenda. There was no quorum to approve the agenda. II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the August 8, 2006 regular meeting of the Eagan Airport Relations Commission were not approved for lack of quorum. III. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard. IV. OLD BUSINESS A. COMMUNICATIONS UPDATE Ziemer introduced the item stating it is the practice of the Airport Relations Commission to discuss any communication initiatives relative to airport noise each month. Ziemer noted an article regarding Phase II of the Noise Study, which was featured in the September/October City newsletter, and two articles which appeared in the Eagan Sun Current newspaper regarding airport noise and the lawsuit between the MAC and the cities of Minneapolis and Richfield. B. MAC MONTHLY REPORTS - EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR ANALYSIS/TECHNICAL ADVISORY REPORT/17-35 DEPARTURE ANALYSIS REPORT Ziemer introduced the item stating the enclosed July 2006 Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor Analysis, July 2006 Technical Advisory Report and the July 2006 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report are the most current reports available on the MAC website. Thorkildson stated there was 96 percent corridor compliance for the month of July. The Commission noted complaints were down from the month of June. Ziemer stated Labor Day weekend generated a large number of complaints. Airport Relations Commission Minutes September 14, 2006/2 V. NEW BUSINESS A. HOME SALES & HOME SALE PRICES Ziemer introduced the item stating Christine Berger with the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors has compiled information regarding home sales and home sale prices pre-runway, November 1 - May 24, 2005, and post-runway, November 1 -May 24, 2006. He noted the survey examined home sales in residential neighborhoods in the vicinity of remote monitoring towers. He further noted there were fewer sales, the average sale price was up despite a dip in the median sales price, and homes spent more days on the market. Ziemer stated the numbers in the study were comparable to city-wide home sales during the same period, but noted the study did not contain information as to why these homes were for sale. Thorkildson suggested getting information for a comparison to home sales in Mendota Heights: The Commission noted the housing market being down and the results were not surprising. Ziemer and Ms. Berger discussed conducting a survey in the spring as to why people are selling their homes. B. PROPOSED MAC REPRESENTATION LEGISLATION Ziemer introduced the item stating the ARC decided at their August 8, 2006 meeting to proceed with drafting legislation establishing permanent representation on the MAC. Ziemer noted on August 16, 2006 the Noise Oversight Committee met and discussed the proposed legislation, requesting additional time to review and discuss the language and membership structure with their city councils. Zeimer stated the committee will reconvene on October 18, 2006 and draft legislation for approval by each city. The Commission discussed the proposed legislation approved by the Eagan ARC on August 8, 2006. They discussed the type of legislation, who should be involved, out-state representation and Governor or city appointments. The Commission suggested including only communities who fall within the contours and suggested using legislation drafted at the August 8, 2006 meeting. VI. STAFF/COMMISSION UPDATE A. PHASE II NOSIE STUDY -ANALYSIS Ziemer gave a brief background on Phase I and Phase II of the Noise Study. He stated the City Council approved having Orfield Labs compare and analyze data from the two Noise Studies and further stated that Steven Orfield will present the findings at a joint Airport Relations Commission meeting with the City Council on October 10, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. in the Eagan Room of City Hall. Ziemer noted the regular Commission meeting will follow at 7:00 p.m..in the City Council Chambers. The Commission briefly discussed the proposal by Orfield Laboratories. Ziemer presented a draft proposal to Commissioners in preparation of the October 10, 2006 joint meeting. S. MINNEAPOLIS/RICHFIELD VS. MAC CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT Ziemer introduced the item referencing Commissioner Bonnett's request for additional information regarding the certified lawsuit between the cities of Minneapolis and Richfield and the Metropolitan Airports Commission as to its potential impacts on residents of Eagan. Ziemer stated, per the City Attorney, that even though Eagan is not included in this lawsuit, Eagan is involved in current litigation with MAC and all discussions concerning litigation must only occur in closed sessions with the City Council. 8 C. 190-DEGREE HEADING UPDATE Ziemer introduced the item stating that during the August 9 Metropolitan Airports Commission meeting, it was noted that the FAA has begun testing the 200-degree heading and, at this point, it is the furthest westerly departure possible. He stated that the City of Burnsville has sent correspondence to Governor Pawlenty, state legislators, and the state's congressional delegation regarding this issue. The Commission asked Ziemer to draft a letter on behalf of the Mayor, City Council and Eagan Airport Relations Commission to Eagan legislators regarding the FAA's new departure heading restriction. D. CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -AVIATION CHAPTER Ziemer introduced the item stating the City is in the process of reviewing and updating its Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Commission discussed changes to goals and policies of the Airports and Aviation chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Ziemer stated this item will be discussed at the October 10, 2006 meeting. E. MAC NOISE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE Ziemer stated the next MAC Noise Oversight Committee meeting will be held on September 27, 2006. He also stated there will be an update on the 190-degree heading at that meeting. F. NEXT MEETING: TUESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 7 P.M. (JOINT MEETING WITH CITY COUNCIL AT 5:30 P.M.; PHASE II ANALYSIS STUDY) Ziemer stated the Commission will meet in a joint meeting with the Eagan City Council in the Eagan Room on October 10, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. to review the Phase II Analysis Study. He noted the Commission will meet at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, following the joint meeting, to hold their regular scheduled ARC meeting. G. MENDOTA HEIGHTS AIRPORT NOISE DVD Ziemer stated, per the request of Commissioner Countryman, the DVD produced by the City of Mendota Heights will be shown following tonight's Commission meeting. VII. ROUNDTABLE The Commission discussed items for up-coming agendas. Suggestions included: Comprehensive Guide Plan Aviation update, comparison of home sales in Mendota Heights, questions to conduct survey on reasons for home sales, invite Christine Berger of the Southern Twin Cities Association of Realtors to an ARC meeting and 190-degree heading. VIII. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50. The DVD from the City of Mendota Heights on aircraft noise was viewed by the Commission following the meeting. DATE SECRETARY 9 Au ust 2006 g Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis ,.~~ ~~w ~~~ .. ~_~ _ ~ ~ ~:~~ .~ o. ..... . ..., , ~ ~ r~ - ,~ ~~ +' .J { ti ~~ ' ~ ~~~'~S`" "~~r ~~ a y ' ~ ~ 4 , r ~ `a.~1~~.Y~~. ~•.~.. ~ Ca l T Ya << r ~~ . J_' ~ 1 % ` ii w ~ ! ~ ~,ywl ~ .+~ ` ~ "~,, .1 L ~ i'. ~ p s`S ~}. h ~~ / ~~ ~~~~ ~J 1 ' ,.! b,t, t. ~. a fi '~' } s ~~~ /p Metropolitan Airports Commission 6536 Carrier Jets Departed Runways 12L and 12R in August 2006 6179 (94.5%) of those Operations Remained in the Corridor Minneapolis-St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate In_Corridor 08/01/2006 00:00:00 - 09/01/2006 00:00:00 U 6179 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 2984 (48.3%), Right = 3195 (51.7%) ~ 600 d d v 500 c 0 R 400 as w 300 1= 0 °- 200 Q ~ 100 0 Q 1 -2 -1 0 1 2 I Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) 1 i Arrival ~ Departure '- Overflight .~~: ;~;~-~»~- ^-. <,.~:~.~--,<<~.x .-~-,-~ _--;ter s :-:- :-,..-;:- Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page l `l 6179 (94.5%) Tota112L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations in the Corridor 6536 Total 12L & 12R Carrier Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission 110 (1.7%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were North of the 090° Corridor Boundary During August 2006 { 4 2 mil• N ~-i T :. 6000 m d u-' 5000 c 0 ~a 4000 _d w 3000 0 °~ 2000 Q ~ 1000 0 a a 0 Minneapolis-St. Paul .a Penetration Gate Plot for Gate North_Corridor 08/01/2006 00:00:00 - 09/01/2006 00:00:00 110 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 1 (0.9%), Right = 109 (99.1 %) e r ..................:...................:..................:.................. O .............~.................. 0~.~p. O .......i O O U ..............................................................0............. -2 (Runway End) -1 0 1 2 Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) (Corridor End) ~,' Page 2 Arrival ? Departure Overflight, Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis ~a Metropolitan Airports Commission 247 (3.8%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were South of the Corridor (South of 30L Localizer) During August 2006 •~ B' 2 mi l• N .. r-i.. Minneapolis-St. Paul Penetration Gate Pfot for Gate South_Corridor 08/01/2006 06:04:56 - 08/31/2006 22:41:12 247 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 162 (65.6%), Right = 85 (34.4%) :. 6000 m LL 5000 ..................:...................:..................:.................. '. ~ 4000 d ~ 3000 ....... o o.....:...o ...............:..................:. , o °~ 2000 ~. ... U~.. .... ......~ ..................:.................. a 'a o c 1000 ............... .... ~. 0.... Q..... . Q o -2 -1 0 1 2 (Corridor End) Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) (RWY Mid-Point) Arrival '~ Departure ~ Overflight Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 3 13 Metropolitan Airports Commission 39 (0.6%) Runway 12L and 12R Carrier Jet Departure Operations were 5° South of the Corridor (5° South of 30L Localizer) During August 2006 w 6000 d m v 5000 c 0 R 4000 _d w 3000 0 °~ 2000 'a looo 0 Q 0 Minneapolis-St. Paul Penetration Gate Plot for Gate South_Corridor_5deg 08/01/2006 00:00:00 - 09/01/2006 00:00:00 39 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left = 26 (66.7%), Right = 13 (33.3%) F ..................:...................:..................:.................. -2 -1 0 1 2 (Corridor End) Deviation From Center of Gate (Miles) (RWY Mid-Poin Page 4 + Arrival Departure - Qverflight <,.,~w:n,~~..a Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis /~- Metropolitan Airports Commission Top 15 Runway 12L and 12R Departure Destinations for August 2006 ' ORD Chicago'- O' Hare 124 '~ 336 ~- ~ ~ 5.1 °~~ DTW Detroit 105° 254 3.90 SE,4 ~ Seattle 278° 167 2.6°,'0 , MhE Milwaukee 114° 147 ?.?°,'o E~~'R Newark 106° l37 2.1°0 LAX Los Angeles ~ 238° 119 1.8°,% CL>/ Cleti~e(and 109° 106 1.6°'0 DEN Den~~er 237° 104 1.6°0 FAR ~ Fargo 312° 93 1.440 1'YL Toronto 95° 93 1.4°S LGA Ne~~• York - La Gaurdia 105° 92 1.4°.% ,~1TL ~~Atlanta 149° 91 ~;4~,.~ DCA Washington DC -National 117° 91 L4°,o BIS Bismarck 291° S3 1.3°,0 PHL Philadelphia 111° 43 1.3°0 Monthly Eagan/Mendota Heights Departure Corridor Analysis Page 5 e~- August 2006 Technical Advisor's Report ~..a ~~ ~~ 1(v Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Table of Contents for August 2006 Complaint Summary 1 Noise Complaint Map 2 FAA Available Time for Runway Usage 3 MSP All.Operations Runway Usage 4 MSP Carrier Jet Operations Runway Usage 5 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition 6 MSP All Operations Nighttime Runway Usage 7 MSP Carrier Jet Operations Nighttime Runway Usage 8 MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operator's by Type 9 MSP Top 15 Nighttime Operator's Stage Mix 10 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks 11-14 MSP ANOMS Remote Monitoring Tower Site Locations Map 15 Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 16 Time Above dB Threshold for Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events 17 Carrier Jet Arrival Related Noise Events 18 Carrier Jet Departure Related Noise Events 19 MSP Top Ten Aircraft Noise Events per RMT 20-32 Analysis of Daily and Monthly Aircraft Noise Events DNL 33-35 A Product of the Metropolitan Airports Commission ANOMS Program I~ MSP Complaints by City August 2006 City Arrival Departure Other Number of Complaints Number of Complainants % of Total Complaints APPLE VALLEY 69 1127 30 119 12 19 1376 53 23°/n BLOOMINGTON 35 0 212 83 2 12 344 36 5.7% BURNSVILLE 12 29 221 801 ]0 53 1126 78 18.8% DEEPHAVEN 1 0 0 0 0 -0 1 1 0% EAGAN 10 255 97 498 5 .199 1064 174 17.8% EDEN PRAIRIE 5 0 93 0 0 0 98 2 1.6% EllINA 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 0% FARMINGTON l 79 0 1 0 1 82 3 1.4% HOPKINS 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0% INVERGROVE HEIGHTS 1 0 4 0 0 0 5 4 0.1°0 LAKEV[LLE 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 4 0.2% MENDOTA HEIGHTS 0 1 27 515 0 0 543 12 9.1°0 MINNEAPOLIS 78 119 149 148 2 172 668 130 11.2% MINNETONKA 4 6 I 0 0 2 13 3 0.2% NEW BRIGHTON 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0% PLYMOUTH 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 2 0.1°/a RICHFIELD 1 0 448 0 11 0 460 13 7.7% ROSEMOUNT 11 1 9 1 1 1 24 6 0.4% SAINT LOU[S PARK 15 83 0 0 0 0 98 12 1.6% SAINT PAUL 0 0 5 1 1 14 21 7 ~ 0.4% SAVAGE 0 0 1 0 0 0 I 1 0% SOUTH SAINT PAUL 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 0.1% SUNFISH LAKE 0 0 1 30 0 0 31 2 0.5% WEST SAINT PAUL 0 0 8 0 0 0 8 3 0.1% Total 1961 3507 517 5985 551 Nature of MSP Complaints Complaint Total Early/Late 350 1484 Engine Run-up 7 28 Excessive Noise 1554 4281 Frequency 494 2824 Ground Noise 340 234 Helicopter 2 2 Low Flying 184 2771 Stmctural Disturbance 14 801 Other 68 145 Total 1.5583 Note: Shaded Columns represent MSP complaints filed via the Internet. Sum of % Total of Complaints may not equal 100°/, due to rounding. •As of May 2005, the MSP Complaints by Ciry report includes multiple complaint descriptors per individual complain[. Therefore, the number of complaint descriptors mey be more than the number of reported complaints. Time of Day Time Total 0000-0559 85 252 0600-0659 57 ]28 0700-1159 360 1348 1200-1559 196 644 1600-1959 .395 1170 2000-2159 236 486 2200-2259 205 289 2300-2359 63 71 Total 5985 Complaints by Airport Airport Total MSP 5985 Airlake 2 Anoka 11 Crystal 0 Flying Cloud 2 Lake Elmo 0 St. Paul ]0 Misc. 0 Total 6010 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 '~ - 1 - MSP International Airport Aviation Noise Complaints for August 2006 -2- 1-5 • ~ 6-17 18-36 37-60 61-97 98-139. 1'40-287 288-445 / ~ Report Generated: 09!08/2006 12:50 Number of Complaints per Address August 2005 August 2006 Air Carrier 1008 841 Commuter 456 ~ 398 General Aviation 97 101 Military 7 6 Total 1567 1345 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 "')~ - 3 - FAA Average Dailv Count Available Hours for Runway Use August 2006 All Operations Runway Use Report August 2006 f~sp ~ H~3 ~,~ ~ wcr~~d ~ _ ~ ~ - ~ ~~~ >.. ~'~~.9°le~'' ~1~ 115 ' I s _., , ,_ 24.1°° ~' ,; p% . ~' x,'147°l0 -~' ~.~. ~ ~ r ~ - _- / ~' , , ~ J ~ ~ D / t~Dn~ki i7~5 ~ ~, F~~3n f i ~ 4~-7 ~ t' ... ~ ~ i ., H~~wr ~~ t_ - - ~1 jt I ,_ _ ,,~_~__m___ __ ._, .~- . ~ .. ;~ o~id ~~ ~ s ~, a -,_~, ~. ~ ~ w`~y ~~. ~ / 1 j ~ ~q~ 0~1 ~ Q 1 ~/a ~ ~. I ate __ ~ _ ~---°0% it ~. ;: ~. . ., 1r _- ~ 5 a ~a ~ .. .~ _ ~ \`.. 1.~ - ~~ ,~ I l RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 5 0% 6 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 5676 27.6% 5074 21.8% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 5662 27.5% 5266 22.6% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 2 0% 11 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3277 15.9% 6802 29.2% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3694 17.9% 6157 26.4% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 2266 11 % 0 0% Total Arrivals. 20582 23316 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 18 0.1 % 19 0.1 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 4931 24.1 % 4933 21.5% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 3012 14.7% 5191 22.6% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 4037 19.7% 0 0% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 17 0.1 % 192 0.8% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4145 20.3% 6063 26.4% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4303 21 % 6525 28.5% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures 20463 22923 Total Operations 41045 46239 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. - 4 - ~ / Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Carrier Jet Operations Runway Use Report August 2006 ____ __ e _ ~" ~ t ~E . - o~ia:; 5 '~:~.., , . I . ~n ~ iru,sapulis 5 ° ~ ~ ~r- =~ ; ; -~~- ;;. , ~ ~ , I ~ ~~ {'s k'4 11 i „o j ~ II / ~ 23 3% _ t I I . 1 ~ I~ ~ ' r~~.5~ l~l 6~/ t{ .I~ L~hC~`~ I - ~%: i ~ 5 3 ,~;/ °/a .-.-. ' ~/ _ i I f._._..._17 1 °ro ,"~ . ~ ' l' fl fj{ I .0 ,~ IOOrru~ ~Q`~j ' .. ~/ f-~~3n J 1~ ~ ~~ _. _ ~~- _ q,:.q,q; C ~. ,t:. ,~ 1 / f~ E i RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year Count Operations. Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 3 0% 4 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4675 27.6% 4024 21.2% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 4684 27.6% 4348 22.9% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0% 7 0% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 2714 16% 5701 30% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 3000 17.7% 4914 25.9% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 1882 11.1 % 0 0% Total Arrivals 16959 18998 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 16 0.1 % 9 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 3944 23.3% 3856 20.6% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 2592 15.3% 4335 23.2% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 3390 20% 0 0% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 17 0.1 % 42 0.2% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3508 20.7% 5233 28% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 3490 20.6% 5216 27.9% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures 16957 18691 Total Operations 33916 37689 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 5 - August 2006 MSP Carrier Jet Fleet Composition Type FAR Part 36 Take- Off Noise Level Aircraft Description Stage Count Percent B742 110 Boeing 747-200 3 4 0% DC10 103 McDonnell Douglas DC10 3 460 1.4% B744 101.6 Boeing 747-400 3 73 0.2% DC8Q 100.5 McDonnell Douglas DC8 Modified Stage 3 3 77 0.2% MD11 95.8 McDonnell Douglas MD11 3 16 0% 8767 95.7 Boeing 767 3 16 0% A330 95.6 Airbus Industries A330 3 66 0.2% 872Q 94.5 Boeing 727 Modified Stage 3 3 355 1 A300 94 Airbus Industries A300 3 159 0.5% A310 92.9 Airbus Industries A310 3 38 0.1 MD80 91.5 McDonnell Douglas MD80 3 686 2% 6757 91.4 Boeing 757 3 3715 11% DC9Q 91 McDonnell Douglas DC9 Modified Stage 3 3 5345 15.8% 6734 88.9 Boeing 737-400 3 4 0% A320 87.8 Airbus Industries A320 3 5253 15.5% B735 87.7 Boeing 737-500 3 609 1.8% B738 87.7 Boeing 737-800 3 1104 3.3% 8733 87.5 Boeing 737-300 3 581 1.7% A318 87.5 Airbus Industries A318 3 62 0.2% 8737 87.5 Boeing 737-700 3 29 0.1 A319 87.5 Airbus Industries A319 3 4317 12.7% RJ85 84.9 Avro RJ85 3 805 2.4% E145 83.7 Embraer ERJ-145 3 870 2.6% E170 83.7 Embraer ERJ-170 3 302 0.9% B717 83 Boeing 717-200 3 992 2.9% CRJ 79.8 Canadair Regional Jet 3 7779 22.9% E135 77.9 Embraer ERJ-135 3 199 0.6% Totals 33916 Note: Sum of fleet mix % may not equal 100% due to rounding. Count.. Current Percent Last Years Percent Stage II 0 0% 0% Stage III 5777 17% 20.2% Stage III Manufactured 28139 83% 79.8% Total Stage III 33916 Note: Stage III represent aircraft modified to meet all stage III criteria as outlined in Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) Part 36. This includes hushkit engines, engine retrofits or aircraft operational Flight configurations. •The Provided Noise levels from FAR Part 36 are the loudest levels documented per aircraft type during take-off measured in EPNL dBA (Effective Perceived Noise Level). •EPNL is the level of the time integral of the antilogarithm of one-tenth of tone-corrected perceived noise level of an aircraft flyover measured in A-weighted decibels. - g - .~ n Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Nighttime All Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Runway Use Report August 2006 ~_ _ ~ , ,~ _,., ~ t--- ~ ~~ -_-w ~; o°la ~` ~ ' s~ ~~ ~'k ~~ ~ ~ 2°/~int Paul o ~ _~ --~ a ° ,~,, o /o ~~ .~ ~ ~ .-~--' 14.7 /o ~ ~~ - - -- - ~ a27 6°r '- _J r . ~. ~, i ~~ ~~ - ~~~ ~ ~~ ~...r_ __ _ _ __ ~~~ r „o ~„ i= ~ ` I~ ~ _~ ~~ ~ 38.9°/v i- a - ~~ '24 1°/a ~~~~ ~_. 0.2/0 --~-._ _~ i ~% /'` loa[mn~ Evan '~ i ~ ~ ~.~,~.fti_ :,,~ r:E ~. ~ f - ~~ ~ ~ 1 Ij F `. ~... - , 1 . i ij i1t ~ l ..-...._.A ~ ) ~~ ~ ~ ~~ RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count .Operations .Percent Last Year Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 3 0.2% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 304 21.1 % 83 6% 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 397 27.6% 368 26.6% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0.1 % 8 0.6% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 433 30.1 % 732 53% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 288 20% 190 13.8% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 12 0.8% 0 0% Total Arrivals 1438 1381 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 2 0.2% 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 328 38.9% 125 12.8% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 203 24.1 % 257 26.4% 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 27 3.2% 0 0% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 1 0.1 % 2 0.2% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 124 14.7% 335 34.4% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 159 18.8% 254 26.1% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures 844 973 Total Operations 2282 2354 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 7 - Nighttime Carrier Jet Operations 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Runway Use Report August 2006 - -~ __ ti~ (_ __. ~. . ~~ .. a ~, uu ~~~{>OG5 =;o x , ~ ~~~, '~ -- ~ t-~;Q.1 o/'fit PaW i , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~9.1 % " ~c- ~ -s ,- . ,Y `~`~. -_; ~ - ., `. ~ r -_ - - - I V ~~ , ~~ -~, ,~o~ M.SP ~ _ F t ~ t: ~ , '~ ~ ~ ~tichHeld ~ ~t ~ ~. cJ°/d jf''~~ds ~ 1IF , ~ ~ 39' 2% l ~ i- ~ = - { 0.2% ~ '24.2°/a ,; W ~_ _ s~ ~. ~ .~ ' .. r. _ ' .AKE { ' - i _.. E ' i ~! ~ I ~o/ ~ t f' , ~loomn~~~, ~ _ F~~~an ~ 1 E . ,,~ r - I € ~ f, f ___._- : t ~ rf t 1 } ~--' ~II RWY Arrival/ Departure Overflight Area Count Operations Percent Last Year. Count Operations Last Year Percent 04 Arr So. Richfield/Bloomington 3 0.2% 0 0% 12L Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 282 21.7% 75 6.1 12R Arr So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 372 28.6% 330 26.7% 17 Arr So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% 22 Arr St. Paul/Highland Park 0 0% 6 0.5% 30L Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 380 29.2% 646 52.3% 30R Arr Eagan/Mendota Heights 253 19.5% 179 14.5% 35 Arr Bloomington/Eagan 10 0.8% 0 0% Total Arrivals 1300 1236 04 Dep St. Paul/Highland Park 1 0.1 % 0 0% 12L Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 284 39.2% 89 11.2% 12R Dep Eagan/Mendota Heights 175 24.2% 208 26.1 17 Dep Bloomington/Eagan 25 3.5% 0 0% 22 Dep So. Richfield/Bloomington 1 0.1 % 0 0% 30L Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 100 13.8% 294 36.8% 30R Dep So. Minneapolis/No. Richfield 138 19.1 % 207 25.9% 35 Dep So. Minneapolis 0 0% 0 0% Total Departures 724 798 Total Operations 2024 2034 Note: Sum of RUS % may not equal 100% due to rounding. - 8 - ~~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 August 2006 Top 15 Actual Nighttime Jet Operators by Type 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Total Nighttime Jet Operations by Hour Hour Count 2230 553 2300 483 2400 127 100 52 200 35 300 54 400 80 500 640 TOTAL 2024 Airline ID Stage Type Count American AAL 3 6738 30 American AAL 3 MD80 12 America West AWE 3 A320 93 Continental Exp BTA 3 E145 54 Comair COM 3 CRJ 51 DHL DHL 3 B72Q 72 American Eagle EGF 3 CRJ 57 American Eagle EGF 3 E135 1 FedEx FDX 3 A300 5 FedEx FDX 3 A310 20 FedEx FDX 3 B72Q 3 FedEx FDX 3 DC10 47 Pinnacle FLG 3 CRJ 166 Kitty Hawk KHA 3 B72Q 10 Kitty Hawk KHA 3 8733 31 Northwest NWA 3 A319 176 Northwest NWA 3 A320 152 Northwest NWA 3 B757 256 Northwest NWA 3 DC10 31 Northwest NWA 3 DC9Q 200 Republic Airlines RPA 3 E170 36 Sun Country SCX 3 6738 185 Airtran TRS 3 6717 36 United UAL 3 B733 36 United UAL 3 B735 23 United UAL 3 B737 1 UPS UPS 3 A300 15 UPS UPS 3 6757 27 UPS UPS 3 B767 1 UPS UPS 3 DC8Q 39 T OTAL. 1866 Note: The top 15 nighttime operators represent 92.2% of the total nighttime carrier jet operations. Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~/~, - 9 B56 806 750 740 654 w 600 C ~, 550 ~ 560 C d 450 +~ O 4~ L ~~ 3 ~~ .j. 250 260 i5o 106 50 6 August 2006 Nighttime Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines 10:30 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. t'' L~~ - iAL RWE BTR CdM OHL EGF FOX FLG 1<HR Nbl i+ ~Pa ~C1r - T12S - UAL UPS Ei ®ManuFactured Stape 3 i~sta@e 3 / StaQ~S August 2006 Nighttime Fleet Stage Mix for Top 15 Airlines 10:30 o.m. to 6:00 a.m. Airline Stage 2 Stage3 Manufactured Stage 3 Total AAL 0 0 42 42 AWE 0 0 93 93 BTA 0 0 54 54 COM 0 0 51 51 DHL 0 72 0 72 EGF 0 0 58 58 FDX 0 3 72 75 FLG 0 0 166 166 KHA 0 10 31 41 NWA 0 200 615 815 RPA 0 0 36 36 SCX 0 0 185 185 TRS 0 0 36 36 UAL 0 0 60 60 UPS 0 39 43 82 Total 0 324 1542 1866 Note: UPS DC8Q and 6727Q aircraft are re-engined with manufactured stage 3 engines. - 10 - ~~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations -August 2006 August 1 thru 8, 2006 - 4455 Carrier Jet Departures k ~ ~. -~ ~ "~k`~ + z f ~Gil~a nll5 - ~ ••~•• ~ „i ~~, ~ A- ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~auit FFxtl r b~ s i~~k 3 c ~'~' ® ~_; as ~~`~ ~ L+~y ~;E+lg l 5 ~it~t P9UI L ,~~'~w' 1 ~ e Gtt3h~elq 7tti ' y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x ~ _. ~ ~~.-~ _ Split! ~ ~ . ; x" <~ ~ ~iiGifi~ki ~~ M P, y k., i j ~ .~ i , ~unh h I aHe ,~ ~~ ~ '~ ._w.Tr.»pq~yNUr~ ~Jn.er i;r~'~a H, ~. ~ ~c~a t~oorpinytun " - - ~ f r . ~~ ~a~ ~n .. , , ~ ' ~^ `,ril lffl`•Vl~~f ~ - Sa/,1ClC ®, }~~~G ill [: ~r ~' SH1~C"-.IIL ® .. August 1 thru 8, 2006 - 329 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals August 1 thru 8,.2006 - 180 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures X41 ~ ~ P~rk' 4 ~ ; i ~` ' '"`-~ 1`-`~.~/~ ~ ~ '~ ti l ~ ~ ~~~~ ,~~, r~ ~%,=7 ~~ ~ ~ L+f~ ~fa~~ t Sant }'a~~ E i~ a ~ I "~~04 i' /~ ~ ~'1 J~ ~~~ ,P ' ~ t t -~-~~ ~,~..~.. Ru.hfi ~Id ~ ~ ~.a i ~ ~ ,unfi h,LdF:e,~~~. :_ ~ _~. i T _.. ~ ~ d t . ~ ~ ~ ~~ t t t~o'. ~ ~ f~ ~' ~ , I lC f:~~I.1FiaL~~KI.aK~ tj ~, ..t Bldo n ton ~~ l;- ~ In r ;r~,~~Ne+~h 9 `'~ f r J " ar5 ~, t ' ~~ ~y € E l ~ ~~ Y ~`i~ i,~ JF ~~ > Y Swage S_ ~~ ~{ ~~_ ®:~ ~ Apple ~alleY~ '~~osemouri[ ~~~ .1~ i; ~t ~. -~~~ i %~; ~~ ~, . ~ }` ~' ~'~Coate Report Generated: D9/08/2006 12:50 ~ Q - 11 - August 1 thru 8, 2006 - 4432 Carrier Jet Arrivals Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations -August 2006 August 9 thru 16, 2006 - 4438 Carrier Jet Departures w it t~s Part s , i s .,~ t t ,i". ..,~'~1 ~,'~ tit~~l~i`i ~~- ~''"~ ~Iht~~ "4 ~}a'+ 'ilk ,s ,~ - 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t~fi la i ~Iv1~N M~ ~r~ S~hS • nth, Groin i9ei~h~ ~ }moo nqt ,~ i ~ ,.~ .~:c. ~ 3 ~ '"` ~''c fr ~'1 ~ ~~~ ~~ a ar ~ 4~ ` ' ,K Ya. ~'~Ur~Eyl~~ ~ ry, ~ p = 2c .~ i'r i E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~.~~~ . P f r '`~ t "fir, u '~ 5~~~ T,i }~~11617[l~, 1 ~ ~ lh® x~ y t = _ ~• i~ x # ~ ra .rb .', ~~. 1:~ ~"?. ~~',. ,.,-< ksL. 4 ~~ F t al' St . o ~» ,G~ August 9 thru 16, 2006 - 352 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals August 9 thru 16, 2006 - 179 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures .,_-,~- ` ~^ ~ 1 Sc1ul~}~~ lU1 i ~acl~fiCld ~ E ~~ # ,~ ~wr ~ ~ ur~et~RLa}F; .. {{ h "~Ye^ 3 ~1 -` i~ ~~~_ 11V~ ~ f 1 {` LC Mf F.1Ct't VKr / 1 t. ~• ~ :~ ~' ~ f Jn ~r t rc,v~ li ~ boa ngton ~ {n ;, :~ ~4 ~. I / ~~ I ; 11 ~ ~`. ~.~~ ~~-._---~-~..~_f ~ #.~ s~ille ~ ~ ~ ~! ~ -"~ -~ ~ 4 x.~ ~ ® Ap~le L~311ey" ~ l Rostamount ~ ;~ j} . ,;, ~ ~ t ,' i _;~ - 12 - ~ ~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 August 9 thru 16, 2006 - 4461 Carrier Jet Arrivals Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations -August 2006 August 17 thru 24, 2006 - 340 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals August 17 thru 24, 2006 - 211 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures ~~ ., ~ . >t Loth eF' rlc ~~ }. '~ f ~-,+; ~~ 1 tlteagolis~ '~ (4i' t • : ~7~ \ ® t -~-..~ ~~,f ~i ~7 , r. ` ~ yCr,r f i ~ 11 P ~ I ~ t~ ~'. ~ i !rte ~1 AK~~I ~ ~ ~~ .~uiifirl~ 1 1,1 ~.~ ~j a `11 it --ter. i 7 '~\ BIW 'i ~ lure A ~ ~ ~ J~r3 tt t rbt~ H ~Igh ~ ~ari ~4 ~,~ *~ ~r~~}' ~l' `~ ~~ ~ "~1^.1 1~ t ~ ~ ~~ ti , ~ a s , ~~" fi x ~~~~ ~ swage _~ ~ ~ ~,y -' ~_ ~.- Apple V311Py t /~o~emount ®,~1~ 1 ,- _ ~ '_:-_~~- ' ate Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~ - 13 - August 17 thru 24, 2006 - 4360 Carrier Jet Arrivals August 17 thru 24, 2006 - 4351 Carrier Jet Departures Airport Noise and Operations Monitoring System Flight Tracks Carrier Jet Operations -August 2006 August 25 thru 31, 2006 - 3713 Carrier Jet Departures s ~r ~ ~~' ©~. .:~ `~ Ln ~ x , ~'- ~, r; _e~ . ~'~ Nin'~Ap~hS ~ ~~ '~~i~t F xil "~ ' e ,. `~ ~ ! ` I i .. CtYih '~ f2 ~ s,~Y3 ~p[r~ i~~ ~dC ~ t' ~~ ,,h ~ ~., "'''`7773, Sai~thS f~l ;P ~ v ~s+chfirld i ~ ~~ wtf- ti ~ ~ sunfish 7 a(~r: ~, - ~?`-_ 67 !?iil~i~tph r E~~n .;_ ~- , ~ ~ ~ r ~~ .,: ~~ ~ ~ . q ,R~ F~y,r ~ r ~ t ~ ,,. Surnss~ll~, ,, '4 ~,,(~',~.v r i Y ~ A s'~ ~ .c{ r w~, . i. 0 . ~ ~ i °' ~ l '~ ~:~, ~~~ T,f;ple ~ail~y ti ~ td tticsemc.~rit , '~ - C a[? August 25 thru 31, 2006 - 279 Nighttime Carrier Jet Arrivals August 25 thru 31, 2006 - 154 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departures ... 4' >.' ~ 1} ,~ ~.. _ I tin ~ ~ioli~ ~ (~ ~:~~ ~~,~~~ ~. i i ,. ~ ~, i; ~; ~ - ~ __ _, ~/ LONG F `5jO~4,I :.K J( f ~ , ~jfl '`~ f jl C ~~BI~t1 8700' 'nylon -~ J ~ \ \ ( v~S,, . r_ _ f an r.~ ;~ . 1 , ( ~ ~~ ~. ~~ Sayage ~°. ~ ®'`~.~-~ P,p~le,~~gey.~-' j,~Rfl emtsurft i~-~ L ~ f~ ,. ~~; - 14 - ~ I Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 August 25 thru 31, 2006 - 3706 Carrier Jet Arrivals MSP International Airport Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT~ Site Locations ....,- . ~~~-_'_` ~~?1') !~ ° Fal on H e ghts ~ 1.~- .... - ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~' saint Louis Park ~, ~, ~ ~i ~'~ ' ~~ `~~ ~i~:F cn~~~~ ~ eta ~, ~ t nneapolis ~ S-~ui aul ~ ? ~~ / ~ ,4 ~::.~-:~ Knr,~ ~ 29 9 ~~w,p~~ R~1~~ ~ ti. 11 it ~ E 3 4 ~ ~t ~''~~ 1,`, '~ ~ ~ ~Li aie ~ ~~ ~-- O i ~ ~~ '~~ ;~~ est Saint Pa I ~~- ` ~ ~: e ina 27 ~1_ '~ , ~$ utJ~~Sairt a~ ,~."". _~ ~:-' ichfield Pv1SP~ ~~r . 23' 1 ~J ` 5~ n ~ . --., ~-~.~-~' MS~ ~-~ 13 I fish Lake 3 ~ 20 18 ' ,U 'hLi~ lA ~o / , f~' I I z~ z~ ,~ ~\ti-G F.~~~R ~9 .~ liav G~~ Heights Blou ~in~tan ~ 2 .~ `' t . \ - -~. LA.C~ LP.KE i ~~~~' t '~ ~~ y ;,,.. 33 37 ~ ~ t ,' 34 ~..:~_.:- rnsvile Savage i pple Valley Rosemount. ~....., 4 ® ,. f .. at ,~ ~E ~.? M ~aue ~ r ~u~; ^~ ~ z - _ Lakeville `~ ~.,e Remote Monitoring Tower Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 15 - Time Above dB Threshold for Arrival Related Noise Events August 2006 RMT ID City Address Time >= 65d6 Time >= 80d6 Time >= 90dB Time >_ 100d6 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 25:22:10 00:00:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 25:21:03 00:09:48 00:00:00 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 30:02:25 01:55:12 00:00:13 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 26:33:45 00:40:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 30:09:28 07:11:22 00:09:29 00:00:00 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 28:35:18 06:00:49 00:12:16 00:00:01 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 00:40:01 00:00:20 00:00:00 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 00:11:44 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:00:52 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:02:12 00:00:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:00:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. ~ Rockwood Ave. 00:01:14 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 00:08:01 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 18:11:07 00:00:46 00:00:00 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 00:24:02 00:00:10 00:00:00 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 16:41:53 01:06:17 00;00:00 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:02:35 00:00:05 00:00:00 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 00:30:43 00:00:12 00:00:00 00:00:00 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 00:17:08 00:00:04 00:00:00 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:04:54 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. $ 67th St. 00:16:33 00:00:01 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 10:14:04 00:00:08 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 01:48:54 00:00:33 00:00:00 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 18:58:44 00:00:48 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 00:39:26 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 02:24:33 00:00:14 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 00:29:26 00:00:13 00:00:00 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 01:17:29 00:00:22 00:00:00 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 00:01:35 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 03:29:42 00:00:02 00:00:00 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 00:00:25 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:01:40 00:00:07 00:00:00 00:00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 00:01:36 00:00:08 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 00:04:06 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 05:44:53 00:00:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 09:09:03 00:00:11 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 00:05:09 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 00:01:16 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 00:00:50 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 Total. Time f or Arrival Noise Events 258x10:24' 17:09:07 00:21:58 00:00:01 - 1 g - ~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Time Above Threshold dB for Departure Related Noise Events August 2006 RMT ID City Address Time >_ 65dB Time >= 80d6 Time >_ 90dB Time >_ 100d6 1 Minneapolis Xences Ave. & 41st St. 03:45:10 00:02:10 00:00:00 00:00:00 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 04:31:49 00:02:53 00:00:00 00:00:00 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 11:13:29 00:21:07 00:01:05 00:00:00 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 13:48:34 00:38:45 00:00:49 00:00:00 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 35:55:05 04:43:29 00:52:53 00:00:19 6 Minneapolis ~ 25th Ave. & 57th St. 40:59:35 06:24:53 01:07:03 00:01:09 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 15:12:42 00:36:57 00:01:11 00:00:00 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 11:50:26 00:27:16 00:00:43 00:00:00 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 00:13:18 00:01:25 00:00:01 00:00:00 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 00:14:31 00:03:58 00:01:32 00:00:00 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 00:12:29 00:02:59 00:00:39 00:00:00 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 00:06:33 00:00:00 00:00:00 00:00:00 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 14:32:41 00:06:29 00:00:00 00:00:00 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 18:56:29 00:54:52 00:01:13 00:00:00 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 17:09:11 00:17:11 00:00:26 00:00:00 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 20:12:17 02:07:25 00:12:48 00:00:00 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 00:26:50 00:03:15 00:00:24 00:00:00 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 10:33:43 00:06:07 00:02:00 00:00:01 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 07:07:44 00:03:15 00:00:11 00:00:00 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 00:41:26 00:00:41 00:00:00 00:00:00 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 06:54:17 00:01:17 00:00:00 00:00:00 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 04:40:14 00:00:15 00:00:00 00:00:00 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 31:40:24 02:21:48 00:15:35 00:00:00 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 12:13:35 00:10:23 00:00:00 00:00:00 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 09:26:51 00:00:47 00:00:00 00:00:00 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 11:41:30 00:16:32 00:00:00 00:00:00 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 10:37:07 00:18:21 00:00:43 00:00:00 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 23:16:44 00:11:25 00:00:17 00:00:00 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 05:15:51 00:02:51 00:00:01 00:00:00 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 19:49:52 01:46:08 00:05:33 00:00:00 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 01:18:29 00:01:14 00:00:13 00:00:00 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 00:27:53 00:00:07 00:00:00 00:00:00 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 04:55:48 00:01:34 00:00:00 00:00:00 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 01:23:41 00:00:13 00:00:00 00:00:00 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 03:04:14 00:02:22 00:00:00 00:00:00 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 01:19:04 00:00:46 00:00:00 00:00:00 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 02:28:14 00:01:43 00:00:00 00:00:00 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 03:35:15 00:02:17 00:00:00 00:00:00 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 02:47:51 00:02:36 00:00:00 00:00:00 Total Time for Departure Noise Events 384:40:56 22:27:46 02:45:20 00:01:29 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 17 - Arrival Related Noise Events August 2006 RMT ID City Address Arrival Events >_ 65dB Arrival - .Events >= 80d6_ Arrival Events >= 90dB Arrival Events >= 100dB 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 6230 3 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 5517 199 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 5814 1440 5 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 5721 637 0 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 6071 4517 195 0 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 5955 4976 406 1 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 122 5 0 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 44 0 0 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 4 0 0 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 8 3 0 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 2 0 0 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 6 0 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 33 0 0 0 14 Eagan 1 s# St. ~ McKee St. 4285 16 0 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 95 2 0 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 3391 769 0 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 9 1 0 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 119 4 0 0 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 47 2 0 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 17 0 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 75 0 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 2565 3 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 456 6 0 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 4405 27 0 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 154 1 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 575 4 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 113 2 0 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. 5. 282 13 0 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 7 0 0 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 955 1 0 0 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 2 0 0 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 7 1 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 5 1 0 0 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 21 0 0 0 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 1455 8 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 1976 3 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 20 0 0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 7 0 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 3 0 0 0 Total Arrival Noise Events 56573 12644 ` ti06 1 - 18 - ~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Departure Related Noise Events August 2006 RMT ID City Address Departure Events >= 65d6 Departure Events >= 80d6 Departure Events >= 90d6 Departure Events >_ 100d6 1 Minneapolis Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. 753 19 0 0 2 Minneapolis Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. 941 39 0 0 3 Minneapolis West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. 2072 153 18 0 4 Minneapolis Park Ave. & 48th St. 2475 306 16 0 5 Minneapolis 12th Ave. & 58th St. 5597 1618 545 6 6 Minneapolis 25th Ave. & 57th St. 6554 2434 518 36 7 Richfield Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. 2526 291 15 0 8 Minneapolis Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. 2050 217 9 0 9 St. Paul Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. 37 7 0 0 10 St. Paul Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. 32 17 14 0 11 St. Paul Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. 27 13 7 0 12 St. Paul Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. 24 0 0 0 13 Mendota Heights Southeast end of Mohican Court 2783 99 0 0 14 Eagan 1st St. & McKee St. 3175 451 13 0 15 Mendota Heights Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. 3134 171 6 0 16 Eagan Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane 3121 679 145 0 17 Bloomington 84th St. & 4th Ave. 70 15 5 0 18 Richfield 75th St. & 17th Ave. 1978 69 17 0 19 Bloomington 16th Ave. & 84th St. 1373 28 2 0 20 Richfield 75th St. & 3rd Ave. 127 6 0 0 21 Inver Grove Heights Barbara Ave. & 67th St. 1451 19 0 0 22 Inver Grove Heights Anne Marie Trail 845 8 0 0 23 Mendota Heights End of Kenndon Ave. 4999 837 217 0 24 Eagan Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. 2086 136 0 0 25 Eagan Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. 1240 11 0 0 26 Inver Grove Heights 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. 2160 160 0 0 27 Minneapolis Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. 1971 177 9 0 28 Richfield 6645 16th Ave. S. 3846 216 1 0 29 Minneapolis Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. 999 36 1 0 30 Bloomington 8715 River Ridge Rd. 3186 633 86 0 31 Bloomington 9501 12th Ave. S. 314 8 3 0 32 Bloomington 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. 91 1 0 0 33 Burnsville North River Hills Park 969 21 0 0 34 Burnsville Red Oak Park 306 4 0 0 35 Eagan 2100 Garnet Ln. 612 26 0 0 36 Apple Valley Briar Oaks & Scout Pond 249 4 0 0 37 Eagan 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. 464 27 0 0 38 Eagan 3957 Turquoise Cir. 693 35 0 0 39 Eagan 3477 St. Charles PI. 539 29 0 0 Total Departure Noise Events 65869 9020 1647 42 Report Generated: 09/08!2006 12:50 ~ - 19 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#1) Xerxes Ave. & 41st St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/25/200619:27 NWA46 DC10 D 30L 86.7 08/14/200615:39 NWA19 6744 D 30L 86.6 08/07/200619:10 NWA44 DC10 D 30L 86.1 08/25/2006 8:02 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 85.6 08/22/2006 8:06 CCI706 B72Q D 30L 85.6 08/29/200619:02 NWA44 DC10 D 30L 85.4 08/02/200613:48 NWA99 DC10 D 30L 84.8 08/02/200619:07 NWA44 DC10 D 30L 83.4 08/28/200619:04 NWA44 DC10 D 30L 83 08/20/2006 6:38 KFS69 LJ25 D 30L 82.4 (RMT Site#2) Fremont Ave. & 43rd St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure 'Runway Lmax(dB) 08/26/200616:32 NWA3 B744 D 30L 89.2 08/19/200619:22 NWA44 DC10 D 30L 88.3 08/13/200616:14 NWA689 DC9Q A 12L 85.6 08/24/2006 21:17 NWA1595 DC9Q A 12L 85.6 08/30/200614:33 NWA1215 A320 A 12L 85.5 08/31/2006 5:27 NWA98 DC10 A 12L 85.3 08/03/200619:20 NWA46 DC10 D 30L 84.9 08/29/200619:07 NWA46 DC10 D 30L 84.9 08/24/2006 22:21 NWA1839 DC9Q A 12L 84.8 08/23/2006 5:13 UPS558 DC8Q A 12L 84.8 (RMT Site#3) West Elmwood St. & Belmont Ave. DatelTime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure . Runway Lmax(dB) 08/28/2006 20:53 DHL197 B72Q D 30L 94.2 08/14/200615:39 NWA19 8744 D 30L 94.1 08/11/2006 22:39 CCP1465 B72Q A 12R 93.8 08/25/2006 8:01 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 93.7 08/22/2006 8:05 CC1706 B72Q D 30L 92.4 08/21/2006 20:53 DHL197 B72Q D 30L 92.3 08/02/200615:49 NWA1838 DC9Q D 30L 91.9 08/20/2006 6:38 KFS69 LJ25 D 30L 91.8 08/08/2006 6:14 NWA909 B742 A 12R 91.7 08/25/2006 20:49 DHL197 B72Q D 30L 91.5 - 20 - ~] Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#4) Park Ave. & 48th St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/01/2006 23:23 DHL304 B72Q D 30L 94.6 08/29/2006 5:59 DHL1648 B72Q D 30L 92.5 08/19/200614:30 NWA766 DC9Q D 30L 92.4 08/03/2006 7:25 NWA744 DC9Q D 30L 92.4 08/19/200619:17 NWA46 DC10 D 30L 92.1 08/03/200610:23 NWA748 DC9Q D 30L 91.4 08/28/200614:34 NWA766 DC9Q D 30L 91.3 08/27/200613:32 NWA1050 DC9Q D 30R 90.9 08/28/2006 7:18 NWA742 DC9Q D 30L 90.9 08/02/2006 23:22 Unknown Uknown D 30L 90.6 (RMT Site#5) 12th Ave. & 58th St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/02/2006 8:33 CCP1430 B72Q D 30L 103.4 08/28/2006 8:32 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 101.7 08/25/2006 8:54 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 101.7 08/0/2006 7:38 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 101.2 08/04/2006 7:37 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 100.7 08/14/2006 8:26 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 100.6 08/21/2006 8:46 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 100 08/03/2006 9:17 CCP1460 B72Q D 30L 99.9 08/02/200610:29 NWA454 DC9Q D 30L 99.7 08/08/2006 6:15 NWA909 8742 A 12R 99.6 (RMT Site#6) 25th Ave. & 57th St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type ArrivaU - Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/02/2006 7:31 FDX1156 B72Q D 30R 105.7 08/29/2006 23:23 CCI705 B72Q D 30R 103.2 08/25/2006 21:58 NWA1536 DC9Q D 30R 103 08/21/2006 9:18 NWA734 DC9Q D 30R 102.9 08/29/2006 23:04 DHL304 B72Q D 30R 102.7 08/02/200610:16 NWA748 DC9Q D 30R 102.2 08/28/200613:38 NWA1050 DC9Q D 30R 102.1 08/22/200614:36 NWA405 DC9Q D 30R 101.3 08/27/200613:11 NWA1068 DC9Q D 30R 101.2 08/07/200613:34 NWA1050 DC9Q D 30R 101.1 Report Generated: 09/08!2006 12:50 `~ - 21 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#7) Wentworth Ave. & 64th St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/19/2006 9:00 CCP1430 B72Q D 30L 95.7 08/02/2006 7:11 NWA448 DC9Q D 30L 95 08/06/2006 8:33 CCP660 B72Q D 30L 92.8 08/02/200617:36 Unknown B72Q D 30L 92.7 08/02/2006 22:20 DHL197 B72Q D 30L 92.4 08/14/2006 7:23 NWA448. DC9Q D 30L 92.3 08/29/200610:21 NWA134 DC9Q D 30L 92.1 08/21/200610:42 NWA1426 DC9Q D 30L 92.1 08/25/200616:46 NWA1531 DC9Q D 30L 92 08/03/2006 5:50 DHL1648 B72Q D 30L 92 (RMT Site#8) Longfellow Ave. & 43rd St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure.... Runway. Lmax(dB) 08/14/200616:18 CCP1103 B72Q D 30L 94.5 08/29/2006 8:01 NWA1212 DC9Q D 30R 93.7 08/29/2006 23:05 DHL304 B72Q D 30R 93.1 08/02/2006 6:22 DHL1648 B72Q D 30L 93 08/28/2006 22:40 DHL304 B72Q D 30L 92.4 08/21/200619:35 CCP2691 B72Q D 30R 91.8 08/15/200613:40 NWA730 DC9Q D 30R 91.1 08/02/2006 7:32 FDX1156 B72Q D 30R 91.1 08/19/200613:40 NWA1050 DC9Q D 30R 90.2 08/01/2006 20:36 NWA616 DC90 D 30R 89.6 (RMT Site#9) Saratoga St. & Hartford Ave. Date/Time Flight Number .Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/11/200615:49 NWA19 6744 D 04 89.9 08/01/2006 2:32 RCH768 MD11 D 04 89 08/06/200615:23 NWA19 B744 D 04 86.9 08/07/2006 8:45 RCH750 MD11 D 04 86.7 08/02/2006 21:24 OAE792 DC10 D 04 85 08/07/200617:12 OAE752 DC10 D 04 84.5 08/18/200615:40 NWA19 6744 D 04 82.5 08/24/200615:24 NWA19 6744 D 04 78.8 08/12/200615:56 ACA584 A319 A 22 78.4 08/10/2006 6:52 BMJ54 BE80 D 12L 76.4 -22- Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#10) Itasca Ave. & Bowdoin St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/: Departure Runway. Lmax(dB) 08/24/200615:23 NWA19 6744 D 04 98.8 08/18/200615:40 NWA19 6744 D 04 98.5 08/06/200615:22 NWA19 8744 D 04 98.4 08/11/200615:49 NWA19 B744 D 04 98.1 08/02/200615:19 NWA19 B744 D 04 96.8 08/26/200615:25 NWA19 6744 D 04 95.7 08/25/200615:19 NWA19 8744 D 04 95.4 08/07/200617:11 OAE752 DC10 D 04 95.1 08/19/200616:01 NWA3 B744 D 04 94.1 08/02/2006 21:24 OAE792 DC10 D 04 94 (RMT Site#11) Finn St. & Scheffer Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/19/200616:02 NWA3 B744 D 04 94.1 08/27/200615:22 NWA19 8744 D 04 94 08/02/200615:19 NWA19 6744 D 04 93.7 08/26/200615:25 NWA19 6744 D 04 93.7 08/19/200615:25 NWA19 6744 D 04 92.6 08/25/200615:19 NWA19 8744 D 04 91 08/24/200615:23 NWA19 8744 D 04 90.1 08/07/200615:23 NWA19 6744 D 04 89.4 08/11/200615:49 NWA19 B744 D 04 84 08/29/2006 23:24 CCI705 672Q D 30R 83.8 - _ -- -- - (RMT Site#12) Alton St. & Rockwood Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ .Departure Runway Lmax(dB)' 08/31/2006 21:41 TCA1 Uknown D 12L 78.9 08/10/2006 7:02 BMJ66 BE80 D 12L 78 08/09/2006 7:34 BMJ18 BE80 D 12R 76.3 08/10/2006 7:22 BMJ18 BE80 D 12L 76.1 08/31/2006 7:14 BMJ18 BE80 D 12L 76 08/29/200618:13 Unknown PA31 A 30L 74.7 08/09/2006 7:34 BMJ13 BE80 D 12R 74.6 08/31/2006 8:10 NWA9840 A319 D 12L 72.9 08/31/2006 7:07 BMJ72 BE80 D 12L 72.5 08/04/200617:45 FLG3774 CRJ A 12L 72.4 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~ - 23 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#13) Southeast end of Mohican Court Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/17/2006 7:02 CC1706 B72Q D 12L 86.5 08/16/2006 20:15 NWA44 DC10 D 12R 86.1 08/08/200615:23 NWA19 6744 D 12R 85.6 08/09/2006 9:02 AAL2240 MD80 D 12L 85.3 08/01/200610:49 AAL1655 MD80 D 12L 84.8 08/20/200615:10 NWA19 B744 D 12R 84.7 08/11/200619:15 NWA44 DC10 D 12R 84.4 08/23/2006 6:28 DHL1648 B72Q D 12R 84.2 08/18/2006 7:14 CC1706 B72Q D 12L 84.1 08/25/2006 0:14 NWA1536 DC9Q D 12L 83.9 (RMT Site#14) 1st St. & McKee St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure.. Runway Lmax(d6) 08/13/2006 7:49 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 97.3 08/06/2006 7:01 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 96 08/17/2006 7:49 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 94.5 08/11/2006 7:36 CCP1464 B72Q D 12R 94 08/17/200615:59 NWA19 6744 D 12R 93.6 08/31/200616:51 CCP2690 B72Q D 12R 92.3 08/01/200612:14 NWA99 DC10 D 12R 92 08/13/200615:24 NWA19 8744 D 12R 91.8 08/04/200612:02 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 91.1 08/06/2006 6:50 DHL1648 B72Q D 12R 90.6 (RMT Site#15) Cullon St. & Lexington Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure- Runway Lmax(d6) 08/17/2006 7:01 CC1706 B72Q D 12L 96.7 08/11/2006 7:26 CC1706 B72Q D 12L 92.6 08/04/200617:48 NWA604 DC9Q D 12L 91.7 08/18/2006 22:05 NWA607 DC9Q D 12L 91.6 08/09/200615:52 NWA1838 DC9Q D 12L 90.6 08/20/200619:27 NWA795 DC9Q D 12L 90.1 08/09/200615:47 NWA497 DC9Q D 12L 88.5 08/22/200613:12 UAL779 6757 A 30R 87.3 08/05/200617:24 NWA1760 DC9Q D 12L 87.1 08/12/200615:37 NWA1790 DC9Q D 12L 87 - 24 - ~ I Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#16) Avalon Ave. & Vilas Lane Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/' Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/05/2006 9:15 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 98.3 08/12/2006 9:09 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 97.8 08/09/2006 8:37 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 97 08/10/2006 7:54 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 95.4 08/16/200610:28 NWA1426 DC9Q D 12R 95 08/11/2006 7:36 CCP1464 B72Q D 12R 94.8 08/23/2006 7:56 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 94.8 08/24/2006 7:54 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 94.7 08/30/200614:14 CCP638 B72Q D 12R 94.7 08/13/200615:24 NWA19 6744 D 12R 94.6 (RMT Site#17) 84th St. & 4th Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/07/2006 4:44 RCH764 MD11 D 22 96.1 08/03/200615:29 NWA19 B744 D 22 92.9 08/18/2006 8:34 CCP1464 B72Q D 22 91.8 08/211200615:32 NWA19 6744 D 22 91 08/23/200615:19 NWA19 8744 D 22 90.4 08/1 5/2006 1 5:22 NWA19 6744 D 22 89.1 08/05/200615:55 NWA3 8744 D 22 88.7 08/01/200615:24 NWA19 6744 D 22 88.3 08/28/200615:21 NWA19 6744 D 22 87.4 08/05/200615:33 NWA19 8744 D 22 85.8 (RMT Site#18) 75th St. & 17th Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/' Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/05/200615:55 NWA3 B744 D 22 99.9 08/12/200616:46 NWA3 8744 D 22 99.2 08/05/200615:33 NWA19 B744 D 22 99.2 08/16/2006 8:39 CCP1430 B72Q D 22 98.4 08/22/200615:39 NWA19 6744 D 22 97.5 08/18/2006 8:34 CCP1464 B72Q D 22 97.3 08/15/200615:22 NWA19 6744 D 22 97.2 08/01/200615:24 NWA19 6744 D 22 96.9 08/28/200615:21 NWA19 8744 D 22 96.9 08/03/200615:29 NWA19 B744 D 22 96.8 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 L~~,( - 25 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#19) 16th Ave. & 84th St. DatelTime Flight Number Aircraft Type ArrivaU Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/04/200615:22 NWA19 6744 D 22 92.2 08/12/200616:46 NWA3 6744 D 22 91.4 08/16/2006 8:40 GCP1430 B72Q D 22 89.6 08/05/200615:33 NWA19 8744 D 22 86.6 08/12/200616:10 NWA19 8744 D 22 85 08/04/200613:24 OAE820 DC10 D 22 84.9 08/05/200615:55 NWA3 B744 D 22 84.6 08/07/2006 4:43 RCH764 MD11 D 22 84.5 08/28/200615:21 NWA19 6744 D 22 84.4 08/03/200615:29 NWA19 6744 D 22 84.3 (RMT Site#20) 75th St. & 3rd Ave. Date/Time Flight. Number Aircraft Type ArrivaU Departure .Runway Lmax(dB) 08/01/200615:23 NWA1266 DC9Q D 30L 88.4 08/13/2006 20:00 NWA1461 DC9Q D 30L 83.6 08/01/200614:47 AAL1442 MD80 D 30R 82.8 08/22/200617:41 AAL422 MD80 D 30L 82.8 08/26/2006 7:29 FDX442 A300 D 30L 82 08/28/200615:21 NWA19 6744 D 22 81.5 08/28/2006 21:48 NWA1269 DC9Q D 30L 79.9 08/19/2006 7:19 BMJ64 BE80 D 30L 79.7 08/22/200616:56 NWA563 A320 D 30L 79.4 08/15/200615:22 NWA19 8744 D 22 79.1 (RMT Site#21) Barbara Ave. & 67th St. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/24/200614:41 NWA361 6757 D 12R 86.7 08/16/2006 6:55 CCI706 B72Q D 12R 83.6 08/23/2006 6:29 DHL1648 B72Q D 12R 83.3 08/09/2006 0:26 RCH791 MD11 D 12R 82.3 08/05/20D6 21:41 NWA56 DC10 D 12R 82.1 08/15/2006 23:27 CCI705 B72Q D 12L 82.1 08/08/2006 21:17 NWA764 DC9Q D 12L 81.5 08/20/20D612:18 CCP2760 B72Q D 17 81.5 08/31/200616:56 NWA1532 DC9Q D 12L 81.1 08/30/200619:15 NWA46 DC10 D 12R 81 _ 26 _ ,[~r'~j Report Generated: 09/0812006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#22) Anne Marie Trail Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/23/2006 22:09 FDX1106 B72Q D 12R 81.9 08/28/2006 8:25 NWA679 A319 A 30R 81.3 08/08/2006 7:48 RCH766 MD11 D 12R 81.3 08/21/2006 8:25 BTA3200 E145 A 30R 81.3 08/31/200612:17 DAL553 MD80 D 12R 81.1 08/14/200611:31 NWA672 A320 A 30L 81 08/20/200610:33 NWA454 DC9Q D 12R 80.5 08/06/2006 7:02 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 80.4 08/24/2006 22:00 NWA56 DC10 D 12R 80.3 08/07/2006 21:56 FDX1106 B72Q D 12R 80.2 (RMT Site#23) End of Kenndon Ave. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/04/200615:46 NWA1838 DC9Q D 12L 96.5 08/18/2006 22:03 NWA1175 DC9Q D 12L 95.9 08/20/200619:31 NWA1842 DC9Q D 12L 94.9 08/20/200617:04 NWA604 DC9Q D 12L 94.7 08/09/200610:49 NWA1082 DC9Q D 12L 94.6 08/09/2006 9:38 NWA1704 DC9Q D 12L 94.5 08/09/200617:47 NWA746• DC9Q D 12L 94.3 08/20/2006 21:15 NWA1462 DC9Q D 12L 94.3 08/12/200616:23 NWA1169 DC9Q D 12L 94.3 08/31/200611:55 NWA1841 DC9Q D 12L 94.1 (RMT Site#24) Chapel Ln. & Wren Ln. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway - Lmax(d6) 08/13/200615:25 NWA19 8744 D 12R 88.4 08/06/2006 7:01 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 87 08/13/2006 7:49 CCP1460 B72Q D 12R 86.9 08/16/200611:55 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 86.3 08/30/2006 23:30 CC1705 B72Q D 12L 86 08/06/2006 6:50 DHL1648 B72Q D 12R .84.9 08/08/2006 21:39 NWA56 DC10 D 12R 84.9 08/15/2006 22:10 FDX1106 B72Q D 12R 84.8 08/16/2006 21:41 NWA56 DC10 D 12R 84.6 08/31/200616:51 CCP2690 B72Q D 12R 84.6 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 -27- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#25) Moonshine Park 1321 Jurdy Rd. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ - Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/20/200612:17 CCP2760 B72Q D 17 86.3 08/27/200615:26 NWA132 DC9Q D 12R 83.5 08/10/200611:45 NWA452 DC9Q D 12R 83.2 08/21/2006 8:03 NWA681 DC9Q A 30L 82.7 08/20/200611:02 NWA1174 DC9Q D 12R 82 08/05/2006 9:15 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 82 08/30/200614:14 CCP638 B72Q D 12R 80.9 08/01/2006 6:05 DHL1648 B72Q D 12R 80.7 08/12/2006 9:09 CCP1430 B72Q D 12R 80.4 08/20/200611:13 NWA1426 DC9Q D 12R 80.3 (RMT Site#26) 6796 Arkansas Ave. W. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway - 'Lmax(dB) 08/16/2006 6:54 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 88.4 08/10/2006 7:23 CC1706 B72Q D 12R 88.3 08/09/2006 7:24 CCI706 B72Q D 12R 88.2 08/16/2006 23:38 CCI705 B72Q D 12R 87.5 08/15/2006 22:54 DHL304 B72Q D 12R 86.7 08/09/200615:24 NWA19 B744 D 12R 86.5 08/23/2006 8:33 NWA1090 A319 D 12L 86.2 08/05/2006 8:17 RCH821 MD11 D 12R 86.2 08/15/200619:09 NWA44 DC10 D 12R 86.2 08/05/200611:57 NWA99 DC10 D 12R 86.1 (RMT Site#27) Anthony School 5757 Irving Ave. S. DatelTime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/25/2006 8:54 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 97.5 08/07/2006 7:38 CCP1464 B72Q D 30L 95.5 08/27/2006 7:47 CCP1460 B72Q D 30L 93.8 08/03/2006 7:12 CCP1460 B72Q D 30L 92.9 08/14/200615:16 NWA1494 DC9Q D 30L 91.5 08/02/2006 8:33 CCP1430 B72Q D 30L 90.9 08/02/200610:30 NWA454 DC9Q D 30L 90.6 08/26/2006 9:20 CCP1430 B72Q D 30L 90.4 08/02/200617:14 NWA746 DC9Q D 30L 90.2 08/25/2006 7:29 NWA448 DC9Q D 30L 88.9 - 28 - ~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#28) 6645 16th Ave. S. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway: Lmax(d6) 08/14/200613:21 NWA494 DC9Q D 30L 98.6 08/25/2006 21:48 NWA1269 DC9Q D 30L 87.2 08/21/200611:29 NWA103 A320 D 30L 86.9 08/24/2006 23:02 DHL304 B72Q D 17 86.8 08/14/200617:04 NWA1531 DC9Q D 30L 86.7 08/07/200619:53 TRS879 8717 D 30L 86.3 08/20/2006 7:01 NWA456 DC9Q D 17 85.9 08/20/2006 7:13 NWA448 DC9Q D 17 85.9 08/22/200613:09 NWA1489 DC9Q D 30L 85.8 08/31/200610:26 NWA134 DC9Q D 17 85.4 (RMT Site#29) Ericsson Elem. School 4315 31st Ave. S. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/28/2006 23:14 CC1705 B72Q D 30R 90.2 08/21/200610:46 AAL1655 MD80 D 30R 85.5 08/06/200613:35 NWA1790 DC9Q D 30R 85.1 08/28/2006 6:54 SCX245 B738 D 30L 84.7 08/28/200616:51 NWA1532 DC9Q D 30R 84.7 08/27/2006 6:56 AAL386 MD80 D 30R 84.6 08/30/2006 7:00 AAL386 MD80 D 30R 84 08/19/200613:18 NWA1093 DC9Q D 30R 83.6 08/06/200615:01 AAL1442 MD80 D 30R 83.4 08/13/2006 22:23 NWA859 DC9Q D 30R 83.4 (RMT Site#30) 8715 River Ridge Rd. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure. Runway Lmax(d6) 08/13/200617:47 CJT630 B72Q D 17 98 08/23/2006 20:40 DHL197 B72Q D 17 96.3 08/24/200616:08 NWA409 DC9Q D 17 95.2 08/09/2006 21:00 DHL197 B72Q D 17 94.4 08/08/2006 7:09 CC1706 B72Q D 17 94.1 08/17/2006 21:56 FDX1106 B72Q D 17 94 08/15/200616:57 NWA1531 DC9Q D 17 93.9 08/27/200619:34 NWA975 DC9Q D 17 93.9 08/24/2006 22:41 NWA1417 DC9Q D 17 93.8 08/10/200611:02 NWA1174 bC9Q D 17 93.3 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 -29- Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#31) 9501 12th Ave. S. DateITime Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/05/200615:34 NWA19 6744 D 22 93 08/05/200615:56 NWA3 B744 D 22 92.9 08/12/200616:11 NWA19 6744 D 22 90 08/04/200613:25 OAE820 DC10 D 22 86.5 08/12/200616:47 NWA3 8744 D 22 84.5 08/04/200615:22 NWA19 8744 D 22 82.8 08/01/200614:47 AAL1442 MD80 D 30R 80.1 08/03/2006 7:07 BMJ64 BE80 D 17 80.1 08/04/200617:06 NWA573 A319 D 17 79 08/24/200617:38 SCX287 6738 D 17 78.2 (RMT Site#32) 10325 Pleasant Ave. S. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft'Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/07/2006 4:44 RCH764 MD11 D 22 84.1 08/09/2006 3:28 UPS552 8757 A 12R 83 08/26/2006 7:47 NWA138 DC9Q D 30L 79.1 08/01/200615:18 NWA1494 DC9Q D 30L 78.8 08/25/2006 22:13 NWA144 DC9Q D 30L 78.1 08/22/200612:10 DAL553 MD80 D 30L 77.9 08/20/2006 7:23 NWA1428 DC9Q D 30L 77.8 08/22/2006 7:12 DAL599 MD80 D 30L 77.6 08/21/200610:43 NWA1426 DC9Q D 30L 77.4 08/29/2006 7:26 FDX645 DC10 D 30L 76.8 (RMT Site#33) North River Hills Park Date/Time Flight. Number Aircraft Type .Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/20/2006 7:44 CCP1460 B72Q D 17 86.4 08/14/2006 22:12 FDX1106 B72Q D 17 83.9 08/14/2006 22:53 DHL304 B72Q D 17 83.7 08/07/2006'4:45 RCH764 MD11 D 22. 83.1 08/24/200618:35 UAL1184 B735 A 12R 82.4 08/03/2006 8:57 AAL675 MD80 D 17 82 08/23/200615:47 NWA1673 DC9Q D 17 81.8 08/23/200611:44 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 81.7 08/24/200616:31 AAL2092 MD80 D 17 81.6 08/16/2006 22:00 FDX1106 B72Q D 17 81.5 - 30 - !1~ Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#34) Red Oak Park Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type .Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/24/2006 23:05 DHL304 B72Q D 17 82.8 08/05/200614:28 NWA973 DC9Q D 17 81.2 08/20/2006 7:44 CCP1460 672Q D 17 80.4 08/01/200616:25 AAL2092 MD80 D 17 80.3 08/1 3/2006 1 7:49 CJT630 672Q D 17 79.3 08/30/200611:46 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 79.3 08/10/200615:26 NWA409 DC9Q D 17 79.3 08/18/200616:18 AAL2092 MD80 D 17 79.1 08/23/2006 9:33 AAL675 MD80 D 17 79 08/30/200616:27 AAL2092 MD80 D 17 78.9 (RMT Site#35) 2100 Garnet Ln. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/16/2006 8:41 CCP1430 B72Q D 22 86.8 08/20/2006 6:56 DHL1648 672Q D 17 86.1 08/03/2006 21:02 DHL197 672Q D 17 85.5 08/14/2006 20:54 DHL197 672Q D 17 85.4 08/11/200614:55 AAL1442 MD80 D 17 84.3 08/21/2006 6:39 AAL1279 MD80 D 17 84.2 08/03/2006 9:19 ~ AAL2240 MD80 D 17 83.2 08/21/2006 7:02 NWA456 DC9Q D 17 83.1 08/23/200614:47 AAL1442 MD80 D 17 83.1 08/08/200613:45 NWA856 DC9Q D 17 82.8 (RMT Site#36) Briar Oaks & Scout Pond Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/13/200617:49 CJT630 B72Q D 17 84.2 08/20/2006 6:56 DHL1648 B72Q D 17 83.8 08/28/200611:36 7RS871 B717 A 35 83.2 08/03/2006 21:03 DHL197 B72Q D 17 82.8 08/14/2006 20:54 DHL197 B72Q D 17 82.7 08/29/2006 20:49 NWA1536 DC9Q A 35 82.6 08/28/2006 7:44 NWA1524 DC9Q A 35 81.8 08/02/200610:01 NWA1458 DC9Q A 35 79.7 08/27/200612:52 MES3555 RJ85 A 35 79.6 08/26/200619:35 NWA579 A320 A 35 79.5 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 31 - Top Ten Loudest Aircraft Noise Events for MSP August 2006 (RMT Site#37) 4399 Woodgate Ln. N. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/09/2006 9:55 NWA1811 A320 D 17 86.5 08/09/2006 8:30 AAL675 MD80 D 17 85.8 08/16/2006 8:41 CCP1430 B72Q D 22 83.8 08/09/2006 8:52 KFS69 LJ25 D 17 83.1 08/27/200617:33 AAL422 MD80 D 17 82.5 08/10/200613:50 NWA1672 DC9Q D 17 82.4 08/201200615:26 NWA132 DC9Q D 17 82.2 08/08/200615:30 NWA138 DC9Q D 17 82 08/01/200611:49 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 81.8 08/16/2006 8:31 AAL675 MD80 D 17 81.8 (RMT Site#38) 3957 Turquoise Cir. Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(dB) 08/04/200611:36 FDX891 B72Q D 17 84.6 08/09/2006 8:52 KFS69 LJ25 D 17 84.5 08/16/200611:47 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 84.1 08/13/200614:42 AAL1442 MD80 D 17 84 08/13/200612:33 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 83.3 08/16/200610:46 NWA1455 DC9Q D 17 83.2 08/09/200617:39 AAL422 MD80 D 17 83.2 08/08/200619:22 NWA140 A320 D 17 83 08/20/200611:53 AAL1386 MD80 D 17 82.8 08/23/200617:35 NWA458 DC9Q D 17 82.6 (RMT Site#39) 3477 St. Charles PI Date/Time Flight Number Aircraft Type. Arrival/ Departure Runway Lmax(d6) 08/31/2006 21:02 DHL197 B72Q D 17 89.4 08/08/2006 7:10 CC1706 B72Q D 17 89.1 08/18/2006 20:46 DHL197 B72Q D 17 88.3 08/12/200616:47 NWA3 8744 D 22 86.1 08/16/2006 20:57 DHL197 B72Q D 17 85.9 08/09!2006 21:01 DHL197 B72Q D 17 85 08/04/200615:23 NWA19 6744 D 22 84.5 08/23/200610:54 NWA1174 DC9Q D 17 82.7 08/09/200610:28 NWA1670 DC9Q D 17 82.6 08/09/2006 7:28 NWA1428 DC9Q D 17 82.6 August 2006 Remote Monitoring Tower Toa Ten Summary The top ten noise events and the event ranges at each RMT for August 2006 were comprised of 93.6% departure operations. The predominant top ten aircraft type was the B72Q with 29.2% of the highest Lmax events. August 2006 Technical Advisor Report Notes Unknown fields are due to unavailability of FAA flight track data. Missing FAA radar data for 0 days during the month of August 2006. - 32 - ~Q Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL August 2006 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12_ #13 #14 #15 08/01 /2006 61.1 60.5 66.3 67.7 74.8 74.9 57.2 62.9 58.8 59.1 47.1 NA 54.4 63.6 56.2 08/02/2006 53.1 55.5 64.2 66 74.7 75.3 66.8 64.8 44.6 56.4 53.2 34.3 36.5 60.7 29.8 08/03/2006 54.3 59.4 60.7 64.1 72.9 73.8 65.3 60.8 NA 29.5 30.5 NA 39.6 61.9 43.9 08/04/2006 57.3 60.6 64.4 62 70.3 70.1 59.7 59 33.8 37.8 28.1 35.1 58.9 64.7 60.2 08/05/2006 59.5 62.1 66.2 64 69.9 70.2 41.5 26.9 46.2 39.9 26.6 34.2 59.2 61.8 60.3 08/06/2006 55.8 57.6 61.6 61.5 71.3 72.7 61.1 57.8 45.5 55.5 42.7 NA 48.5 64.6 .47.2 08/07/2006 55.9 57.9 62.6 62.2 72.6 73.1 62.2 58.6 49.2 55.8 49.9 41.9 55.9 65.4 56.9 08/08/2006 62.5 63.4 67.4 64.7 72.5 72.4 44.6 36.2 NA NA NA NA 59.5 66.4 59.9 08/09/2006 60.8 61.7 67.7 62.9 72.5 69.2 42.9 41.4 43.4 46.5 NA 38.2 59.1 66.6 60.8 08/10/2006 60.1 62 67.9 63 72.5 69.5 44.3 NA 50.2 42.6 NA 47.5 59.5 66.1 60.3 08/11/2006 60.9 62.3 69.5 63.5 73.7 69.4 43.1 36.9 49.3 55.3 44.4 32 61.2 64.4 61 08/12/2006 59.8 61.5 66.9 63.4 71.2 69.2 51.7 32.2 38 41.4 NA 26.5 59.2 63.3 61.3 08/13/2006 59 59.9 64.9 62.5 70.4 72.1 58.2 53.6 NA NA NA NA 55.1 64.7 54.9 08/14/2006 52.6 53.2 60.1 61.5 71.3 72.5 63.3 61.3 37.8 38.2 35 39.5 31.4 61.5 41.9 08/15/2006 54.2 58 62.9 64.9 73.1 72.5 61.4 61.2 38.6 39.5 NA NA 55.8 64.5 57.5 08/16/2006 57.9 60.3 65.3 62.2 69.5 68.4 50.8 55.4 27.7 NA NA 26.3 60.3 64 61.6 08/17/2006 61.1 61.3 69.1 62.4 72.8 68.8 42.1 41.3 39.6 NA NA NA 59.6 64.6 60.9 08/18/2006 60.4 61.7 67.3 62.5 71.4 69 36.1 29.1 49.2 55.9 43 38.7 59.5 64.2 64.8 08/19/2006 51.7 56.7 58.5 61.7 70.4 74.5 61.5 59.8 42.6 55.8 55.4 NA NA 60.4 34.9 08/20/2006 58.8 60.3 65.2 61.3 70.1 68.4 55.8 53 NA 32.8 26.4 34 57.8 62.3 58.6 08/21 /2006 55.9 56.7 63.5 62.2 73.4 74.4 62 60.8 NA 36.3 NA NA 45.2 59.5 45.1 08/22/2006 55.8 58.3 61.7 62.2 69.4 72.1 58.5 61.4 40.7 32.4 42.7 NA 55.7 63.8 55.9 08/23/2006 61.1 64.1 66.3 65 70.7 71.8 43.5 49.3 28.5 36.9 30.3 37 60 64.7 60.2 08/24/2006 62.5 66 69.6 67.4 73.1 73.2 48.4 38.3 39.8 56.2 48.8 NA 58.2 63.3 60.9 08/25/2006 59.2 58.6 67 65.4 74.8 75.6 62.9 59.6 42.6 53.8 51 30.6 54.1. 60.8 54.7 08/26/2006 49.7 52 56.8 60.4 68.4 71.3 61.3 58.3 NA 55.3 52.1 30.3 46.1 61.5 51.8 08/27/2006 54.7 57.9 61.3 60.2 69.5 69.5 60.9 57.9 NA 51.4 52.4 NA 55.2 61.2 55.7 08/28/2006 54 56.3 61.7 62.5 73.7 75.1 64.3 64.6 NA 34.8 NA NA 48.4 60.3 43.1 08/29/2006 55.4 55.4 63.6 64.4 73 77.2 65.5 65.3 NA 51.7 55 32.7 28.2 59.8 39.4 08/30/2006 57.5 60.6 64.1 63.2 70.4 70.8 56.4 56.2 NA NA NA 27.9 58.8 64.3 59.5 08/31 /2006 59.9 62.5 67.4 64.3 71.8 70.2 44.2 NA 46.8 43.6 41 46.9 58.8 66 62.3 Mo.DNL 58.6 60.5 65.6 63.7. 72.1 72.5 60.2 58.9 46.8 51:6 47.3 37.3 57 63.7 58.6 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~ - 33 - Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL August 2006 Remote Monitoring Towers Date #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 08/01 /2006 69.1 48.9 55.3 49.9 50.6 51.1 58.1 63.1 61.3 54.3 56.5 53.2 60.1 56 08/02/2006 67.1 29.2 45.6 NA 36.9 40.3 58.9 46.9 61 43.4 48.9 63.6 60.7 68.3 08/03/2006 68.2 51.3 54.8 46.4 40.4 40.9 58.7 49.8 61.8 38.4 52.6 60.6 59.5 55.9 08/04/2006 69 42.8 56 53.4 28.3 54.1 59.5 67.9 62.9 53.7 57.1 54.8 54.5 53.3 08/05/2006 64.6 52 60 51.1 45.6 55.1 54.1 68.2 58.5 53.2 59 30.7 52.2 NA 08/06/2006 65.4 30.7 40.4 26.4 39.8 39.5 54.6 59.2 60.9 47.4 56.9 56.9 57 52.8 08/07/2006 66.9 63.3 63.2 54.3 49.7 52.8 57.3 66.2 62.2 53.7 58.2 60.5 57.9 51.9 08/08/2006 69 NA 55.2 51.5 25.8 54.9 57.4 68.6 63.4 56.2 62.3 38.8 55.8 30,7 08/09/2006 69.4 NA 54.8 51.2 48.6 57.2 56.8 68 62.6 56.4 63 46.4 55.8 35.7 08/10/2006 70.1 48.8 54.9 52.8 NA 56.8 55.9 68.4 61.8 59 61.6 43.8 58.2 37.5 08/11/2006 66.2 36 54.4 52.1 31.3 57.1 55.7 68 60.4 52.8 68.7 41.5 57 30.9 08/12/2006 65.8 45.2 69.4 54.9 41.1 53.9 55 67.8 60.2 54.7 58.7 34.3 52.7 NA 08/13/2006 67.6 40 51.9 50.7 43.8 51.4 56.8 64.1 61 50.5 58.9 52.9 57.3 56.6 08/14/2006 66.8 29.8 54.1 53.6 46.4 40.3 57.5 50.5 60.6 45 52 59.2 61.8 56.9 08/15/2006 67.5 48.4 55 46.6 44.4 55.5 58.3 66.2 62.6 50.3 60.6 58.9 57.6 54.2 08/16/2006 65.6 42.9 58.4 54 35.5 58.1 56.7 68.5 61.1 53.8 63.1 41.6 56.3 29.2 08/17/2006 66.6 41.9 55.8 53.6 NA 55.9 54.9 68.6 60.1 52.6 61.5 36.2 56.9 NA 08/18/2006 67.6 51.1 57.1 52.8 44.4 54.9 54.9 70.8 60.9 53.3 60.4 33.9 55.3 NA 08/19/2006 66.3 38.7 48.5 41.8 45 41.4 56.3 42.1 59.8 46.2 48.6 57.9 57.5 53.6 08/20/2006 66.2 NA 55.3 52.1 34.1 56.7 56.8 68.2 59.7 51.4 58.3 50.8 58.1 41.1 08/21 /2006 63 50.9 54.3 50.2 46.2 41.1 55.2 58.6 58.9 46 56.3 61.2 59 54.5 08/22/2006 67.7 46.9 57.3 51.4 47.1 54.5 59.4 66 62.1 54.1 60 54 59.6 56.4 08/23/2006 67 55.8 59 54.5 38 57 58.6 67.8 61.5 55.2 61 44.7 58.9 46.4 08/24/2006 69.1 35.2 60.2 57.2 35.5 52.4 54.3 65.7 59.9 58.2 57.9 47.6 64.1 33.4 08/25/2006 65.1 40 43.6 34.8 41.5 47 55.3 61.9 59.5 48.5 54.9 60.2 60.9 51 08/26/2006 66.3 43.1 50.2 48 43.5 47.2 57.7 57 60.5 50.2 52.3 57 56.5 50.3 08/27/2006 65.8 33.6 51.1 49.5 37.5 53.4 54 65.7 58.9 52.8 57.1 56.9 55.8 55.7 08/28/2006 65.2 48.6 55.3 45.6 46.5 41.4 55.1 53 59.1 48.2 48.9 61.9 60.3 62.2 08/29!2006 65.5 44.7 48.8 43.9 46.4 46 56.5 49.1 59.7 44.4 53 59.9 60.4 58.8 08/30/2006 65.9 43.6 59.1 57.2 48.4 55.7 59 67.4 62.5 51.7 60.8 58 61.1 48.5 08!31 /2006 68 49.1 57 54.9 37.5 53.4 56.6 68.9 62.7 57.4 62.9 45.1 59.9 29.8 Mo.DNL 67.2. 50.8 58.4 52.1 44.3 53.7 56:9 66.1 ' .61..1' 53.3 60.1. 56:9. 58.8 56.4 - 34 - ~!~ / Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Events DNL August 2006 Remote Monitoring Towers .Date #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 '#36 #37 #38 #39 08/01 /2006 60.6 46.1 43.3 48 43.5 49.7 49.4 46.8 46.3 48.6 08/02/2006 49.4 NA NA NA 32.2 52.1 55.7 NA NA 26.5 08/03/2006 55.4 41.8 40.2 47.1 38.5 54.2 55.7 31 25 NA 08/04/2006 60.3 47.5 24.6 50 42.7 47.5 45.3 50.7 51.3 49 08/05/2006 58.4 54.9 33.1 46.6 40.3 49.4 48.5 41.8 48.3 48.5 08/06/2006 47.6 30.2 26.3 NA NA 50.9 53.8 NA 43 NA 08/07/2006 51.4 43.4 53.9 52.6 44.2 53.8 56.4 50.6 NA. NA 08/08/2006 63.1 43.5 33.8 49.3 40.1 49.5 41.8 48.6 49.4 53.5 08/09/2006 63.8 42.9 52.1 52.1 43.4 48.6 41.5 52.2 53 50.8 08/10/2006 63.8 42.3 31.5 50.1 48.7 48.4 44.6 50.6 51.8 43.4 08/11/2006 63.5 44.8 29.7 49.8 44.6 50.4 44.9 49.7 50.8 48.6 08/12/2006 60.2 50.3 31.8 47.3 43.5 47.7 39.4 46.6 47.3 48.8 08/13/2006 63.4 43.3 41 48 46.2 50.6 50.2 48.7 50.9 42.7 08/14/2006 65.9 40.9 39.2 59.4 49.9 56.6 56.8 NA NA 37.6 08/15/2006 56.3 28.5 49.2 45.9 38.8 49 53.4 41.6 45.3 44.4 08/16/2006 64.7 39.9 27.5 55 45.1 54.1 49.4 51.6 52.3 51.9 08/17/2006 63.5 48.8 40.2 51.5 46.3 46.6 40.5 51.3 51.7 49.6 08/18/2006 63.3 41 36.2 50.5 45.9 49 41.9 48.6 50.2 51.9 08/19/2006 56.3 NA 38.6 44 41.5 49.9 54.1 47.4 26.7 33.8 08/20/2006 64 38.6 42.8 52.4 47.4 57.2 55.4 49.8. 49.5 48.3 08/21 /2006 61.8 43.7 51.7 46.8 38.9 56.8 55.4 44.8 43.4 NA 08/22/2006 63.1 45.6 44.6 45.8 43.1 52.5 53.4 41 45.1 42.4 08/23/2006 65.1 43.7 33.6 53.7 47.4 48.1 42.1 47.8 49.9 53.8 08/24/2006 68.4 50.5 42.2 53.4 52.6 48 45 43.6 44.6 49 08/25/2006 54.1 45.5 50.2 46.4 44.6 53.7 54.9 48.3 52 39.6 08/26/2006 58.8 36.6 43.9 41.4 44.8 51.7 55.3 NA NA NA 08/27/2006 60.7 38.1 NA 45.7 38.5 49.3 50.9 46.2 50.4 43.7 08/28/2006 50.4 37.4 43.5 44.2 34.5 53 55.9 37 39.6 NA 08/29/2006 54.5 38.4 43.2 35.4 45.1 50.5 54.4. 45.1 29.5 NA 08/30/2006 66.3 51.4 46.2 51.9 48.9 53.9 49.9 51.8 52.3 49.3 08/31/2006 65 45.6 36.8 51.9 44.7 47.8 45.4 50.1 51.8 52.1 Mo.DNL 62.4 45.9 45.1 50.7 45.3 52 52.4 47.9 48.8 47.8 Report Generated: 09/08/2006 12:50 ~~ - 35 - 8/ 1 /2006 - S/31 /2006 Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport ~~~ ~ti ~' ~ ~~`` ~+f~C ~ T'~f 1"^~. ~4T J '~»~'t ~f r ~ ~'? j ~ w ~r. -~ *This report is for informatl'onal ppurposes only and cannot be used for entorcerhent purposes. 3390 Carrier Jets Departed Runway 17 - 8/1/2006 - 8/31/2006 Runway 17 Departure Overflight Grid Analysis _ __ __ _ ___ ., _ • ~ , !r ,~, .~ ,. ~ ~ 1 3 1 _ ~1 i ~' 1 ,, t . ,; ~ , --> 2'' I 4 tl ~. ' 2 i ~ e,~o~ ~.~ ~, e~i a z . ~ ~~~ J " west ~ti r,, `~' ~. l ~ ~~ i n s Mend ~ a eights. ~~ i 11 ~ ~ ` 1 FA: I- y L xt+.S.x~'' V Sunfist dcv r E r Sld"5'Flaui 1~-'f"ur ~ouL --" ~~ -}~ 2 2. 8 22 ~~~ ~ ,1 0 , 11 7 .; •, , , h ion ~r Ly 4 _ ; a~ ~. 443 1 ~4 ,~ 42 .: r ~; w ~ r' ~ al 1 2 1 ~8 ` 1 ! ;~ 2 fl1 i 4~1 21.9 ''~0 ~~ . , y ~_ ~ _, i ~~ ~~ ~ 1 ~~ f _ 7 _ 9 ` - %•4 1 320, - 2 0 'l, -{ ~ .~ ._- ' ~ i 6 , i ~` 45 ,1 ~ 2 4 j 472 312 ' ~ 225^ ~®~ ~ ~ ~ ' 46Y ~8t4 ~ 1~ 24 ~ 9r~ ,, 47 42 38 ~ 257 1 , Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 8/1/2006-8/31/2006 - 1 - ~~ Runway 17 Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 8/1/2006-8/31/2006 3365 (99.3%) West Bound Carrier Jet ~~ 25 (0.7%) Carrier Jet Departure Departure Operations Flying the Runway 17. Jet Operations Turned West Before Passing Over the Departure Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NM Runway 17 2.5 NM Turn Point. This is 1.5% of Turn Point) and Runway 17 East Bound Carrier Jet 1686 westbound departures. Departure Operation ~m~T, -- 1~ ~ ,~ i - --'~; .~t ~~.,e~~ ..`. ~ ~ ~" /, " i t' •~Kesi 9.iil Paiil _ r _ ~, v ~ 1 ~Heighls{ I k hhakl (f~~fl,~~ } ~--~~~ .~ i i~ ~. 'd ,.~. 5u ,fish Lake«?: ~ ~ 7- ~a F~. ~ 1 jl -,-.~._ ~. ;~' ~ ~~ 'I ~ ~V ~~'I~FC~~I~ 1{ ~ ' ~~I~ ~~11~jj 'ilr~~ ~rl ~~41 '~~' - ~ i + ~~ ~ ...mss r•, ,~~`t'''x -~ Minneapolis-St: Paul hternational Airport Gate Plot Runway 17 Departures That Turned West Before 2.SNM Turn Polnt Sil/2006 00:00:00''- 8/31/2006 23:59c59 25 Tracks Crossed Gate: Left=2(8°~), Right=23(92%) ti 0 o a °0 m m .~ . I a O O ~ _ a O a pp ~ ~ u•r 8 4 ~ ~ ~~ ... ' W 9:t a. a O a M•~ 0 Q 4.ti ~.. a 200 i i ~ r ~ ..Z -i.e -~ 3 -~.6 -o.~ v.2 ~. _~ _ a~a c.6 0. _.~ i.7. i {Runway End) {Corridor End) Deviation From{enter of Gate {Mlles) ,tin cases where altitude inPdrnation ire"iviavallable. u4,t °berattoh ia. not re~e°ented In above graph. Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report -8/1/2006-&/31/2006 - 2 - Runway 17 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations - 8/1/2006 - 8/31/2006 - ~ __~ ~ Laws k ~ ~\~~ } ~l.KE H4FRL' _ ~_ } ~ I~ ~~1# ~ ~ ~ ~ -' ~rn~apolis ~ ~~\ is ~ , ~ 3 ~ ~'~. I~ f i~'.~~i_~d 7 4 ~ r ~ t ~ H . "~',w ce w.Et ~_~_ I i ~~ ~ ~ /, ~~~ `` ~~ - ~ :i_ ~~ `fit i _ ~ ~+ ~~ 1 ~ ~_ ~ n ~~~```sss` West Saud Paui v ,. _. f7 3~ iz ~. m ti: -a ~ ~ _~ endg€~e ~ 4iai nta i b'" ~ ~ Sfluth S auC F u r ~~ ~ °~ ' ~ - ~1--- `~ _.~. ~~ ~ :~ ~n"Oe~~6r6r~ V~e~hts ~ ~L ~~ z~ r-i 25 Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations off of Runway 17 in 8/1/2006 - 8/31/2006 (10:30 p.m.-6:OOa.m.) 1 (4%) West Bound Carrier Jet 1 (4%) West Bound Carrier Jet Departures Turned West Between 2.5 and 3.0 NM Departures Turned West After 3.0 NM from Start of from Start of Takeoff and Remained Over the Takeoff and Remained Over the Minnesota River Minnesota River Valley (trending with Runway 17 Valley (trending with Runway 17 River Departure River Departure Heading) Procedure) 2 (8%) Carrier Jet Departures Turned ®21 (84%) Remaining West Bound Carrier West Before Passing Over the Runway 17 2.5 NM Jet Departures Flew the Runway 17 Jet Departure Turn Point Procedure (Passing Over the 2.5 NM Turn Point), and with an enroute heading to the destination airport 0 (0%) Other Nighttime Carrier Jet Departure Operations Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report -8/1/2006-8/31/2006 - 3 - ~~ Remote Monitoring Tower (RMT) Site Locations r `, iop~fit Lans P~rk`~ ~ ~, ~ ~~ ~r F ai ~~ ~t~ Cdrs ~ ..r ~ to 1° ~~ ~~t ~ Eaowts '`mo'o L,i.1- 'f `^6 r ~~ ~ ~.-~ ~ Went °axA PauFi ~ Edend Q, ez - \~~wvEa ~~r ~ r ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~' '~ ~~`,~ ~3fc 1 t. -'°.,-'~" MSPn,`~:~~~ ~ e'er ~' ,, ~~ ~ -- I i ... r~,hf~eld ~ ~ - ~~f ~ ~._ - ~~ i J __._ -_ r. ,~ ~. -_ :,,ter -L_r e-~=~:...,,,,~ /~ ~'y ..R~. ----, .~ -~, _ .I .y ~~ `~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~, ;~ ,~ ~~ ~~ r ~ r ~, _. ..~_ ~_ ~ ~~ _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~` t, 4~ lM'7 ~ r~ e Heights ~~' ' ,; ~ _ l; _ _ _ ~ - _ r'' ~_r, , ~~...~ Savage ~~~~^ i~ Ewst~ng RMT"s Runway ~ ~-3~ RMT' Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report -8/1/2006-8/31/2006 - 4 - ~7 Analysis of Aircraft Noise Levels - DNL dBA 8/1/2006-8/31/2006 Date #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 1 60.6 46.1 43.3 48 43.5 49.7 49.4 46.8 46.3 48.6 2 49.4 NA NA NA 32.2 52.1 55.7 NA NA 26.5 3 55.4 41.8 40.2 47.1 38.5 54.2 55.7 31 25 NA 4 60.3 47.5 24.6 50 42.7 47.5 45.3 50.7 51.3 49 5 58.4 54.9 33.1 46.6 40.3 49.4 48.5 41.8 48.3 48.5 6 47.6 30.2 26.3 NA NA 50.9 53.8 NA 43 NA 7 51.4 43.4 53.9 52.6 44.2 53.8 56.4 50.6 NA NA 8 63.1 43.5 33.8 49.3 40.1 49.5 41.8 48.6 49.4 53.5 9 63.8 42.9 52.1 52.1 43.4 48.6 41.5 52.2 53 50.8 10 63.8 42.3 31.5 50.1 48.7 48.4 44.6 50.6 51.8 43.4 11 63.5 44.8 29.7 49.8 44.6 50.4 44.9 49.7 50.8 48.6 12 60.2 50.3 31.8 47.3 43.5 47.7 39.4 46.6 47.3 48.8 13 63.4 43.3 41 48 46.2 50.6 50.2 48.7 50.9 42.7- 14 65.9 40.9 39.2 59.4 49.9 56.6 56.8 NA NA 37.6 15 56.3 28.5 49.2 45.9 38.8 49 53.4 41.6 45.3 44.4 16 64.7 39.9 27.5 55 45.1 54.1 49.4 51.6 52.3 51.9 17 63.5 48.8 40.2 51.5 46.3 46.6 40.5 51.3 51.7 49.6 18 63.3 41 36.2 50.5 45.9 49 41.9 48.6 50.2 51.9 19 56.3 NA 38.6 44 41.5 49.9 54.1 47.4 26.7 33.8 20 64 38.6 42.8 52.4 47.4 57.2 55.4 49.8 49.5 48.3 21 61.8 43.7 51.7 46.8 38.9 56.8 55.4 44.8 43.4 NA 22 63.1 45.6 44.6 45.8 43.1 52.5 53.4 41 45.1 42.4 23 65.1 43.7 33.6 53.7 47.4 48.1 42.1 47.8 49.9 53.8 24 68.4 50.5 42.2 53.4 52.6 48 45 43.6 44.6 49 25 54.1 45.5 50.2 46.4 44.6 53.7 54.9 48.3 52 39.6 26 58.8 36.6 43.9 41.4 44.8 51.7 55.3 NA NA NA 27 60.7 38.1 NA 45.7 38.5 49.3 50.9 46.2 50.4 43.7 28 50.4 37.4 43.5 44.2 34.5 53 55.9 37 39.6 NA 29 54.5 38.4 43.2 35.4 45.1 50.5 54.4 45.1 29.5 NA 30 66.3 51.4 46.2 51.9 48.9 53.9 49.9 51.8 52.3 49.3 31 65 45.6 36.8 51.9 44.7 47.8 45.4 50.1 51.8 52.1 Av. DNL 62.4 45.9 45.1 .50.7 45.3 52 52.4 47.9 48.8 47.8 Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report -8/1/2006-8/31/2006 - 5 - ~g Community Vs. Aircraft Noise Levels DNL dBA 8/1/2006-8/31/2006 RMT Community DNL Community DNL Community DNL 'Aircraft DNL 08/01 /03-08/31 /03 08/01 /04-08/31 /04 08/01 /05-08/31 /05 8/1 /2006-8/31 /2006 30 59.5 57.9 61.6 62.4 31 64.7 59.1 63.4 45.9 32 58.4 57 60.1 45.1 33 57.1 55.9 60.2 50.7 34 58 57.3 59 45.3 35 61 60.7 61.4 52 36 61.2 61.2 62.8 52.4 37 63.2 63.4 64.2 47.9 38 60 59.1 61.8 48.8 39 60.7 60.3 61 47.8 Top 15 Runway 17 Departure Destination Report Airport City Heading (deg.) #Ops Percent of Total Ops DEN DENVER 237° 199 5.9% DFW DALLAS/ FORT WORTH 193° 190 5.6% MDW CHICAGO (MIDWAY) 124° 143 4.2% ORD CHICAGO (O'HARE) 124° 135 4% PHX PHOENIX 231° 120 3.5% IAH HOUSTON 185° 110 3.2% LAS LAS VEGAS 243° 103 3% STL ST LOUIS 160° 93 2.7% ATL ATLANTA 149° 92 2.7% CVG CINCINNATI 127° 79 2.3% MCO ORLANDO 151 ° 69 2% OMA OMAHA 205° 58 1.7% LNK LINCOLN 208° 57 1.7% FSD SIOUX FALLS 245° 54 1.6% SAN SAN DIEGO 235° 54 1.6% Metropolitan Airports Commission Runway 17 Departure Analysis Report - 8/1/2006-8/31/2006 - 6 - S~ Taxes Payable 2006 Residential Market Value Calculator Taxes Payable Estimated Market Value: To calculate insert market value in cell D23 Credit Calculation: .4% of market value to maximum of $304 credit Phased out over $76,000 in market value: Reduced by $9.00 for every $10,000 of value over $76,000-Zeros out at $413,777 Example Table Taxable Market Value Credit $ 50,000 200.00 $ 60,000 240.00 $ 70,000 280.00 $ 76,000 304.00 $ 100,000 282.40 $ 125,000 259.90 $ 150,000 237.40 $ 200,000 192.40 $ 300,000 102.40 $ 400,000 12.40 $ 413,777 0.00 $ 278,021 122.18 LQD i~ O i CA 7 Q r N N 000 00 O O f~ ~ I~ 00 00 N N N N r R C .~ . ~ a ~° c m a d H C r r R 7 V t0 V lx0 0 H O ~ O ~ o ~ N ~ 0) ~ 4 p ~ ~ ~ U ~ U a U ~, ~ ~ ~~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ U ns ~> U X ~ ~ ~ ( p ~ ~ io X w~ N d ~ Z ~ C d O V W C 7 O N M Cn O 69 d' 00 M T ti <O ti M 00 co 00 M M (O ti 0 X 0 ~~ ~~ 0 0• f 0• N I~ OJ to ~ M d9 d9 d9 a m ~_ ~ j o j o o ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 N '- M O O 00 O O O O (O 00 d r O r f~ '~t ~ 00 ~ O I~ f~ N O ++MO M~ Of~tn Oc0~0~ RCflO ~t•- I~NOCA r'~O~N ENO NO O'c1'N ~ 000~r- k 0 0 0 0 O ~ O ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 {C O O 00 0 ~ O O O O a d Q Q 0) U . N N ~~ ~ ,~ t0 ~VU ~ U c ~ H i u > > ~ ~ H ~ ~ ~ C J ~ • N ~ ~ ~ 05 O 0) L ~ ~O .V ~ ~ ~ ~ y N U ~ U N N> > o oF-I-~ ~F=~HC~ . X Y U ~ Y D. J cv m x Q c ~ L O0 L ~_ V C C C / O ~ U U ' m m rn ~ ~ ~ ~ W W 0 0 o o *k ~' ~' ~ OD UU ~ O N O M CO CO O O 00 00 M T M M ~ O M f~ ti ~ N ~ ~ N ~ 00 CO <D 1~ O ~ to ~ O ~ I ~ O N ~t ( ~ 69 E9 I fA M CO O N b9 00 N N_ E+9 00 CA N ea M ~t (D M M O M O C0M1~0 ~t 00 et f~ SON O N 00 ~ OO~N O O O O ~-O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N ~ c c ° ~ U >, o _ ~ . U. c ~ c ~ ~ N o > > ' O U•~ ~ •~ o o ~ o- U U ~ ~ o .. X ~ ~ ~ ~ J H ~o • U 0) n October 5, 2006 Orfield Laboratories Inc oeS~9n q~p~st/Researc s ~ L h hest brdfip ~'9 / `si o~ i C; 9h~~ 9 i 9,. o~f~c ~G ~p d~ ~~ p~ n~ PREPARED FOR Mr. Jason Ziemer City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Phone (651) 675-5014 Fax (651) 675-5012 e-mail jziemer@cityofeagan.com PREPARED BY Elliott B. Dick Orfield Laboratories, Inc. 2709 East 25~' Street Minneapolis MN 55406 Phone (612) 721-2455 Fax (612) 721-2457 e-mail elliott@orfieldlabs.com MEMORANDUM 03 REGARDING Noise Impact Analysis of New Airport Runway 17/35 ~~ Project New Runway Noise Analysis Client City of Eagan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport new Runway 17/35 impacts the noise levels in Eagan. The City of Eagan contracted week-long noise measurements before the new runway was completed, and again after the new runway began use. These measurements show some trends through qualitative analysis which we may generalize to certain areas of Eagan. Statistical analysis somewhat supports these generalizations. . In the western part of Eagan, day-to-day levels were relatively consistent before the new runway. Now the new runway is operational, and the western part of Eagan experience higher noise levels on days where departures are routed south off runway 17/12. At the same time, northeastern Eagan is experiencing slightly lower noise levels now that the new runway is in use. This is likely due to lower use of those runways facing that area of Eagan. In general, the northeastern area of Eagan also experiences the same higher noise levels on days with southerly routed departures. TABLE OF CONTENTS Background ................................ Overall Comparison .................... Runway Use Statistics ................ Qualitative Analysis .................... Statistical Analysis ...................... Discussion of Individual Sites..... Conclusion .................................. Appendix A: Runway Use Statistics Appendix B: Data Collection Locations ......... Appendix C: Hourly Measured Sound Levels .......... 3 ..........4 .......... 7 .......... 7 .......... 9 18 21 ~;.~::;, -~` F Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan Orfield Laboratories Inc BACKGROUND The City of Eagan wishes to evaluate the noise impact of the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport (MSP) new Runway 17/35. In June 2005, the City contracted Wyle Laboratories to conduct the initial measurement set before the runway opened. The new runway began use October 27, 2005. Orfield Laboratories conducted a second measurement set in June 2006. The second measurement was executed to be similar to the first in most respects. In order to get a as true a comparison as possible, the same equipment and settings were used as in Wyle Lab's initial measurement. OVERALL COMPARISON The day-night average sound level was measured at ten locations. The averaging period was week in June of 2005, before runway 17/35 was complete, and June of 2006, after runway 17/35 was operational. Figure 1 shows the before/after comparison for each site. Locations are identified in detail in Appendix B. The day-night average, expressed LpN or DNL, is the equivalent sound level over a 24-hour day with 10 dB added to nighttime levels (from 22:00 to 07:00). This is the preferred metric of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), as well as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). ~o 65 o~. 60 z 0 N 55 m a 50 J d m 45 L as .~ ~, 40 A 0 35 30 Figure 1: LpN Comparison Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Ske 5 Site 6 Site 7 Site 8 Site 9 Site 10 Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan At some locations, the overall levels increased, and at other locations they decreased. One should not read too much into this direct comparison. There are many variables, other than the new runway, which may cause the change in result. Some of these factors are explored below. RUNWAY USE STATISTICS The number of over-flights will greatly impact the noise level. The Minneapolis Airports Commission keeps records of their runway use statistics, and the daily statistics are easily accessible. These data are used in this analysis, here qualitatively, and later statistically. The runway use provides an estimate of traffic over the measurement sites. Flights will differ in elevation and direction depending on weather conditions and their origin or destination. The number of overflights at a location will correlate well with runway use, though runway use does not directly predict overflight. 2000 1500 A c m 1000 R. n a a, ~ 500 d R 7 Q ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- -- ----- ------ ------ ------ ------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ - `----- - - ----- --- 84/22 --- - - - ^ 17/35 __ _____ . 12R/30L ~ ----- --- --- 12L/30R - :~ w -'u ~ -- r ~ ~- t ~~ t ' ~ ,, -- ~ --- E ~i5 _ ~~ _ _ Figure 2: Runway Use over Measurement Periods The overall runway use is shown in Figure 2. The first thing to notice is runway 17/35 is handling approximately 13% of the traffic during the 2006 measurement periods. [.. Orfield Laboratories Inc Week Week Week beginning beginning beginning 6/13/05 6/13/06 6/20/06 Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan The next observation is there were approximately 10% more flights over the first week -before runway 17/35 was operational. This may have an effect on the noise levels -namely understating the noise levels over the 2006 measurement periods. Normalizing the measurement result to the runway traffic is one way to estimate the rough impact of this change. It would depress the 2006 overall LoN measurement by 0.5 dB, a relatively insignificant change for aweek-long duration. 1000 900 ~ 800 0 w 700 -0 600 c A 500 a 400 m ~, 300 .~ m 200 a~ `m 100 a ~ -~ N O O N M ~ ~ J ~ N N Week beginning 6!13/05 Q' --~ ~ N O O M N M ~ ~ ~ J fY N N Week beginning 6113!06 2' J ~ N O O [` ` M ~ ^ ~ J D! N N Week beginning 6120/O6 Figure 3: Direction of runway use ^SW ^ SE ^S NW NE Figure 3 shows the runway use for each runway, and the direction of the runway used. That is, departures which take off towards the south are grouped with arrivals approaching from the south. We will analyze these southern .flights to estimate the over-flight traffic over Eagan. Daily flights arriving from or departing to the south are shown in Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6. Runway 12U30R and 12R/30L run parallel to each other, from the northeast to the southwest. These runways face the north end of Eagan. Runway 17/35, the new runway runs south over the western end of Eagan. The south end of runway 4/22 faces into Bloomington, and only some of the departures will turn to fly over Eagan. This runway is used very little, so the impact of these statistics will be insignificant. Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~° ~ ' ~;., Client City of Eagan ~~ Orfield Laboratories Inc 500 e ~ 400 > 300 ~ 200 e A m 100 0 A 0 a m 0 Figure 4: Daily runway use, week beginning 6/13/2005 (flights arriving from or departing to southern end of runway) ~, 500 e o aoo > 300 ~ 200 c d 100 ~ 0 A a d D Figure 5: Daily runway use, week beginning 6/13/2006 (flights arriving from or departing to southern end of runway) ,, soo oa 3 v 2 e m 1 r n m 00 00 ~ ,.. ? - d' J l!'1 N d' J l1Y N Q' J lf/ N Q' -~ u9 N d' J ~fi N Q' J 47 N Q' J In N ~ J ll7 N O O f`! N O O` N O O /~ N O O C7 N O O t` N O O (\ N O O l` N O O f` N t` m t` ~ ~ ~ ~ R M ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C M ~ ~ ^R ~+ 1~ R M ~ n C ~ ~ I~ ~ J Q' ~ J 0_' ~ J Q' ~ J R~ ~ J Q' ~ J~ ~ J~ ~ J 2' ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N si2oizoos snv2oos sizzi2oos si23i2oos si2ai2oos si2snoos snsi2oos siz~izoos Arrivals ^Departures Figure 6: Daily runway use, week beginning 6/20/2006 (flights arriving from or departing to southern end of runway) >1 Arrivals ^Departures Arrivals ^Departures Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan It is also worthwhile noting the relative number of arrivals versus departures ov Eagan. Wind conditions determine the direction to land and take-off. Runway use during the first measurement period in 2006 is consistent with the period in 2005. Runway use over the second measurement period in 2006 has a much higher number of arrivals than departures. These differences are shown in Figure 7. Week beginning 6/13105 ^Arrivals ^Departures Week beginning 6/13!06 ^Arrivals ^Departures Week beginning 6/20!06 '`~5, 't~ Y / ~Va . ,~- ,'-t s' i ^Arrivals ^Departures Figure 7: All runways comparison of arrivals vs. departures (flights arriving from or departing to southern end of runway) Arrivals will have a different noise characteristic than departures. Arrivals will approach in-line with the runway, at a lower altitude, and with a lower engine speed. Departures will use a greater engine speed, and after clearing the end of the runway climb and turn as quickly as possible. The noise impact of each will depend on the location of the site, and its relation to the runway. QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS Qualitative analyses are performed in this study by examining the results and observe trends and relationships. From this examination we infer that one event may cause another event. At its essence, the qualitative analysis is a means to construct hypotheses. Graphs of data are the most useful tool to visually discover these potential trends and relationships. Appendix C contains the hourly and daily results shown in graphs. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS The daily measurements and daily runway use statistics were entered into statistical analysis software. Table 1shows the Pearson correlation between individual measurement sites and runway use. The Pearson correlation coefficient measures linear correlation or predictability between two variables. The value of the coefficient varies between -1 and +1. A value of +1 indicates that one variable can be predicted perfectly by the other. A value of -1 means the same thing except that the variables are inversely related. A Pearson correlation of 0 indicates that neither of the two variables can be predicted from the other by using a linear equation. ~:. Orfield Laboratories Inc .,* it ~~ Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor G~= Client City of Eagan There were few statistically significant correlations in this matrix. This is mainly due to the small number of cases (days) and the great variability in aircraft noise from day-to-day. In general, the correlation coefficients somewhat support the qualitative analysis at most sites. DISCUSSION OF INDIVIDUAL SITES ANALYSIS AT SITE 1 The Site 1 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period increased overall from the 2005 measurement. The overall increase is expected, due to flights from runway 17/35 in 2006, which were not present in the 2005 measurement. A qualitative analysis of the daily and hourly noise levels show the behavior of noise at Site 1 is consistent with the noise at other nearby sites, and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 4'/< miles south-by-southeast of runway 17/35. During the 2006 measurement period, days where runway 17/35 was mainly used for departures also showed increased noise levels in Leq, LpN, L,o, and Lo,. The statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. Noise levels at Site 1 correlates very poorly with all runway use, except for runway 17/35. It shows some correlation between departures off the south end of runway 17/35, though the correlation is not statistically significant. ANALYSIS AT SITE 2 The Site 2 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period decreased overall from the 2005 measurement. This is due to a decrease in the nighttime hourly average levels (LeQ). There is no clear explanation for the nighttime measurements. The daytime average levels did increase from the 2005 measurement to the 2006 measurement. A qualitative analysis shows that, over the 2006 measurement, the Leq LpN, Lso, L90, and L99 measurements were higher on days with heavier departures. However, L,o and Lo, are much higher than Lso at other sites on these days. The difference between L,o and Lso is smaller at this site on the departure-heavy days. This may be due to departures, this far from the airport, are high enough in elevation that they can be heard over a longer duration. The engine noise builds slowly and dies slowly, rather than getting a shorter blast of engine noise. This position is approximately 5'/z miles south-by-southeast of runway 17/35. On days with heavier arrivals, L,o and Lo, are much higher than at this site. This may be due to arrivals, at their lower elevation, exposing this site to shorter durations of their engine noise. The engine usually runs lower at arrivals, so the overall noise dropped on these days. Most sites are within a mile of a either Highway 77 or Interstate 35E (excepting Site 5, Site 6, and Site 9). This site is approximately ahalf-mile from both highways, one on either side. This may also contribute to the noise, as it does at other sites. Rush hour traffic is reflected in the statistical measurements as well. ;> OrFeld Laboratories Inc ~~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan Statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. There is relatively poor correlation of the daily noise levels and the runway use, except for runway 17/35. Though the correlation is poor, it is consistent in that departures are slightly correlated with higher noise levels and arrivals are slightly correlated with lower noise levels. This is consistent between sites 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10. The departures off 17/35 are somewhat correlated with higher noise levels at Site 2. Interestingly, lower noise levels are correlated with arrivals onto 17/35 with statistical significance. ANALYSIS AT SITE 3 The Site 3 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period did not differ much overall from the 2005 measurement. The daily and hourly noise levels show the behavior of noise at Site 3 is somewhat consistent with the noise at other nearby sites. This position is approximately 5 miles south-by- southeast of runway 17/35. A qualitative analysis shows that, during the 2005 measurement period, the daily average noise levels (LpN) varied little, except nighttime levels were responsible for higher LpN some days. The statistical metrics (L~) while varying hour-to-hour, exhibited similar behaviors day-to-day. During the 2006 measurements, the daily Leq, LpN, L,o, and Lo, results seemed to increase on days where runway 17/35 was mainly used for departures. The meter did not measure a full Day with heavy departures over Eagan. This was due to an overnight meter malfunction. Perhaps if the departure-heavy days been measured in full, the overall results would have been higher at this location. Statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. There is relatively poor correlation of the daily noise levels and the runway use, except for runway 17/35. Though the correlation is poor, it is consistent in that departures are slightly correlated with higher noise levels and arrivals are slightly correlated with lower noise levels. This is consistent between sites 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10. There is a statistically significant correlation between noise levels and the number of flight departures on runway 17/35. At Site 3, like site 2, arrivals off the 17/35 runway are correlated with higher noise levels, but without statistical significance. ANALYSIS AT SITE 4 The Site 4 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period increased overall from the 2005 measurement. The behavior .of noise at this site, however, is inconsistent with the noise at other nearby sites, nor consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 6'h miles south- by-southeast of runway 17/35. This monitor location overlooked a busy city street. Most of the noise was road traffic, as evidenced by the traffic cycles, especially in the Lso measurement. It was more pronounced in the 2006 measurement than the 2005 measurement. Noise levels were consistent day-to-day (a little lower over the weekends), whereas most other sites exhibited different noise characteristics depending on the number of arrivals versus departures over Eagan. µ7 i`f,. Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan Statistical analysis shows correlations which do not represent the probable overflight noise. This may be due to the fact that the flight arrivals over Eagan heavily outnumbered departures during the 2006 measurement, which was also, in general, higher in noise level. The data from this site was heavily influenced by the traffic noise. ANALYSIS AT SITE 5 The Site 5 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period increases overall from the 2005 measurement. Despite this, the behavior of noise at Site 5 is inconsistent with expatiations and the noise at other nearby sites. Note that the normal diurnal cycle disappears after June 21, 2006. Usually every metric drops through the small hours of the morning. This daily cycle can be observed on the hourly percentile level graphs. At Site 5, the Lo, and L,o measurements remain relatively constant. This is likely due to a babbling brook in the neighbor's back yard that ran down the hill. The brook was still under construction Tuesday and Wednesday. The construction may account for much of the high daytime levels. The brook was running constantly since Wednesday, and the sound levels never dropped much below 45 dB at the monitoring station. This position is approximately 6'/2 miles southeast of runway 17/35. The Lo, measurement may reflect a higher number of departures than arrivals over Eagan, but it is not significant. Statistical analysis showed correlations which were similar to Site 4, but not to other sites. There is probably a similar reason for this: the noise levels were generally higher during the 2006 measurement, and the number of arrivals greatly outnumbered the number of departures during the same period. ANALYSIS AT SITE 6 The Site 6 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period increa overall from the 2005 measurement. The overall increase is expected, due to flights from runway 17/35 in 2006, which were not present in the 2005 measurement. This position is approximately 6'h miles southeast of runway 17/35. Qualitative analysis shows that, despite being further away, the behavior of noise at Site 1 is consistent with closer sites and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. During the 2006 measurement period, days where runway 17/35 was mainly used for departures also showed increased daily and hourly noise levels in Lam,, LpN, L,o, and Lo,. The statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. Noise levels at Site 1 correlates very poorly with all runway use, except for runway 17/35. It shows statistically significant correlation between noise levels and departures c the south end of runway 17/35. ~- ~`~: Orfield Laboratories Inc Client City of Eagan ANALYSIS AT SITE 7 The Site 7 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period increased overall from the 2005 measurement. The overall increase is expected, due to flights from runway 17/35 in 2006, which were not present in the 2005 measurement. Qualitative analysis of the daily and hourly noise levels show the behavior of noise at Site 7 is consistent with the noise at other nearby sites, and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 5 miles southeast of runway 17/35. During the 2006 measurement period, days where runway 17/35 was mainly used for departures also showed increased noise levels in Leq, LpN, L,o, and Lo,. Site 7 was located on top of a hill, without any nearby trees or structures. Without anything to break up the sound of overFlights, this site had higher results than the other sites. Overflight noise would be recorded from further away, and the ground effect will also moderately increase the noise. Traffic noise probably also influenced both the 2005 and 2006 measurements at Site 7. Statistical analysis is contrary to the qualitative analysis. Reasons for this are not immediately apparent. For answers, this may require additional research, testing, or analysis. ANALYSIS AT SITE 8 The Site 8 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period decreased overall from the 2005 measurement. In part, this is due to a decrease in the nighttime hourly average levels (Leq). Also, for days with a light number of departing flights, the daytime level was lower in 2006 than it was in the 2005 measurement period. There is no clear explanation for the nighttime measurements, nor the decrease in levels on particular days. During the 2006 measurement period, behavior of noise at Site 8 is consistent with the noise at other nearby sites, and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 4 miles southeast of runway 17/35. Days where runway 17/35 was mainly used for departures the daily and hourly noise levels also showed increased noise levels in Leq, LpN, L,o, and Lo,. Statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. There is relatively poor correlation of the daily noise levels and the runway use, except for runway ~ 17/35. Though the correlation is poor, it is consistent in that departures are slightly correlated with higher noise levels and arrivals are slightly correlated with lower noise levels. This is also consistent between sites 2, 3, 8, 9, and 10. The departures off 17/35 are somewhat correlated with higher noise levels at Site 8. Interestingly, lower hoise levels are correlated with arrivals onto 17/35 with statistical significance. ``.~ Orfield Laboratories Inc ~~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~~ Client City of Eagan ~.. ANALYSIS AT SITE 9 The Site 9 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period decreased overall from the 2005 measurement. The overall decrease is expected, due to fewer flights over Eagan from runways 12U30R and 12R/30L in the 2006 measurement, which were diverted to runway 17/35. The daily and hourly noise levels show the behavior of noise this site is consistent with the noise at the nearby Site 10, and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 5 miles southeast of runway 12R/30L. Sites 9 and 10 are closer to the 12V30R and 12R/30L runways than to the 17/35 runway. During both the 2005 measurement period and the 2006 measurement period, days where runways were mainly used for departures over Eagan also showed increased noise levels in Leq, LpN, L,o, and Lo,. In general, all metrics Site 9 were lower in 2006 than they were in the 2005 measurement. Statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. There is relatively poor correlation of the daily noise levels and the runway use. Though the correlation is poor, it is consistent in that departures are slightly correlated with higher noise levels and arrivals are slightly correlated with lower noise levels. There is little correlation with runway 17/35 at this site. That is reasonable, since Site 9 and 10 are located under the flight path of the 12!30 runways. ANALYSIS AT SITE 10 The Site 10 day-night average level over the 2006 measurement period decreased overall from the 2005 measurement. The overall decrease is expected, due to fewer flights over Eagan from runways 12U30R and 12R/30L in the 2006 measurement, which were diverted to runway 17/35. The daily and hourly noise levels show the behavior of noise this site is consistent with the noise at the nearby Site 9, and consistent with its relation to the airport runways. This position is approximately 2'/4 miles southeast of runway 12R/30L. Sites 9 and 10 are closer to the 12U30R and 12R/30L runways than to the 17/35 runway. During both the 2005 measurement period and the 2006 measurement period, days where runways were mainly used for departures over Eagan also showed increased noise levels in Leq, LpH, L,o, and Lo,. In general, most metrics at Site 10 were similar in 2006 than they were in the 2005 measurement. Statistical analysis generally supports the qualitative analysis. There is relatively poor correlation of the daily noise levels and the runway use. Though the correlation is poor, it is consistent in that departures are slightly correlated with higher noise levels and arrivals are slightly correlated with lower noise levels. There is little correlation with runway 17/35 at this site. That is reasonable, since Site 9 and 10 are located under the flight path of the 12/30 runways. ~. Orfield Laboratories Inc 74- Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan CONCLUSION In general, the new runway 17/35 does seem to have an impact on noise levels in the City of Eagan. Since the overall number of flights during the measurement periods were less after the new runway became operational, there is not a direct comparison between the "before" and "after" condition on a city-wide basis. Certainly, the impact is dependant on location, and the direction of arriving and departing flights. The City of Eagan should continue to monitor aircraft noise levels. Orfield Laboratories Inc ~~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan APPENDIX A: RUNWAY USE STATISTICS The runway use statistics used in this analysis were obtained from the Minneapolis Airports Commission. Arrivals and departures which are bold in the tables below either depart towards the south end of the runway or arrive from the south end of the runway. ,,Table A2: Runway Use Statistics, Week Beginning 6/13/2005 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Runway 0 M 0 v 0 n 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 rn 0 o 0 r- co ifl cfl cfl ~ m co ca co Departure 33 7 0 ~ 24 34 36 37 38 12L s 4 9 1 0 6 2 Arrivals 33 8 0 0 25 35 36 35 36 8 7 6 1 6 8 Departures 0 ~ 4 9 ~ b 0 0 4 30R Arrivals 3 8 3 0 0 19 4 7 0 3 Departure 35 7 1 2 26 33 34 31 39 12R s 6 1 1 1 5 2 Arrivals 35 18 1 0 25 33 34 34 36 9 5 3 4 5 6 Departures 0 8 6 11 5 1 0 0 7 30L Arrivals 3 12 1 1 18 7 9 0 3 Departures 0 2 1 1 5 4 0 0 0 4 Arrivals 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Departure 5 10 11 10 21 15 9 6 8 22 s Arrivals 6 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 Departures 69 77 80 80 76 69 71 69 79 Total 5 1 3 3 1 2 0 7 3 Arrivals 70 71 81 81 75 70 70 70 77 9 8 8 0 9 4 7 2 1 Departure 69 24 12 12 53 68 71 69 78 South s 5 1 7 0 7 2 Arrivals 6 62 61 8 1 2~ 15 1 1 37 0 O~eld Laboratories Inc ~~ ,~ Ofield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~~ ,,. Client City of E agan Table A4: Run way Use Statistics, Week Beginning 6/20/2006 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Runwa N E y O N N N N M N ? N ~ N C O N ti N (O (O CD ~ Cfl (O CD t0 Depas ure 1 3 2 2 9 46 0 2 0 12L 1 Arrivals 25 2 0 2~ 71 0 0 0 Departures 2 35 36 13 21 32 35 34 9 7 3 6 2 0 0 30R 28 28 10 19 25 30 24 Arrivals 19 5 6 5 4 0 4 6 Dep srture O 0 0 8 29 1 0 6 12R Arrivals 3~ 0 0 6 62 0 1 0 Departures 1 33 33 11 21 28 31 34 8 7 6 0 9 5 7 30L 23 24 16 19 24 25 Arrivals 1 3 9 86 3 1 9 7 17 Departure 24 0 0 12 78 0 0 0 s 3 9 35 Arrivals 0 19 16 66 10 16 13 19 2 4 1 3 2 8 Departures 0 3 0 0 1 1 1 1 4 Arrivals 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Departure 1 4 2 1 2 0 0 0 22 s Arrivals 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Departures 71 70 70 68 58 61 66 69 Total 8 6 8 6 2 3 8 4 Arrivals 71 71 69 70 59 60 68 70 9 4 9 0 1 4 6 1 Dep srture 51 6 4 ~3 5 1 2 6 South Arrivals 20 71 69 25 45 60 68 70 1 9 7 8 4 5 1 Orfeld Laboratories Inc !~ Project Aircraft Noise Analysis ~ ~~~ Client City of Eagan APPENDIX B: DATA COLLECTION LOCATIONS Measurements were captured at each of ten sites used in the initial study. The measurements occurred over two weeks with five noise analyzers, a week at each site. The City made all arrangements with property owners. Locations are described below and are shown in Figure 8. Location Number 1: Private residence at street address 2037 Flint Lane; Northeast corner of backyard; Latitude 44° 48' 39.3120" N, Longitude 93° 12' 34.7004" W; Monitor period from June 13 to 20, 2006. Location Number 2: Rahn Elementary School at street address 4424 Sandstone Drive; South of athletic fields, On hill in clearing of deciduous tree grove; Latitude 44° 47' 39.9120" N, Longitude 93° 12' 33.9624" W; Monitor period from June 13 to 20, 2006. Location Number 3: Private residence at street address 4265 Beaver Dam Road; Between two coniferous trees in western corner of backyard; Latitude 44° 48' 08.5824" N, Longitude 93° 12' 08.6364" W; Monitor period from June 13 to 20, 2006. Location Number 4: Private residence at street address 4850 North Safari Court; Western perimeter of yard, within sight of moderate traffic road; Latitude 44° 46' 48.0756" N, Longitude 93° 12' 10.3464" W; Monitor period from June 20 to 27, 2006. Location Number 5: Private residence at street address 4730 Westminster Circle; Southern corner of backyard, under trivial deciduous canopy; Latitude 44° 47' 03.0480" N, Longitude 93° 10' 33.4488" W; Monitor period from June 20 to 27, 2006. Location Number 6: Private residence at street address 1290 Wilderness Curve; Southern perimeter of backyard, under trivial deciduous canopy; Latitude 44° 47' 37.0428" N, Longitude 93° 09' 38.8944" W; Monitor period from June 20 to 27, 2006. Location Number 7: Deerwood Elementary School at street address 1480 Deerwood Drive; On hill between running track and tennis courts; Latitude 44° 48' 34.6068" N, Longitude 93° 10' 34.9608" W; Monitor period from June 13 to 20, 2006. ~5 43 Orfield Laboratories Inc -~a Project Aircraft Noise Analysis ° Client City of Eagan Location Number 8: Private residence at street address 3730 Blackhawk Road; Near bottom of hill in backyard, under moderate deciduous canopy; Latitude 44° 49' 20.1360" N, Longitude 93° 11' 30.6636" W; Monitor period from June 20 to 27, 2006. Location Number 9: Private residence at street address 860 Basswood Lane; Southern corner of backyard; Latitude 44° 49' 22.8828" N, Longitude 93° 07' 56.1396" W; Monitor period from June 20 to 27, 2006. Location Number 10: Private residence at street address 1490 McCarthy Road; Southeast corner of backyard, at top of hill under trivial deciduous canopy; Latitude 44° 50' 47.4108" N, Longitude 93° 10' 31.5444" W; Monitor period from June 13 to 20, 2006. Orfeld Laboratories Inc OO Ofield Laboratories Inc ~, Ofield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan N { C N ~ ~ N ~ C ~ N ~ ~ O 5 N ~L C N 7 "'~ r O ~ N ~ N 7 [O ~"' U O C J ~ 3 ~ Z ` ~ ~p O O ~ C N Q 3 7 m ~ ~ ~ N r ~ ~ ' ~-- J ~ A ,, v/ r W ~ ~ ~ m ~ L C L C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J N N ~ ~ ~ ~ r C 3 Z ~ ~ Q ~ ~ _ c ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ` ~ .. L i O ~ O Z Q a ~ q ~~ ^ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ m ~~ .Q m W ~ ~ ~ ? ~ c 3 N 7 ~ ~ ~ g >, c Q ~ ~ ^ v ~ N ~ r ~'S?' r ~ N = -'~ ~ r l c M - __ _ ________ -._,. 7 N O O O O O O O O r O ~ V O O O~ ~ M N ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ b'9P) lanai OrField Laboratories Inc ~3 r d M ~ r ~ ~ ~C_ G ` d ~ ~_ ~ •O 0 Z L L ~ L Q a~ ~~ ,~ ~, ~m W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ~ed~ OZ ~a~ t/8P) moy a43)o %u Papaaax3lana~ :u~ N ~ N ~ ~ N C N 3 ~ ~ O N C N 7 "'7 r-. N ~ C Q 3 N ~ ~ m C N ~ ~ C N 3 . ~ ~ C N ~~ °o g C N 7 ~ ~ 7 O ~ ~ t N C N N 7 -0 ~ ~ C N C N ~~ ~~ ;Q ~~ ~~ C N 3 ~ ~ ~ N 7 .~ ~" C N ~ ~ C ~ N ~ ~ M ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ +I c a ~ N O ~ ~ Otfield Laboratories lnc Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~~~ Client City of Eagan i N ~ N r w,k: ~ r N ~ ~ Q ~ N ~ ~ O S = N ~ ~ Q Q~ ~ r CD '6 Q C N ~ C ~ ~ ~ J Z c0 5 ji i0 O c N ' 7 ~ ~ _ Q rD O ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ 3 N J ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~_f f O ~ ~ ~ C N .- 7 Q ~ .-~ ~ O C O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ cp G L C Q N J H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .O ~ ~ ~ Z O + ~ ~ ~ c g tt ~ ~ ~ ~ t ` >r z , _ °' i Q a cp g Q ~ o ~ ~, ' ~ m ~ ~~ C ~ N ~ J Z ~ ~ g S 1 C N ~ . ' 7 T ,~ ~ ~ ~ N 3 ~ r V i 3 N r I j N ~ I 7 M ~ ~ C Q _. __ _.... _.____.-_____._.-_--T 3 N O O O O O O O O O '7 ~ O ) a0 1~ O ~ V M N (Ede OZ 'a~ `d8P) lanai ~~ ~~ Orfeld Laboratories Inc r ,+~_+ M ~ ti L ~ ~ (Q 0 C C ~ L N ~ '~ C yZy p M~ L '~ L N ao ^L, W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan a o N C N ~ ~ O N Q ~ N 7 ~ r ~~ C N ~ ~ ~~ C ~ N ~ ~ ~~ C N 7 `_" W C ~ N ~ ~ n C ~ -~ i- 7 O n ~ L ~ Q N j N N ~ ~ ~ C N 7 -7 ~ (D ~a ~ N ~ ~ r~ C N ~ ~ ~~ C N 7 ~ '_' ~~ C N ~ ~ ~~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ ~~ c N ~ ITT r C N ~ a~0 ~ ~ (O IAA 'cT M N ~ ~ ~ (ed~ OZ ~a~ `d8P) moy ayf ~o %u papaaox3 iana~ :u~ Orfeld Laboratories Inc N ~ d M ~--' ~ ~ ~_ C0 ~ G N ~ Z ~ ~ c ~ 'c L Q a~ ~~ ~, ° ~~ W m Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan 1~ N C N 7 ~ N g C Q ~ N ~ ~S N 'lr C N ~ ~ O ~ N Q C N 7 ~ ~ C N ~ ~ C N 7 7 ~ C N 7 7 ~ W G N ~ ~ r C ~ 7 r~ Q (O C N ~~ ~~ C N ~ N 7 7 ~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ 7 g ~ I~ C ~ 7 i Q j N ~ ~ r C N 7 ~ ~ (7 C N O ~ ~ 7 O L N f6 a F= y Orfeld Laboratories Inc ~ed~ OZ ~a~ `d9P) lanai Project New Runway No ise Monitor ~~' N ~ M N V ~ ~ • ~ ~ 0 Z ~ 1r ~ L L Q. a~ ~° ~ ~ m W Client City of Eagan N C N ~ r N Q ~ N 7 ~ ~ .~ N C N ~ r N ~ C Q 3 N ~ ~ 01 C N 7 ~ ~ O ~ m C Q 'O ~ N ~ ~ O J ~ ~ ~ 7 C' N ~ ~ m ~ Oo ~ o C Q J 3 ~ "~ 7 O L r m ~ d ~ j ~ ~ O --~ ~ ~ « c..+i+ ,,.:... ~ J C Q Q 7 ~ (Y] r ~ U O ~ O CA i J C N ~~ Q ~~ m Q ~ ~ ~ J ~,. ~ ~ N -'~ ~- r C Q ~ N "~ r 7 ~ N ~ ~ r ~ C o- N ~ ~ y;. T ~ . c N 7 --~ ~ ~ ~ N 3 0 O ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ 0 O 0 ~ C V N (edri pZ ~a~ `d8P) moo a4i }o %u papaa~x3 iana~ :u~ ~. Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor d Client City of Eagan f 4~ ~~~ I N ~ ~ . C N 7 ~ 7 O ~ N Q j N -'~ ~ O C N ~ ~ Q W ~ ~ C N C - 7 ~ ~ p J Z. C N ~ ~ ~ _ Q m ~ ~ a N c Q N N M ~ ' ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ r r `' x L ~ r - a. (Q . ~ ~ m O ~ CO C i n g .= v C C Q N J N ~ -3, ~ ~ Z ~ ~ Z o ~ ~ ~ 3 N `-' R C ~ L L •~ L O~ Q a O ~ ~a o ' ~ Q L L .~ ~ °' W C 7 ~ ~ J Z` j r C -' ~ eN- T ~ a C ~ C N 7 '7 r r Q C N 7 ~ ~ r C N 7 ~ ~ I ~ ~ N O O O O ~ O O ~ O O O a r O O n CO ~ ~ M N ~- ~ed~ OZ 'a~ d9P) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc ~9 • ~ Project New Runway No ise Monitor `-~" Client City of Eagan o N C N 7 ~ ~ O N Q j N s ~ C N 7 ~ ~ C N i C 3 N ~ m ~ ~ °.a ~ ~ 0 r Q N j N m u7 a m M N r ~ ~ .a o L ~ ~ ~+ ~ 7 N ~ ~ J ~ r. ~ ~ L ~ a ~ m ~ ~ ~~ ~ ° p c Z p `r ~ F= Q CT ~ N ~ m -a tC C ~ .~ ~ ~ L Q a o CO ~ = Q J ~ ~. ~ m W ~ ~: ~ ~ ~t` ~ N J ~ ~ r ~ ~ Q ~ N ~ ~ ~ r C N ~ r s ~~ r Q ~ N "~ r M C N 3 7 ~ M C N 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ (D ~ V N (edd OZ ~a~ d8P) ~no4 a43lo %u Papaa~x3 lanai :u~ ~~~ .~ OnField Laboratories Inc 9~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor =' E ~f Client City of Eagan ,h' N C N ~ ~ N ~ ' C N 3 ~ ~ O N C N ~ ~ N ~ j N [0 ~ ~ U O ~ ~ C J -= 3 N z' ~ i0 O ~ ~ C N Q 7 ~ [~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ J ;Z r ~ O ~ "~' L ~ Q _ ~ ~ ~ O ~ L f n t r ~ ~ ~ «~ J 7 ~ 'O ~+ C 3 Z ~ ~ Q C ~ ~ ~ : _ ~= .+ L Q d.;:;...... , i ~ ~ O Z a o ~~ Q ~ , ~Q W m ~ ~ •- ~ ~ a ~ ~ N 1;,; ~ Q 8 ^ a~ j N '~7 ~ c N ~~ M C N ~ ~ I '..~ _. __....__. __. __ --_- -_ ---~- C Q 3 N O O O O O O O O O~ ~ 6 ] OD 1~ O ~ '~! M N ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ `d9P) lanai fit, O~eld Laboratories Inc QI Project New Runway No ise Monitor x; ~` Client City of Eagan N C N 7 "') r .F s N Q c _. N ~ -~ ~'.. N FQ C N 3 ~ ~ ;'~ O ^2 N , Q C N 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ C N 7 ~ ~ W ~ m C Q 'O 7 ~ ~ O J M ~ ~ ~ (` ~ ~ ~ m , _ ~ ~ ao g o O N c Q J _ _ 1~9~- ~ ~ m ~ . ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ O y- ~ n g z ~ ¢ ~= Q ~ ~ • ~ L ~ L ~~~ ~p ~ O Q ~ ~ a ~ _ y ~ Q L Q ~ (O ~ r m U .> Q m ~ 7 W r ~ ~ J ~ S T 3, IL C N 7 ~ r C Q 3 N ~ ~ r C N ~ ~ ~ ~ _. C N ~ r .L ~ i C N ~ ~ r C Q ~ N O O O O O O O O O ~ ~' 0 1 N h (D l!7 ~ M N ~ (ed~ OZ ~a~ tfBP) moy ayt;o qou papaaox3 lanai :u~ Orfield Laboratories Inc qa Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan !I ~ I o N ~ N ~ r O N Q j N ~ ~ O C N ~ ~ Q p) ~ r m 'D i Q C N ~ ~ ~ ~ a J ~ ~ l~ C 7 ~ _ Q m O ~ ~ M C Q N N 7 J ti .. N r L ~_ ~ j~ ~ ~N-- ~ .-. Q ~ O m ~ C C ~ ~ ~ ... 6 G L C Q ~ N ~ J H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' C ~ I ~ t~ .C ~ ~ L Of ao ~`~Q ~ W ~~~ ~ N 7 ~ J Z 7 r Q C 7 ~ j~ 7 ~ N 7 ~ ~ V ~ j N ~ ~ M c N M r Q __.__._- __- ._..... _ C O O O O O O O ) CO t~ CD ~ 7 O O O~ ~ M N r- (ed~ OZ 'a~ b'8P) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc a3 M M ~ r L r CQ C 1-. %1 N '0 C Z O L ' L N ao W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan 01 0~0 ~ (~D ~ ~ (~7 N (ed~ OZ 'a~ beP) moy ayl;o %u papaaox3 iana~ :u~ o N ~ N ~ ~ O N Q j N -7 r ~ 5 C N 7 "~ r 01 C N 7 7 ~ ~~ C N 7 ~ ~~ C N ~~ ~~ C N 7 7 7 O t ~ Q N j N /9 ~ ~ ~ C N ~ ~ ~~ C N 7 7 ~ ~~ C N ~ ~ ~~ C Q ~ cV r. ~ S ~ N ~~ V i Q j N ~ ~ M 5 C N ~ ~ M C Q ~ N O ~ ."" Or teld Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ,~~ 1 i N ~~ c ~ N N C Q ~ N 7 ~ °.r~',w o. ,;a ~.a.r ,:nom J O N C ~ N ~ ~ N ~ a c N 7 CD ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ C J C N 7 ~ ~' •_ Lil ~ ~ ~ C N Q ~ -'~ C0 ~ ~ M ~ ~ J z N r ~ ~ ~v` L ~ ~ 16 ~ j N ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ L ~ 6 C C L ~ C ~ ~ J ~ r ~ ~O y"' ~ ~ Z Q C ~ , ~ ~ _ •~ ,VIII i ~ p I ? ~ ~ C ~ ~ m t0 O m g v R m ' N N W ~ ~ C 7 N 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ Q C ~ 7 C N tt ~ i Q C N 7 ~ ~ _...._._ r I C N ~ ~ Q __-_-_ _ -_ ___-_ _. -_. ~ ~ N ~ ~ M N ~ ~ p j ~ ~ (O t sr (ed~ OZ ~a~ `d8P) lanai Ofield Laboratories Inc qs Project New Runway N oise Monitor ~.#~~ Client City of Eagan N C N N ~ C N 7 .~ ~° O N C N 7 ~ r O ~ N Q C ` N 7 ~ ~ W C N ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~a N ~ ~ ~ ~ O J ai ~ ~ N m . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ O Q J w 3 ~ -, ^ ~ ~ ~ L m ~ ~ ~; H ~ `- a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' O ~ ~ _~ Z c Q ~ Q ~ ~ m ~ , ~ = ~ L Q ~ ~ o J a C N ~ ~-- L o ~~a~. ~ ~ti Q U W W JS _ ~ ~ ~ J C N 7 ~ ~ r ` = N 7 "7 ~ _ -~ C 7 ~ ~ a ~~ ~ Q c .: ,. - N 3 7 ~ ~~.:. ' M C N .' r M C N 7 O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O CO I~ fD LL'1 V M N ~ (edri pZ •a~ y8P) ~no4 a43;o %u papaaox3 iana~ :u~ -. _r- . f. .~.; Orfield Laboratories Inc ~~ ,+~~+ M ~ ti L ~ O ~+ ~ ~ O c ~ ~ ~_ ~O t_ Z ~ R ~ L '~ i N ao L W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan n N i C ~ N Q C N 7 ~ ~ N C N .' r N Q ~ N 7 ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ N Q C N 3 ~ ~ N C N 0 v ~ s N Q ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N ~ ~ M ~ N Q C N 7 .' ~- N N C N "~! r N ~ N Q 3 N ~ ~ N CC N ~ ~ N C 3 N ~ ~ O N C N ~ r O N Q c N O -7 ~ OrFeld Laboratories Inc ~ 0~0 ~ (~O uOj ~ m N (ed~ OZ 'a~ tl8p) lanai r M N ti L r ~ ~ C0 = C ~ N ~O C Z 0 _~ L N ao Q W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ~ ; I,~ ~'.. ~.# 41_ ~~ N ,C N '=7 ~ N ~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ O N C N ~ ~ O ~ N Q j N ~ ~ lC) N C N 7 ~ t17 N Q C ~ 3 7 N C 7 ~ ~ r. 7 O ~ ~ t N Q ~ j eN- W -, a N C N 3 ~ ~ M ~ N Q 3 N ~ ~ N N 'C N ~ ~ N ~ N Q j N ~ ~ N C ~ 3 N C ~ N O N C 3 N ~ `._' O ^~ N Q C N O O O O O O O O O~ ~ O O r O ~ ~ f7 N ~-- (ed~ OZ 'a~ b'8P) ~noy aye ~o ~~au papaaox3 lanai :u~ Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ~~'';'~; t N ~ Q C N 3 ~ r O $ N I~ C N ~ e-- O ~ j N [0 --~ ~ a W ~ C C N ~ ~ .Z~p+ L] O ~ ~ C ~ Q 7 ~ C0 ~ ~ !` ~ N ~ M ~ ~ J ~ ~ y ~ ao g :~;~< .. ~ Q 3~ ~ a 3 ~ g m ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 J 3 N ~ ~~ ~ ~ 'o ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ O Oi L 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ m 'O m ` W ~ r J r ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~Q ~ _~ ^ ,,. k . i ~ N 7 '7 ~ C 3 N ~ ~ ~ j N i ~ ~ ~ _.-_ ~ i ~ Q __-_ _..__. _.-~. C ~ N O O O O O O O ) W I~ O ~ 'V O O O -'~ ~ fh N ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ tlBP) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc 9q Project New Runway No ise Monitor Client City of Eagan N C N ~ ~ N Q 7 O N C 7 ~ ~~ N ~ C ~ N ~ ~ c ~ v~ C N 7 -'~ r - ~ ~ LLS ~ Q c 'D N ~ ~ O J ~ s. ~ ~ ~ V7 G1 M + 3 N ~ m w ~ UI r 'O L ~ ~ O ~ ~ C L .3c~'... ~ . G N ~ C ~ ~ ' p ~ ° n g Z ~a ~ Q ~ ~ ~~ . ~ L a ~ o ° ; o ~~ a ~~ Q W m ~ ~, ~ J •~-- i = N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~'"' i ~ ~~ ~ r i¢~ C _~..~. N ~ ~ ~ s ~ C N ~ ~ M C 3 N rn M O 0 0 ~ O ~ O '~ ~ a t 0 V 0 (ed-~ OZ 'a~ b'8P) moo a4#;o %u papaa~x3 iana~ :u~ .> 1~ Orfeld Laboratories Inc / ~~ • ~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor • ~ Client City of Eagan i n N C N ~ ~ r g ~, c Q N ~ ~ (D N i C N 7 ~ Q N Q rt] ~ C N 7 C - ~ ~ p J 2+ N ~ ~ C N ~ ~ Q [T1 ~ ~ N ~ t() j N a J LA ~ ~ ~ .2 ( N ~ N L O ~+ ~ N -' ~ ~Q _ ~ ! ~ m ~ CO C L O N ~ ~ Q N Q G as ~ c ; ~ ~ J r .O ~ c ~ g Z p _ N ~ ~ ~ ~F ~ 7 N cO C ~ r L. !_ L ~ Q N = O L ~ N Q ' ~ ~ D a' ~ N ~ W ~ ~~ ~ ~ r 3 N C 7 ~ >+ ~ g ~ C N RL ~ N ~ ~ N Q ~ N 7 -'~ ~ O N ) C ~ Ii '~7 1 N Q __ _ _._ _.__. __ _. -. C ~ N 6O i a~0 n (O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ' ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ !/8P) lanai ~~I Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway No ise Monitor ' Client City of Eagan N C N ~ ~ N Q C N ~ ~ N ~ N 7 ~ ~ N Q C N 3 "i ~ N C 3 N ~ Q m 7 ~ ~ ~ O ^ ~ j N ,4; M ~ ~ m ~ N ~ +~ N S ~ p O ~+ 7 N J d-+ (~ '~ ~ O C • V ~ 7 L C C i N Q N ~ ~ ~ 3 r ~ ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ ~p ~ Z p N ~ ~ a ~' ~ ~ N CD ~C C ~ ~ r. • ~ 0 N ~ Q 01 O C ~ CD 'O Q W N ~ ~ C N J ~ r N ~ N Q ~ N 7 ~ r N ~~ ? ~ N 7 ~ ~ ~T.T ~ ~ N Q C N ~ ~ .+„ ,. G~~ o N C 3 N ~ ~ O ~ N Q c N 7 ~ °~O ~ f~D u~"7 V' f~'Y N ~ ' ~ ~ed~ OZ ~a~ b'8P) ~no4 a43;o %u papaaox3 lanai :u~ _~, Orfield Laboratories Inc D~ ~ ~ ~ M N r C~ ~ G Z •~ L Q a~ ~~ ~o ~, ~, m W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan b3 N C N "~7 r N ~ C N 3 ~ ~ O N C N ~ ~ O ~ N C N 3 ~ ~ W C N 7 "~ r i Q j N -'~ ~- C N ~{ ao g C N 7 7 r C N 7 "'~ r r C Q 7 ~ '"'f (D 5 c N ~~ ~~ C N 7 ~ ~ C N 7 ~ ~ Lr) C Q ~ N -'~ ~ C N 7 ~ V C N 7 ~ ~ r C N 7 ~ ~ r C Q N O -~ ~ 7 O t N f6 V _~ ;t r Orfield Laboratories Inc OOi a~0 h (~O ~ V (~~ N (edri pZ ~a~ b'9P) lanai Project New Runway N oise Monitor ~' _~~ Client City of Eagan N C N 7 ~ ~ N ~ - C ~ ~ 7 ~'" " O N i ~ C N 7 ~ r N ~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ ~ O g CL • ~ C 3 N 7 ~ ~: O ~ m a C -~ N 7 ~ ~ O J ~ e ~ ~ • ~ M ,t', 7 ~ C N m _ N ~ ~ ~° L ~ ~: O ~^ O Q (Q Q J ~ ~ 3 ~ ^ ~ ' 3 L ~ ~ L j m ~G N '~:i".:. ~ ~ Q ~ C . O °- Z~ ~ ~ ~ Q H Q ~ ~ ~ m ' C L ~ ~ L Q ~ ~ O ~ ~ 7 N ~' 0 O m ~ W m ~ N O ~ J l O C N ~ ~ C N 7 ~ ~ C N "31 f C Q ~ N --a ~ -~ ~ C N 3 ~ ~ M C Q 3 N O 61 O O O O O OO 1~ (D ~ ~ O O (h N O ~ -'~ ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ b'8P) ~no4 a43 bo %~ papaaox3 iana~ :u~ c Orfield Laboratories Inc 1 D~- Project New Runway Noise Monitor L~ ~ Client City of Eagan n N C N ~ r N I;i" Q G N '7 '~ O N .~.. C ~ _ ~ 7 Q N Q 'B ~ ~ N 7 C ' --) ~ 6 J ~~ N G N ~ 7 ~ ~~ _ Q CD ~ ~ ~ Q ~ C 7 N ~ J r M ~ ~ ?~ ti N ~ ~ fB C N ,-. ~ ~- Q C j m CCO C G L ~ ~ t C Q N ~ N ~ ~ ~ v J 2~ ~ ~ Z o ' N ~ ~ ~ C31 N 7 ~ +-~ ~ ~ L V '~ Of CV Q Z ^ Q L ~ ~ m ~ W N ~ °' G ~ N ~ J ~, 7 N C N ~ ~ N ~ • C N 7 ~ N ~ 3 ~ O N C N ~ r O ^~ N Q _. _.. -- ---_. _.. _~. G ~ N O O O O O O O ) a0 f~ (O O ~ O O O '~ ~ ~ N '- (ed~ Ol ~a~ b'9P) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc CG r M ~ ~ L r 0 ~ CO C C ~ d N ~ ~O ~ Z 0 •~ i. N ao W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ C ~ N ~ ~ O N C N ~ ~-- O N Q 7 N ~ ~ N N C 3 N -'~ r N ~ c Q 3 N ~ ~ v N C ~ N O sr ~ L N Q ~ j N f6 r 'O N C N ~ r- M ~ N Q j N ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ N ~ N Q j N ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ N ~ ~Q 3 N ~ ~ O 5 N Ii C ~ N ~ r O ~ N Q C N 3 O O O O O O O O O~ ~ m O r` O O 7 ('~ N ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ d8P) moo a43 }o %u papaaox3 ~ana~ :u~ Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor ° . Client City of Eagan ~~~~ ~~~~i ~ N ~ ~ r N C Q ~ N -'~ ~ O 5 N s C N ~ r O ~ j N CO ~ ~ ~ ... O C ~ ~ J C N ~ ~ 2^ m ~ ~ r Q C _ Q ~ 7 ~ m ~ ~ r C` 7 N ~ J Z ti ~ g L ~ ~ ,.~, j j N .-~ Q C C ~ o ~ C L T ~ L ~ G ~ _ - N ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ 'O ~ H C 9~ ~ O r ~ ~ Z Q ~ c ~ L ~ ~ L L Q ~ ~ ~ Z a~ = ~ ~' r- ~ m ~~ ~~ Q Wm ~ ~ .~.: ~ CC ~ N 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ T C Q ~ r 'o- ~ N ~ r !~~ ~ ~ Q C ~ N ~ ~ II 1 ~ ~ C N 7 i ~ ~ i ~ _ __~ C Q _-___ _ ~ N O O O O O O O O O -7 ~ O ~ ~ O ~ V M N ~- (ed~ OZ 'a~ tfBP) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc 1~7 G1 M ~ r L ~_ •r` ~ C~ ~ G d H C O O Z ~ C R = V ~ L Q a~ ~~ ~° ~~ Wm Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan Obi Opp ~ c~D ~ V ~ N (ed~ OZ 'a~ t18P) ~noy ayl;o ~/ou papaao~ lanai :u~ O N C N ~ ~-- N ~Q ~ N ~ ~ O N C N ~ ~ N C Q 3 N ~ ~ c N -,i ~ 01 C Q 3 N 7 ~ C N ao g C N 7 ^ ~ ~ 7 O r ~ .c r ~ C N l4 7 -0 ~ Q c N C N ~~ ~~ ~Q ~~ ~~ ~ N .? ~ ~[1 ~ N 3 ~ ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~ ~ N 3 ~ ~ (h C N ~ `_ M ~ C N 7 O "'~ r Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~,~ ~~:. Client City of Eagan ~~~i ' t , N i ~ N o g N Q ~ N 7 7 ~ .; O i ~ N 7 "~ r Q O ~ V C N ~ ~ C ~ ~ J Z ~ . ~ N 1 ~ ~ i m ~ ~ ~ ti ~a 7 N ~ J ~ l ~ ' ~ ~ ( Nr~ ` ~ L r ~ ; ~ ~ ,. C ~ ~ m ~ 0 `` C L r ~ L 6 C ~ Q C ~ N ~ J N ~ ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ~ Z p ~° ~ ' F= g g~~ t t~ i j N V ~ O a o ~Q ~" m W ~~ C ~ N 7 ~ J 2, 7 Q C ~ ~ T V ~ ~ C N 7 ~ ~ ~ C Q C ~ N ~ ~ r C cN- 1 '7 M ~ r. C __. _--. __.. .. ~-~ N O 6 O O O O O ) a0 N CD ~ ~ O O O~ M N ~ '~~ Orfield Laboratories Inc I ~~ Project New Runway No ise Monitor g ~`; Client City of Eagan o N C N ~ ~ N ~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ r) C N ~ ~ d) C N ~ ~" p C N ~ `_" m a W ~ O ~a ^ ~ 3 N ~ M ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ p L O ~ ~+ 3 N J W/ (E ~ ~ O c r g L m ~ ~ Q ai v N ~ ~ ~ a 'p C ~ Z p `r ~ F= Q ~ >~ ~ N ~ m ~ l4 C '~ L i '~ p a Q o ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ (~ [D W ~ ~ Q) Q) C N J ~ ~ C N ~ ~ r C N 7 ~ ~ V ~ C N ~ ~ r C ~ M C N 7 Op t Op0 ~ ~ ~ V M N ~ ~ c- (ed~ OZ ~a~ V8P) ~noy a43 bo q°u papaaox3 lanai :u~ Iu ~~. J ~ I~ ~ y. ~S ...~ ~~, r `Ta T :r L`+s ~:'~ ~_o ~. ~rf ;:° ~~~.~ Orfeld Laboratories Inc ll~ • Project New Runway Noise Monitor ~ ,.. Client City of Eagan I N C N 7 r N ~ C N 7 7 ~ O N C N 7 ~ r N ~ Q j N (~ ~ ~ V ~ C ~ ~ J C ~ N ~ 2 ~ 0 S C N Q m a ~ ~ ~ ~ u7 r (` ~ ' ~ ~ ?_ ~ r ~ a " ;~ ~ 3 -- `_~ a ~ c ~ `_ ~ ~ 0 ~~ L ~ N ~; C ~ ~ ~ -~ 2+ = ~ ~ Z ~ c Q C ~ N ~ C ' ~ .c V L Q ~ ~ ~ Z a O c N ~ ~ ~ Q O ~ ~ ~ m N W 7 '7 ~ J r ~ 7 ~ N 7 ~ `_ ~ Q C ~ r C N 7 ~ 'ct ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~ r I' j N ('7 ~ ___ _.- Q ... --~- C N ~ Opp ~ (~D ~ a M N ~ ' T (edh OZ ~a~ b'8P) lanai `€:. Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway No ise Monitor Client City of Eagan N K~ C 3 N ~ r N Q C N ~ r .u< -. O N , ~~ C N 7 ~ ~ . ~ O ~ ~ C Q ~ N -~ r C N ~ ~ ~ ~ m C Q '6 ~ N ~ O J ~ ' ~ ~ ^ ~ l( ) ~ ~ N ~ m i + _ ~ -~ v r L . ~ ~ ~ 0 C ~ 3 O ~ ~ ~ L m C C jw C ~ N ~ ~ ~ a H . C J O 4- ~ i n Z g C Q ~ ~ ~ Q ' ~ ~ ~ L L ~ ~ O J Q O ~ N ~ ~s' L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A,, A W -_ 1 Q v m W ' ~ rn J c N _~ ~ ~ i 'r r Q C .. ~ aiW:.. N 7 ~ ~X'Et' ~ ~ i N r- ' C ~ N ~ `" ~ ~ C N 7 -'~ ~ fh C C N 7 ~ (`'~ C N ~ Op0 ~ f~0 ~ '7 M N 'O ~ ~ (ed~ OZ ~a~ b'8P) moo a43 bo %u papaa~x3 lanai :u~ Orfield Laboratories Inc pia Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan n N i = N 7 ~ r g N Q _-__ ~ N ~ ~ tD N C N 7 ~ ~ f a~ N Q m ~ C C ' 7 _ - ' ~ p J 2+ N C N 7 ~ ~ _ Q I'0 - ~ ~ ~ 'O i~ ~ Q ~ 3 N J r M ~ ~ ?~ N ~ N ` r O ~ CC~ ~ N g L Q N Q J C ~ C d ~ ~ ~ -f6 o 2~ ~ v Z 0 N ~ C C v t0 ~ t _ V V = D1 Z a o ~Q L ' ~ Q ^ ' ~ {~W'~ VI Q ~ ~ N ~ W J 7 ~ ~ 2+ 3 N C Q 3 ~ -'~ ~ N ~ ^ C N 7 ~ ~ C N 3 O N ~ C ~ N 7 ~ O N Q _.~ 1T j N O O O O O O O O O~ ~' 0 1 OO I~ (O t!') V M N ~ (Ede OZ ~a~ b'8P) lanai I13 Orfield Laboratories Inc M ~ ti L r 0 ~ 3 O C G ~ L d 3 N ~ Z ~ L ' i N ao _ ~ IiL Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan t N C N 7 ~ n N Q ~ N 7 ~ ~ O N ~ N ~ ~ tD ~ N Q j N ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ N Q c N 3 ~ r.. N C N 7 7 O ~ ~ r N Q ~ ~ ~ (6 ~ ~ N C ~ 7 N ~ ~~ 3 N ~ ~ N N C N ~ ~ N ~^ N Q C N 7 ~ ~ N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ C ~ N ~ ~ O N C N '~i ~ O ^~ N Q j N O O O O O O O O O~ ~ O a0 N (D ~ ~ (`') N ~ed~ OZ'a~ t/8P) ~no4 a43;o %u papaaox3 lanai :u~ Orfield Laboratories Inc • Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan N C N 7 ~ r N ~ C Q N -~ ~ O N C N ~ ~ N ~ ~ Q ~ N 7 Cp ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ C J C N ~ ~` ~ ~ O ~ Q C Q ~ ~ ~ m ~ N c\i ~ ~ J a_ r ~ N ~~ ~' ~ O (0 ~ N - Q , . ~ ~ m ~ 0 ~ p ~ ~ Q ~ ~ N J H .O • v r •- g ~ ~ N ` ~ L O O L O a C N ' ~' ~ ~ m ~, ° , *~a... ~° Q m W ~ ~ ~ C ~~2 N 7 ~ r 1 ~ ~ T i Q C ~ .-7j r C N 7 ~ ~ Q C ~ N ~ ~ C ~ 7 ch ~ C ___T-T ~ N O O O O O O O O O~ ~ O ) oO t~ t0 tO 'a M N ~ . ~ad~ OZ 'a~ d8P) lanai Orfield Laboratories Inc 1(~ ~~ d _M r C ~ O ~ ~ ~ d ~ N C Z ~ ~, C ~ ~C V ~ L Q O W m Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ~ °~O ~ t~D ~ V M N (edd OZ'a~ b8P) ano4 a43~o %u papaaox3 lanai :u~ N = N ~ ~ N ~ C Q ~ N "'~ r. O N C N ~ ~ O ^~ N Q C N 7 ~ ~ ~~ c N rn ~ C N 7 ~ ~~ C N 7 ~ `_ ~~ i Q c N C N .~ r c Q --~ ~5 C N ~ ~ ~~ C Q 3 ~ r ~ N ~ ~ ~~ C Q ~ N -'~ ~ t7 C N ~ ~ ~~ C N 7 ~ ~ ~~ C N ~ ~ ~~ +I C a ~ N O ~ ~ 0 t N f6 t F= Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway Noise Monitor *;~ Client City of Eagan I n~ N C N ~ ~ N Q ~ N 7 7 ~ O N C N ~ ~ Q ~p ~ N Q CO 'n ~ N 7 ~ C -0 O J 2 N ~ i O C N ~ Q m ~ ~ ~ N Q a ~ 3 N J ~ M ~ ~ ? _ ~ L r N ~. ,, a. ~ C ~ .~ Q ~ ~ cO ~ G N ~ r Q N ~ N L ~ ~ C ~ N f4 ~ ~ J ~ N ~ C _ ~ Z p N ~ F- ~ C31 ~ N 7 ~ :-. ~ R 7 L _ L ~ O a o ~Q Z L ^ ^`` W ~ ~ m ~ ~ W k N ~ d 7 ~ ~ 2+ 3 O = N C Q ~ ~ T N ~ ^ C ~ 7 7 } N . Q C N ~ ~ O 5 N I~ G ~ r 7 O N --~ C _. _-._ N O Q O O O O O 1 aD I~ t0 to '7 O O 0 7 ~ (h N ~ (ed~ OZ 'a~ `d8P) lanai ~.~ Orrield Laboratories Inc ,+~~' M N ti L ~ Q ~ .~ C0 ~ C ~.. ~_ ~ ~O ~ Z 0 ~_ ~ •~ i N ao ^L, W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan ~ ~ ~ (~D ~ 7 M N ~ed~ OZ 'a~ tlBP) ~no4 a43;o %u papaaox3 lanai :u~ I~ N ~ N ~ ~ N ~ C N 7 '7 ~ (D S N I~ C N 7 ~ N Q ~ N 7 ~ ~ N N ~ N ~ ~ t(y ~ N Q C 3 N 7 ~ N C N O ~ ~ t N Q ~ j N (6 ~ ~ N C N ~ ~ N .Q j N 7 ~-- N N C N ~ ~ N N Q i 3 N *'" N C N 7 ~ N ~ C ~ N ~ ~ O N G N ~ ~ O N Q C N 7 O -7 ~- Orfield Laboratories Inc ~ ~ ~ ~ Project New Runway Noise Monitor t Client City of Eagan ~ i ~ N ~ N ~ ~ } N =~ Q C N 7 ~ ~ O N C N ~ r- ~ O ~ N ,. :.;~i.~ ,. C Q ~ N Q m ~ r' V ~ c ~ ~ ~ L] W ~ ^ - CC N Q ~~ i 7 ~ [0 U O ~° ~ m ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ J Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ,.~ = . r 3 ~ -~ m = c o Q ~ ` ^ ~ L 6 C C 3 °' ~ 'o ~ o ~ a ~ Z °' `_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ~ L ~ ~ ~ L ~_ Z i p c ^ a ~ Q o ~~ ~ m 7 N N W ~ ~ J 5 C N ~ r' ~ ~ C N 7 ~ ~ ^ C C N ~ r ~ ~ Q C N ~ ~ r C N "3~ r i (h ~ Q C ~ N 6O i 0~0 t~ tD ~ 7 ~ ~ N ~ ~ '- ~ed~ OZ 'a~ b'8P) lanai 19 ,~.,- c:i Orfield Laboratories Inc Project New Runway No ise Monitor ''~ Client City of Eagan N ~~' ~_ ~ C ~ N C Q 3 N ~ ~ t O N fir: C N 7 r O N Q j N .: '~ ~ C N 3 ~ r ~ ~ ~ m Q '6 75 j N ~ ~ ~ r~r J O .zx 00 r ~ (` ~ cis ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ,,y" W ~ O V ~ ~ i C Q ~ J _ ~ r O ~ ~ L ` 5 ~ ~ t 7 N d c6 ~ p Q ~ Z y.: C a ~ ~ ~ .~:cr. `- J L Q 0 LL j N ~ ~ N VO- ~ ~ Q 'm0 lQ m `. ~ ~ N ~, W =~ -' ~ ~ N 7 ~ ~ 7 N -'~ ~ V C N .7 r ~~ C Q N ~ ~ a~ .a_, ~ C ~ 3 r C ~ N ~ a~O ~ t0 ~ V (~ N ~ ~ '- (edd OZ 'a~ `d8P) ~~04 a4i;o qou papaaox3 lanai :u~ `isk Orfield Laboratories Inc I a"''` 0 r d ~ M ~ e~- L T C C0 ~ G ~ H ~ Z ~ _~_ L ~ L a~ W Project New Runway Noise Monitor Client City of Eagan 1a o N C N ~ ~ O ~ N Q C N 3 ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ i Q j N ~ ~ C N ~ ~ C Q ~ N ~ ~ n c N 7 O L i Q N ~ l6 ~ ~ C N ~ ~ (D ~ C N 7 ~ ~ i C N 7 ~ ~ ll7 r Q j N ~ ~ r C N 7 ~ ~ C Q 3 N ~ ~ r C 7 eN-- r C 3 N O -~ r Orfield Laboratories Inc OOi GAO ~ c~D ~ V M N ~ed~ OZ 'a~ d9P) lanai Project New Runway No ise Monitor 4 Client City of Eagan o N CC N ~ ~ O N Q j N ~ ~ W = N ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ N ~ ~ 3 N OJ ~ ~ U ~ ~ O O cQ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ r M ~ (%~ ~ ^ ~ o C ~' ~ N J • 7 Q ~ ti ~ t m C C L C Q ~ ~ C1 ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J ^^`` N W ~ o ~ ~ _ ~ Z L ~ TT ~ ~ Q m ~O .` A+ i •W 0 d ~- O ~ a c _ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ m '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W C N J 7 ~ ~ uy i Q 3 N ~ ~ r C N ~ ~ C N ~ ~ r C N ~ ~ (7 ^~ C Q 3 N ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tD ( ) N (ed~ OZ ~e~ b'9P) ~noy ayt;o %u papaaox3 lanai :u~ t . ~~, s. «~ 'K ~:n ~_. .:'~ ~... a, i~ SG i5 'sz •n 'F 5. ~~ ~ '7... ~~' .: ~t ;~ Orfield Laboratories Inc ~aa~ p OrFeld Laboratories Inc 06/20/2006 AIRPORTS AND AVIATION INTRODUCTION As a neighbor to Minneapolis - St. Paul (MSP) International Airport, the City of Eagan is affected both positively and negatively by the airport. The City benefits by convenient access to airport services while at the same time areas of the City are negatively affected by aircraft noise. A significant change at MSP occurred in October 2005 when a new north-south runway (Runway 17/35) opened, resulting in many areas of Eagan previously unaffected by noise now being impacted by aircraft noise. The existing parallel runways continue to have noise effects upon the northern portion of the City. Part of the City's challenge is to maximize the benefits of its convenient location while minimizing the aircraft noise effects. The major benefit of the City's proximity to the airport is convenient access for its residents and businesses to the services offered by MSP. It is less than a 20 minute trip from most areas of Eagan to MSP. Businesses such as Northwest Airlines, USPS Bulk Mail Facility and numerous hotels decided to locate within Eagan in part due to the proximity to the airport Aircraft noise is the negative aspect of being two-three miles from MSP. In 2004, MSP served 36.7 million passengers and accommodated over 541,000 landings and takeoffs. MSP ranks 9th in North America for the number of travelers serviced. The airport boasts the eighth busiest airfield in the world. MSP is expected to serve 55 million passengers annually by the year 2020, thus creating a need for further airport expansion, according to the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). As a result of the numerous over flights, substantial areas of Eagan are within a designated noise exposure zones. Aircraft noise is a nuisance to many people and the amount of noise in certain areas affects how the land can be used and how buildings need to be constructed to minimize negative impacts. For example, much of the northern half of Eagan falls within designated noise zones and new single family homes, churches, schools and other noise sensitive uses are discouraged from being built in this area. If these uses are built they must be constructed to provide greater than average noise reducing walls, windows and doors. GOALS AND POLICIES GOALS 1. To minimize the establishment of noise sensitive uses in areas where noise impacts are greatest. 2. To the extent possible, mitigate noise impacts in areas where noise sensitive uses currently exist, or can be anticipated, in noise impact zones. i Based on Metropolitan Council's 2007 MSP Noise Policy Zonc~ la~- 06/20/2006 3. To advocate airport-operating procedures that will minimize adverse impacts in Eagan's noise sensitive areas, especially those areas that were established outside of areas where operations and noise impacts were anticipated. 4. To implement an orderly transition from noise sensitive land uses to noise compatible ones where appropriate, in consideration of all development factors for the area. 5. To minimize the establishment of physical structures that will interfere with aircraft operations. POLICIES 1. The City will generally discourage new residential development in areas most affected by aircraft noise. This area is depicted by the current Metropolitan Council Noise Zones as illustrated in Fgw~e >.l . 2. The City will consider in-fill residential development within the area described above on a case by case basis. Where such in-fill development is permitted, it will only occur under appropriate requirements respecting aircraft noise including sound attenuating construction techniques and buyer notification of the noise environment. 3. The City of Eagan will enforce its Noise Attenuation Construction ordinance, at such time as it is adopted, which applies to all noise-sensitive areas within the Metropolitan Council Noise Zones. 4. Any additions, modifications or replacements of existing homes within the Noise Zones shall use noise abatement designs and construction techniques to achieve an inside noise attenuation level appropriate for its noise zone. 5. The City will encourage the maximization of noise mitigation programs for.the benefits of its residents. 6. The City will designate the Metropolitan Council Noise Policy Contours on its zoning and comprehensive guide plan maps to inform current and prospective property owners of the presence of potential noise impacts and the existence of regulations and performance standards for those areas. The designation of the contours on the comprehensive guide plan and zoning maps shall constitute buyer notification of the noise environment by the City. 7. The City will continue its cooperative efforts with the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the Pollution Control Agency and other governmental agencies to reduce adverse noise impacts generated by air traffic. 8. The city will advocate for historic and prospective aircraft operating procedures that respect the City's purposeful efforts to minimize noise sensitive uses in the Eagan-Mendota Heights Corridor. The City will resist efforts by other agencies to introduce or modify operating z ~c~j 06/20/2006 procedures so as to increase adverse impacts in noise sensitive areas of Eagan outside of the Comdor. 9. The City will continue to encourage noise compatible commercial-industrial uses in the northern portion of the City where the noise compatible Corridor has been established. The City will consider redevelopment ofnoise-sensitive residential uses to noise compatible uses in the Corridor in situations where other planning factors support such action. 10. The City does not anticipate a strategy of major redevelopment of the residential areas of south and west Eagan that now experience additional over-flights from the north-south runway. This is due to the scale of residential development that has occurred in this area to date and the presence of substantial areas of commercial and industrial land uses in the northern portion of the City associated with historic air traffic patterns. The City will apply appropriate performance standards to expansion or modification of uses, in-fill development or redevelopment within the area. 11. The City will advocate for specific noise attenuation considerations for noise sensitive areas in southwest Eagan, because neither the City nor its property owners could have anticipated the over-flight impact from the new north-south runway. 12. The City will notify appropriate agencies of proposed construction or alterations that will exceed height limitations in airport areas as specified in Federal or State law. ECONOMIC BENEFITS According to the 2006 Metropolitan Airports Commission's Strategic Plan, the Minneapolis-St. Paul .International Airport is both directly and indirectly responsible for over 150,000 jobs in the region, $10.7 billion in annual business revenues, $5.9 billion in personal income, and $626 million in State and local taxes. For the City of Eagan, the benefit of being located in close proximity to the airport has helped the City support a healthy and diverse business community, from corporate headquarters to distribution companies to hotels and restaurants. The airport is a tremendous marketing tool for bringing in new businesses and retaining those that have made Eagan their home. AIRPORT/AIRCRAFT IMACTS LAND USE Different types of land use have varying degrees of sensitivity to aircraft noise. For example, commercial-industrial uses are more compatible with aircraft noise than noise-sensitive residential, churches and schools. Noise sensitivity varies among residential uses. Single family homes have more exposed exterior walls and roof areas and rely more on the outdoor yard areas than most multi-family housing. As such, single family homes are generally more affected by aircraft noise than multi-family housing. !a(~ 06/20/2006 The northern portions of Eagan are particularly affected by aircraft noise (See Figure ~. ~ for a locationof the proposed 2007`mitigated noise contours). To avoid additional conflicts the City has guided most of this area for commercial-industrial development and discouraged construction of new single family residential homes and most multi-family homes in noise exposure areas. In general, the Comprehensive Plan does not recommend construction of new single family homes within the noise exposure areas, except on a case specif c basis. Extraordinary sound proofing should occur if new single family dwellings- are constructed in noise exposure areas. Construction ofmulti-family homes may occur within the noise zones in which such uses are considered provisional or conditional, but they must be constructed to provide adequate sound insulation to provide a quiet indoor environment and meet other standards outlined for such uses in this guide and the regional guidelines. Where this is deemed appropriate, it can be accomplished by meeting the Structure Performance Standards established by the Metropolitan Council's Aviation Chapter of the Metropolitan Development Guide, as well as by meeting standards set forth in the City's future noise attenuation ordinance. For residential and educationaUmedical land uses, interior sound levels may not exceed 45 dBA. An interior sound level of 50 dBA is required for cultural, recreational, entertainment, office, commercial, and retail service uses. Table 5.1 outlines the Metropolitan Council's land use compatibility guidelines for development within noise exposure areas. NOISE EXPOSURE AND NOISE MITIGATION There are existing residential uses within noise exposure zones. Aircraft noise exposure is measured and mapped by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). The noise exposure zones and accompanying mitigation programs are subject to approval by the Federal Aviation Administration. Noise exposure is measured on an annualized average weighting of day-night noise levels measured in decibels (Ldn). Around MSP, the significant noise exposure zones are mapped from Ldn 75 (highest) to Ldn 60 (lowest). Homes within the proposed 2007 Ldn 65 Mitigated Noise Contour are eligible for the residential sound insulation program offered by MAC. All currently eligible homes in Eagan have been contacted for participation in the program, and have either had the insulation modifications completed or declined to participate. All homes within the 60-64 Ldn DNL contours maybe eligible for some mitigation should the FAA approve the 2007 proposed residential noise mitigation being recommended by the MAC. As of June 2006, the City of Eagan remains in active litigation with the Cities of Minneapolis and Richfield against the MAC regarding the proposed 2007 residential noise mitigation program for those homes that are located within the 60-64 Ldn Noise Contours. While the MAC has submitted the 2007 Part 150 Update, the FAA has not yet approved the document. The FAA has approved the 2007 unmitigated noise contours; however, the mitigated 2007 noise contours, which show the homes that would be eligible for mitigation, have not yet been approved. Depending on the outcome of the litigation, it is anticipated that the next Part 150 ~a~ 06/20/2006 Update, and corresponding update to the noise exposure map will begin at the earliest in 2007 to reflect the proposed noise forecast for 2012. Table: 5.1 Metropolitan Council Airport Land-use Compatibility Guidelines /Noise Ex ooure Zones Land Use T es Land Use _ Compatibility New Development Infill-Reconstruction or Guidelines Major Redevelopment Additions to Existing Structures 1 2 3 4 1 2- 3 4 Residential Single/Multiplex with INCOZ INCO 1NC0 COND COND COND COND COND Individual Entrance Multiplex/Apartment with INCO PROV PROV PROV COND PROV PROV PROV Shared Entrance Mobile Home INCO INCO 1NC0 COND COND COND COND COND Educational and Medical Schools, Churches, 1NC0 INCO INCO PROV COND COND COND PROV Hospitals, Nursing Homes Cultural, Entertainment, Recreational Indoor COND3 PROV PROV PROV COND PROV PROV PROV Outdoor COND COND COND CNST COND COND COND CONST Office, Commercial, Retail COND PROV PROV CNST PROV PROV PROV CNST Services Transportation-Passenger COND PROV PROV CNST COND PROV PROV CNST Facilities Transient Lodging INCO PROV PROV PROV COND PROV PROV PROV Other Medical, Health & COND PROV PROV CNST COND PROV PROV CNST Educational Services Other Services COND PROV PROV CNST COND PROV PROV CNST Industrial,Communication, PROV CNST CNST CNST CNST CNST CNST CNST Utility Source: Metropolitan Council, Metropolitan Development Guide -Aviation, 12/96 Z INCO means Inconsistent s COND means Conditional a PROV means Provisional 5 ~g 06/20/2006 • Consistent: Land uses that are acceptable. • Provisional: Land uses must comply with certain structured performance standards to be acceptable according to MS 473.192 (Metropolitan Area Aircraft Noise Attenuation Act). • Conditional: Land uses that, in addition to meeting the structure performance standards, maybe identified as conditionally acceptable upon review by the City Council. The City Council will review and authorize conditional uses upon a finding that they comply with the factors set forth in Table 5.2. • Inconsistent: Land uses that are not acceptable even if acoustical treatment were incorporated in the structure and outside uses were restricted. 5.2 Conditional Land Use Review Factors 1. S ecific nature of the ro osed use, includin extent of associated outdoor activities. 2. Relationship of proposed use to their planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall com rehensive Tannin and relation to other metro olitan systems. 3. Fre uenc of exposure of ro osed uses to aircraft overflight. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on-ground operating and maintenance areas. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions, and shielding of outdoor activities. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft o erations. 7. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run-up areas. !ay 06/20/2006 AIRPORT SAFETY Safety zones are established within the MSP Airport Zoning District to ensure an unobstructed flight path for departing and arriving aircraft. The safety zones extend off the ends of each runway and impose height and use restrictions on properties and structures within them. Due to the distance between the runways and the municipal borders of Eagan the safety zones do not have a significant effect upon height of proposed structures in Eagan. The main concern is that structures within safety zones do not exceed Z00 feet in height. The City of Eagan is required to notify MNDOT of any proposed structure in excess of 200 feet outside of individual airport zoning districts to control potential obstructions in the region's general airspace. A section needsfo be ad~iLd_to Note the JAZB Q~-erla};Area. AIRPORT EXPANSION A significant expansion of MSP Airport took place in 2005, which changed flight patterns and noise exposure in Eagan. Runway 17/35, also known as the North-South Runway, became operational in October 2005, and is anticipated to add 25% capacity to MSP. The current runway configuration consists of two parallel runways (12-301eft and right), one cross wind runway (4-22), and one north-south runway (17-35). The two parallel runways are oriented in asoutheast-northwest direction and landings and takeoffs from/to the southeast are generally over Eagan. The North-South Runway is located to the west of the parallel runways, with both landing and takeoffs from/to the south. The location of Runway 17-35 in proximity to the other runways allows for independent and simultaneous use of the north-south and the parallel runways. The flight departure tracks from the North-South Runway spread noise over much of the southern half of the city, and the arrival operations off of Runway 17-35 concentrate significant noise over those homes in Eagan that are located just east of Cedar Avenue, as that is the location of the extended centerline for arrival operations. The City will continue to work with the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) to minimize the area affected by noise and to establish additional noise mitigation measures. INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS Eagan Airport Relations Commission The City of Eagan has an active Airport Relations Commission. The Commission is an appointed advisory body of the Eagan City Council. The purpose of the Commission is to advise and make recommendations to the City Council concerning aircraft noise and airport policy issues that impact or have the potential to impact Eagan. As citizen volunteers, Commission members provide valuable insight into public perceptions of these issues for the City Council, City staff and community at large. Currently the Eagan Airport Relations Commission is focusing on: /3~ 06/20/2006 1. Monitoring departure and amval tracks of Runway 17-35 to minimize noise exposure to residential neighborhoods. 2. Seeking a 95% or better rate of compliance within the Eagan/Mendota Heights Comdor. 3. Efforts to improve the representation the City receives on the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). 4. Understanding the impacts ofground-level, low frequency noise on the community. S. Communications efforts to inform residents about the activities of the City to reduce airport noise over the City of Eagan and provide avenues in which citizens can be heard regarding concerns over airport noise. 6. Monitoring the progress of the litigation efforts against the MAC with regard to the Part 150 Residential Noise Mitigation Program. Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Noise Oversight Committee The City of Eagan is one of six communities surrounding the airport that has a seat on the MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC). The MAC established the NOC in August 2002. Its purpose is to bring industry and community representatives together as a balanced forum to dialogue about noise issues at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport and to bring policy recommendations to the MAC. The committee meets on a bimonthly basis. The NOC replaced the group formerly known as the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council (MASAC), which was disbanded in 2000. Metropolitan Council The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning agency that has the legislative authority of approving the MAC's Capital Improvements Plan budget. The Metropolitan Council's role in the evaluation of noise is to promulgate guidelines for the compatible use and development of land in communities surrounding the airport and approve individual airport long-term comprehensive plans. Other Agencies A number of other State agencies work with the MAC in either a cooperative and/or regulatory capacity. The Minnesota Department of Transportation is involved in all construction projects that will impact the traveling public, including runway construction and roadway improvements. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency works with MAC Environment Department on issues such as noise and groundwater runoff. The Minnesota Environmental Quality Board has the 131 06/20/2006 final authority in approving Environmental Impact Statements and other environmental documents related to the MSP. 9 r3~ ITEM 2 MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Leqve, Manager -Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs SUBJECT: UPDATE ON RUNWAY 17 190-DEGREE DEPARTURE HEADING DATE: September 6, 2006 At the July 19, 2006 NOC meeting Mr. Carl Rydeen, FAA MSP Tower Manager, addressed the Committee regarding the technical considerations related to airspace use/design and departures off Runway 17 at MSP in the context of the 190-degree departure heading. Mr. Rydeen informed the Committee that the 200-degree heading test began on June 19, 2006 and reported that it appears the 200-degree heading will work and that FAA anticipates implementation of the heading. However, given the minor 10-degree shift from the 190-degree heading to the 200-degree heading, Burnsville residents under the 190-degree heading departure track have reported minimal change with the use of the 200-degree heading. As a result, the City of Burnsville remains equally concerned with the 200-degree heading and the continued concentration of overflights over northeast Burnsville. FAA's position at the July 19'h NOC meeting was that a 200-degree heading is the furthest extent of the Runway 17 westerly departure heading fan that is available during southeast operational flows at MSP. The NOC expressed concern over FAA's position and a hope that the FAA and the City of Burnsville would work together to address the concerns of the residents impacted by the departure heading. Burnsville City officials stated their intent to meet with FAA officials hopefully to identify a workable resolution; however, the city continues to explore its legal options. At the August 9, 2006 MAC Finance Development and Environment Committee meeting, MAC Commissioners heard testimony from Burnsville Mayor Elizabeth Kautz and State Senator ~Iliam Belanger. Following those comments, MAC Commissioner McKasy requested that MAC staff continue to work with the City and the FAA to ensure that the concerns and input from the City are considered in accordance with the applicable FAA regulations and environmental documentation relative to Runway 17 departures. On August 29, 2006 Mr. Tom Hansen, Burnsville Deputy City Manager, and MAC staff met with Mr. Rydeen to discuss possible options for addressing Burnsville's concerns. MAC staff shared the MAC's concerns with Mr. Rydeen. Mr. Rydeen extended an invitation to Mr. Hansen to come and express the City's concerns at a future FAA tower supervisors meeting. Mr. Rydeen also offered to address Burnsville residents on the operational issues. FAA's position remains that these operations are in compliance with previous environmental documentation, which include a departure heading fan that ranges from a 095-degree heading on the east side to a 285-degree heading on the west side of Runway 17. The FAA has determined that this departure fan provides FAA Air Traffic Control (ATC) the flexibility to utilize the respective headings within the departure fan in 5-degree increments as they determine appropriate. Mr. Rydeen will address MAC Commissioners at the September 6, 2006 Finance, Development and Environment Committee meeting regarding the technical considerations associated with the use of the 190/200 degree heading off Runway 17 at MSP. l~ At the September 20, 2006 NOC meeting staff will provide an update to Committee members regarding this topic and discussions to date. 3~ ITEM 5 MEMORANDUM TO: MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC) FROM: Chad E. Legve, Manager -Aviation Noise and Satellite Programs SUBJECT: 2007 NOC WORK PLAN ELEMENTS DATE: September 6, 2006 At the September 20, 2006 NOC meeting discussions will begin regarding possible elements of the 2007 NOC Work Plan. Fina! member comments and ideas will be sought at the November 15, 2006 NOC m eeting in an effort to finalize the 2007 NOC Work Plan. MAC staff provides the following for consideration as possible 2007 NOC efforts: Part 150 Implementation2 • Updates on Part 150 Litigation and Associated Developments • Develop Part 150 Program Mitigation Implementation Measures as Appropriate MSP Noise Program Specific Efforts • Review of Runway Use System Implementation • Assessment of Runway 17/35 Operations • Review Runway End Departure Turn Point Procedure Compliance on Runway 12L • Review and Implementation of Modified Voluntary MSP Nighttime Operations Agreement with Operators • Review of Possible Aircraft Procedures at M SP to Reduce Noise • Review Status of FAA Center of Excellence/PARTNER Initiatives Continued Review of Public Input • Continue to Review Input Received from the Public Input Meetings as Possible Agenda Items Please consider the above efforts in preparation for a preliminary 2007 NOC Work Plan discussion at the September 20, 2006 NOC meeting. Final discussion and consideration of work plan elements will occur at the November 15, 2006 NOC meeting when the 2007 NOC Work Plan is finalized. ~ It is important to note that the Part 150 implementation elements are ongoing efforts that could span multiple years. i~ ~~' ' Neighborhood: t,~' 1 ~ : Test Areas Combined ~4 a November 1, 2004-May 24, 2005 >, .. ~~: Number of Sales '` ~; ' , 135 y t ~ - R ..:.. ~~ . ~~` ~ Avg Sales Price `' ~~'~ ' ' .,., $306,544 n~,~ ~ _,~.~ x .. e Median Sales Price.J __ $267, 500 ~~~ ~' Af~ ~. f [~ Avg DUM 48 ~r~' r-~~ ~~~' _' _Median DOM J 35 November 1, 2005-May 24, 2006 Number of'Sales f a ~ a~.. ~ 100 ~~ . <_T~ Avg .Sales Price $316,564 Median Sales Price _- ' $264, 900 Avg DOM 60 Median DOM 54 ~,:. . Prepared by the Southern Twin Cities Association of REALTORSfor the City of Eagan. k~; ~. .. Based on data from the RMLS, Inc.' and covers'`sold, single-family homes -June 6, 2046. .. , /3[~ ^Y L ~ Neighborhood: ~=- Total City of Eagan rc'>~ f h ;November 1, 2004-May 24, 2005 ~., ..; '. Y--:... '. J.~.. ,( '~~._ -__ Number of Sales { :__ ~~ ' 331 4~`~ ~ ,r .. ~ Avg Sales Price ~ 'z ~.:~ ~ , $330,454 .. ,:r: , -' ~~x ... ; ~. ,~~, Median Sales Price ~ ,A '" $285 000 } ~_ ~, ~ Av ~DOM I. Yy _ - ~t~ ~~ ~~ - Median DOM .~-:~, 33 ~, ;, ~ ~.~ .. .';, ;.,~; 4 November 1, 2005-May 24, 2006 Number of Sales. ) 202 Avg Sales Price __ _ _ X328,771 Median Sales Price 285,500 ~~m_ ~~:~;,~ . _ Avg DOM~ 60 Median DOM 54 -s;:__,: ` :Prepared by the Southern Twin Cities Association of REALTORS for the City of Eagan. `'based on data from the RMLS, Inc. and covers sold, single-family homes -June 6, 2006 X37 Neighborhood: ~- i__ Total City of Inver Grove Heights b ~~"'. November 'l, 2004-May 24, 2005 November 1, 2005-May_24, 2006 ,r F ~~V~ =7 .;: _ Number of Sales Number of Sales Y 205 ..~ .255 ~?` 4"., ~. ~. ~~ Avg Sales Price J $270, 503 ~' Avg Sales Price $267.385 ~~'' ~. ~. ., ~~,. s~~+,> r ~F, -r :~ Median Sales Price $218, 500 Avg DOM _~ 65 Median DOM J 51 Median Sales Price _ __ $212,000 Avg DOM ~ 69 ~: Median DOM 52 -::.- ~,., :, ;, ,. ;; ~. ,,;+ ,r::: '~ Prepared by the Southern Twin Cities Association of REALTORS for the City of Eagan. ~2_ ~ Based on data from the RMLS, Inc. and covers sold, single-family homes -June 6, 2006 13£~ ~, ~ J_ Neighborhood: 1 .~_,.-- - Cities of Mendota Heights, Mendota, & Lilydale :~ >-;~; , ~~:, u'~NovemfJer 1, 2004-May 24, 2005 Novernber 1,.2005.-May 24, 2006 ~~, .~ ~; ~~~'~ ~ ~ Number of Sales Number of Sales >. ~'~~ ~ ~ ~ _ 66 ~ _, 84 w °;~~~. s' r.. -a . ~^ ~~1 ~' VY% ~~- i 2 : :` ~ Avg Sales Price a. G . _........ $364, 912 ,r > . ^9k r ~r~? ~ ~~ } ~ - Median Sales Price r "`~ ~~ ~ 314 000 ~~~ ~.~~ „ r.~~.~~: ;~~~:~ . rr s~ ~ Avg D©~ :~ ~: ~5; 79 r ~~' ~;:: ~ Aa. $:~• 1 ~' ~ Median DOM 57 ~~~~" ,: ,- ;> . Avg Sales Price $455,455 Median Sales Price __ :,;~4~ 05,000 Avg DOM -~ 77 Median DOM 52 E~ ~.=:,, ,~~ ,.~~,., ~;~, r ~ -. Prepared by the Southern Twin Cities Association of REALTORS for the City of Eagan. Based on data from the RMLS, Inc. and covers sold, single-family homes -June 6, 2006 ~:> a;: ~'%" > ~y ,~_.:` X39