Admin section L
ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION
1 Letter from Todd Hoffman dated April 6, 1993.
Notice of Neighborhood Meeting on Trunk Highway 101 Trail.
Memo to Mayor and City Council dated April 7, 1993.
1 Letter to Mr. Rental J. Anhorn dated March 31, 1993.
Letter from Mr. Arne Carlson, Governor.
' Letter to Ms. Alyce Fuller dated March 31, 1993.
1 Letter to Mr. Craig Anderson dated March 30, 1993.
Memo to Urban Wetland Coalition dated March 29, 1993.
' Letter from Mr.Robert Obermeyer dated 1
ye ted March 26, 1993.
1 "Eagan News" dated March 1993.
Thank you from Scott Harr.
Thank you and picture from Sojourn received March 31, 1993.
1 Memo to Sergeant Julie Boden dated April 1, 1993.
Letter to Mr. and Mrs. Art Bofferding dated March 26, 1993.
Letter to Deloitte & Touche dated March 19, 1993.
1 Information packet on expansion of Flying Cloud Airport dated March 18, 1993.
1 Letter to Mr. Roger Gustafson dated March 19, 1993.
Stormwater Feasibility Report, Project 93 -6 -3, dated March 1993.
' Note from Ms. Robin Spevacek received April 5, 1993.
1 Letter to Mr. James Hurm dated March 30, 1993.
Letter to Chanhassen Estates Residents dated March 23, 1993.
Memo from Mr. James Dvorak dated March 25, 1993.
1
1
,
1
Administrative Section
1 April 12, 1993
Page 2
1 Letter to Ms. Dottie Rietow dated March 26, 1993.
I Memo Urban Wetland Coalition dated March 22, 1993.
H.R.A. Accounts Payable dated March 22, 1993.
1 H.R.A. Accounts Payable dated April 12, 1993.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CITYOF
0‘ CHANHASSEN
• •
6 90 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
April 6, 1993
1
Re: Trunk Highway 101 Trail Neighborhood Informational Meeting
Project No. 88 -22B -6 1
Dear Property Owner:
The City of Chanhassen is currently considering the construction of a bituminous trail along
the west side of Trunk Highway 101 (TH 101) from South Shore Drive to Pleasant View
Road.
Since resident input will be an important part of our further consideration of this project,
the City is requesting your attendance at a neighborhood informational meeting for the
project. This second meeting has been scheduled to insure all residents have sufficient
opportunity to voice their opinions in this regard. The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on
Tuesday. April 20. 1993 at Chanhassen City Hall. The meeting will include a brief
presentation of the proposed trail construction and will provide time for residents to ask
questions and voice their support /opposition for the project.
We hope that you will be available to attend the meeting and help us in our further
evaluation of this project. If you otherwise have any questions regarding the project or
would like to schedule a time for me to meet with you at your home, please feel free to call
me at 937 -1900.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN ,
Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
TH:ktm 1
c: Charles Folch, City Engineer 1
City Council Administrative Packet (4/12/93)
1
�� PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
_ CC. A ., (q IQ/
y
1
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1 CARVER COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
1 TRUNK HIGHWAY 101 TRAIL
PROJECT NO 88 -22B -6
The City of Chanhassen is currently considering the construction of a bituminous trail along
Y g g
the west side of Trunk Highway 101 (TH 101) from South Shore Drive to Pleasant View
' Road.
' Since resident input will be an important part of our further consideration of this project,
the City is requesting your attendance at a neighborhood informational meeting for the
project. The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday. April 15 1993 at Chanhassen
' City Hall. The meeting will include a brief presentation of the proposed trail construction
and will provide time for residents to ask questions and voice their support/opposition for
the project.
1 We hope that you will be available to attend the meeting and help us in our further
evaluation of this project. If you otherwise have any questions regarding the project, please
feel free to call me at 937 -1900.
Todd Hoffman, Park and Recreation Director
937 -1900
(Publish in the Chanhassen Villager 4/8/93)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4,,ta.
q- .1-13 CITYOF CC
4 CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
MEMORANDUM 1
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Don Ashworth, City Manager
h' g
DATE: April 7, 1993 1
SUBJ: Finalize Pay Compensation Plan
The update process for the compensation plan includes the preparation of goals for each of the
departments, submitting such to the City Council for adoption/revision, and authorizing an
adjustment to the manager's compensation. The goal process that we adopted was one of having
this office continuously review each of the departmental goals. Staff is currently placing time
lines on each of the departmental listings. In addition, we have established an on -going process
by which staff can receive feedback from Council members regarding current and long -range
work items. I would propose that we close out the Pay Compensation Plan process and approve
a salary adjustment for the manager equal to the average offered to all other employees (3% of
midpoint). I will process this adjustment unless the Council directs otherwise. The Mayor and
I have typically met to discuss departmental/administrative goals. I am assuming that process
will occur in the near future.
1
1
1
1
is
t PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
1 CITYOF
i
CHANIIASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1 March 31, 1993
Mr. Rental J. Anhorn, Limnologist
Metropolitan Council
Mears Park Centre
230 East 5th Street
St. Paul, MN 55101 -1634
Dear Mr. Anhorn:
I received your March 26, 1993, letter concerning the Metropolitan Council's Lake Quality
Monitoring Program. I was excited to hear about your program since I believe there is an
' excellent fit between your program and Chanhassen's Surface Water Management Program.
As you may be aware, Chanhassen embarked upon a surface water management program nearly
3 years ago. It is a three- phased effort designed to improve upon the city's already impressive
wetland protective measures, develop a storm water management plan, and develop a water
quality protection program. What is possibly unique about the Chanhassen program is that all
' three elements are being undertaken concurrently with what we believe to be significant
improvements in efficiency and quality of protection. The planning stage of the program is
nearly completed and it has already spun off several products that are in use, including a new
wetlands protection program and ordinance, and a Best Management Practices Handbook for the
city.
The Chanhassen program is funded through a surface water utility that generates funds on an
annual basis. We have already appropriated approximately $5,000 per year for water quality
testing but have not yet had an opportunity to organize the program. I feel that your approach,
which involves community residents, is consistent with what we had envisioned. We believe that
involving area residents is important since they are the key to resolving many surface water
issues, and that involving them in this matter seems to be an excellent way of educating the
I community. While I have not yet had an opportunity to consult with the Surface Water
Management Task Force or City Council on the appropriation of funds, I anticipate gaining their
support since we have already appropriated some funds for the purpose. Because it seems much
' more efficient for us to piggyback onto the Metropolitan Council's efforts rather than establish
our own, I will be recommending that we support funding for Chanhassen's participation in the
n
t of PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Mr. Rental J. Anhorn I
March 31, 1993
Page 2
Metropolitan Council's Monitoring Program. The information that will be gathered will be put 1
to good use in helping to direct our water quality improvement efforts. I am therefore
anticipating requesting that you coordinate annual testing for Lake Minnewashta, Lake Lucy, '
Lake Ann, Lotus Lake, Lake Susan, Lake Riley and Christmas Lake. Christmas, Rice Marsh and
Lake Riley are not located entirely within Chanhassen. We would therefore believe it to be
appropriate to have the costs of establishing a monitoring program for these lakes shared with I
adjoining communities. However, if this is not possible, we may be willing to assume the burden
ourselves. Further discussion on these lakes may be necessary. I should also note that our
participation will be based upon your agreement to provide data to the city as it is generated.
I
However, I am requesting your assistance in coordinating these efforts with the adjoining
communities.
It is my understanding that this is the second year of the Metropolitan Council's Monitoring 1
Program. I was informed that last year your contacts were directly with the Riley Purgatory
Creek Watershed District, who declined to participate. I view this as unfortunate; however, you
should be aware of the fact that the watershed does not represent Chanhassen in its entirety, nor
did they ever contact the City of Chanhassen regarding a potential desire to participate in your
program. Since we will be funding the program through the use of local resources, we would
I
expect you to deal directly with us in the future.
S' cerely, 1
i } dx,d____;d i (Za,i—Z
Paul Krauss, AICP
Planning Director
PK: '
/
c: City Council
1
SWMP Task Force
Ismael Martinez, Bonestroo Engineering II Planning Commission
1
1
1
1
I
WArir..lid METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mears Park Centre. 230 East Fifth Street, St Paul, MN 55101 -1634 612 291 -6359 FAX 612 291 -6550 TTY 612 291 -0904
1
1 March 26, 1993
I Paul Krause
Planning Director
City of Chanhassen
I 690 Coulter Drive
Channhassen, MN 55317
1 Dear Mr. Krause:
As you may already be aware, the Metropolitan Council has initiated a citizen - assisted lake
I monitoring program for 1993. This year's monitoring, which involves 34 lake sites in eleven
watersheds is just getting underway. Although, we have yet to complete the first monitoring
season to judge the program's success, I am beginning the process of developing a 1994 budget
I and will need to estimate the number of lakes which may be involved in the program next year.
The purpose of this letter is to determine if your watershed management organization (WMO) or
governing agency might participate in our volunteer monitoring program in 1994 and, if so, which
I lakes might be involved. Please understand that your response will not be a commitment of any
kind. We will not request a firm commitment of participation for next year until late this
summer. Therefore, you will be able to observe the success of this years program, as well as
1 define your own budget and monitoring needs before committing to 1994.
The lake monitoring program is designed to provide lake and watershed managers with good lake
1 quality data as well as involve local citizens. As was the case a year ago, we envision that WMOs
and local governing agencies will be the primary liaison for the citizens who do the sampling and
the Council staff who coordinate the collection and analysis of samples. Involving citizens serves
1 the dual role of substantially reducing the cost of obtaining data and at the same time, involving
local residents in water quality issues.
I Citizen volunteers, using simple field collection and preservation techniques, can be trained to
collect credible data. The sampling program involves collecting samples from the lake surface at
bi- weekly intervals throughout the summer (mid -April through mid - October), for a total of 14
I sampling visits. Volunteers collect water to be analyzed for total phosphorus, total Kjeldahl
nitrogen and chlorophyll, and measure surface temperature and water transparency with a Secchi
disk. Water samples are processed and then stored in the citizens' home freezers for later pick -up
I by Council staff, and volunteers use inexpensive sampling equipment provided by the Council as
part of the overall cost per lake site. Council staff will also collect occasional samples for quality
assurance. We anticipate the cost to the WMOs or local governing agency in 199g,l,v&bA
I $1,000 per lake site per summer which includes equipment, lab analyses, as well as receiving a
copy of the data and a report. The cost will be slightly less the sampling equipm� ttwais ®l ��
acquired for participating in this year's program.
1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
1 age Recycled Paper
AAA
METROPOL CO UNCI '
Mears Park Centre. 230 East Frfth Street, S t Paul, MIv' 55101 -1634 612 291 -6359 FAX 612 291 -6550 TTY 612 291 -0904
Council staff will assist when needed, but we feel the WMOs or local overnin agencies benefit
g g g
most from the involving its citizens in the monitorin process. The Council will train the citizen
volunteers, collect the samples for analysis, provide quality assurance sampling, and report the '
sample results to the WMOs and local governing agencies.
Because the Council's budgeting process goes through many approval levels, it is important that I
receive your response soon. Please send me (or phone in) a list of lakes that you might include
in the 1994 program by April 14, 1993.
If any of this needs further clarification, please feel free to call me at 291 -6449. I am looking '
forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely, ,
Randall J. Anhorn
Limnologist
1
1
r
1
Recycled Paper 1
STATE OF MINNESOTA ee A cK -
tF - £, 3 = OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
I ~ 130 STATE CAPITOL
`� - r_ s SAINT PAUL 55155
I ARNE H CARLSON
GOVERNOR
I Mayor Donald Chmiel
City of Chanhassen
1 690 Coulter Drive
Post Office Box 147
Chanhassen, MN 55317
1
Dear Mayor Chmiel:
I
Thank ou for contacting office with your concern regarding the level of
Y g m Y
transportation funding in Minnesota. I am happy to explain my position on this very
1 , important issue.
Although I earlier indicated that my administration would be supportive of a gasoline tax
I increase, the uncertain economic impacts of President Clinton's proposed national energy
tax on Minnesota businesses and consumers have caused me to reassess my position.
I Various independent analyses show that the Clinton proposal could increase the price of
gasoline by as much as 18 cents per gallon by July, 1996. My firm belief that
Minnesotans should not be burdened with a state gas tax increase on top of a possible
I significant increase in federal taxes resulted in my decision not to propose or support a
tax increase for transportation funding during the 1993 legislative session.
I I clearly recognize that there are critical needs in the area of rural and metro transit and
in the maintenance of our highways. But as we pause to assess the impacts of the
President's tax proposal, Minnesota will still spend more than $670 million for state
I highway construction projects over the next two years and an additional $320 million for
highway maintenance and preservation. Furthermore, my supplemental budget proposal
calls for an additional $25 million over the 1994 -1995 biennium for rural and urban
1 transit improvements.
The economic challenge I have put forth to all areas of state government, including
1 transportation, to live within existing means does not preclude Minnesota from matching
and utilizing all federal transportation aid expected to be available during 1994 -1995
biennium. I realize that without additional transportation funding by the 1996 -1997
I biennium, Minnesota would lack the financial resources to match all available federal
funds. I have pledged to revisit the issue of transportation funding in the 1995 legislative
I session. At that time, our state's ability to capitalize on federal funding will receive
consideration.
1
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
1 ice, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Seett675
I am very sensitive to the potential loss of jobs in your industry. I am also concerned
that an increase in the gas tax could negatively impact jobs in other industries. I am
proud of the accomplishments and strategic initiatives my administration has made in
creating and sustaining an improved business climate in Minnesota. Holding the line on
property, sales and income taxes, consecutively closing budget gaps without new taxes,
reforming workers' compensation laws, providing tax relief and seed capital for small and
expanding businesses in Greater Minnesota, are all examples of my administration's
commitment to creating and maintaining jobs throughout the state.
Mn /DOT will conduct and contract for the 1993 state highway construction program
g Y ram as P g
planned because it is not impacted by a decision to hold the line on the current level of
state transportation funding in the 1993 Legislature. I am confident that Mn /DOT,
under the leadership of James Denn, will fulfill its commitment to deliver a safe,
effective and efficient transportation system to the citizens of Minnesota.
Warmest regards,
1
ARNE H. CARLSON 1
Governor
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 CITYOF
ClIANIIASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
March 31, 1993
1
Ms. Alyce Fuller
' Secretary
Red Cedar Cove Townhome Association
Board of Directors
' 7075 Red Cedar Cove
Excelsior, MN 55331
Re: Lake St. Joe to Lake Minnewashta Waterway Crossing
Project File No. 90-15
1 Dear Ms. Fuller:
I have received your letter dated March 27, 1993 concerning issues surrounding the Lake
1 St. Joe /Lake Minnewashta waterway crossing. In general, I can empathize with your
concerns for how the site will look upon its completion this summer; however, I feel it is
important that I elaborate on some of the recent history of this issue and some of the
specific issues raised in your letter.
First of all, the culvert crossing between Lake St. Joe and Lake Minnewashta was planned
to be replaced as a part of the Minnewashta Parkway improvement project. Our project
engineers, Engelhardt & Associates, work very closely with the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources and the Watershed District during the project design phase and permit
approval process to determine the proper size culvert to meet flood protection requirements
and culvert elevation to maintain the normal lake level elevations for Lake St. Joe and Lake
Minnewashta as established and regulated by the Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources. Following the installation of this culvert, it became apparent that the existing
channel from the culvert to Lake Minnewashta would need to be re- graded to allow for
proper grade and properly confine the channel flow area.
In early October, Mr. Louis Guthmueller, the President of your Red Cedar Cove Townhome
Association, contacted Al Larson of Engelhardt & Associates regarding the waterway. Mr.
Guthmueller explained that the waterway in the recent past had very little flows going
1
t« PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
Ms. Alyce Fuller ,
March 31, 1993
Page 2 1
old culvert which greatly restricted flows through the culvert. Mr. Guthmueller requested
that the waterway be dealt with in one of two alternatives. The first alternative involved
grading the channel to a maximum width of 18 inches, lining the channel with a fabric and
placing rock along the channel to create a "babbling brook" effect. The other alternative
was to enclose the whole waterway from the road to the trail bridge crossing with a pipe and
cover the pipe with topsoil and establish turf. Both of these alternatives were discussed with
both the project engineer and representatives from the City's Maintenance Division and it
was unanimously concluded that the first alternative could not feasible be achieved since
flow from the large pipe under Minnewashta Parkway could not always be contained within
a small 18 -inch wide channel. Therefore, the alternative of enclosing the waterway in a pipe
was considered the preferred long -term solution.
In evaluating the option of enclosing the waterway and pipe, it was obvious that some
consideration would have to be given for the low -lying area of the townhome association
outlot which I understand was a damp soil area for a good portion of the year. In discussing
this with staff and the project engineer, it became apparent that the elevation of the outlot
would need to be raised with fill material. This was conveyed to Mr. Guthmueller in the
late fall. In discussing this matter with Mr. Guthmueller, it was agreed that if this work was
to be done, it should occur during the winter time when soils would be frozen, thus 1
minimizing disturbance by heavy equipment and it is also a time of year when the channel
would typically have lower flows.
Shortly after our discussions, the City became aware of a source of free fill material that
could be used to re -grade the townhouse association outlot. Mr. Guthmueller was again
contacted and gave the "OK" to bring in the fill material. In my discussions with Mr.
Guthmueller, I explained to him that the City would initially rough grade the fill material
and then finish grade the area in the spring in a manner so as to allow for proper drainage
of the outlot following the installation of the channel pipe. I also explained that if excess
material remained, some minor berming could be constructed on the outlot at locations
designated in the fiedl by board members.
In early December I received a letter from Mr. Guthmueller confirming that the board
members of the association supported enclosing the waterway pipe since there was no
feasible way to create a picturesque "babbling brook" effect with the channel. Shortly
thereafter, the City Council authorized a change order to the Minnewashta Parkway project
to allow for the installation of pipe through the waterway channel. The work was conducted
by City forces in order to insure that the work was constructed during winter months and
keep costs to a minimum.
In conducting this work, as expected, and discussed previously with Mr. Guthmueller, a few
trees were going to be lost. I explained to Mr. Guthmueller that during the late spring or
1
Ms. Alyce Fuller
1 March 31, 1993
Page 3
early summer following the fine g e grading and restoration of the outlot area and general
' completion of the work in the area, that the project engineer and staff would meet with the
association in the field to discuss locations for the planting of new trees from the list of bid
trees for the Minnewashta Parkway project and replace those that were lost due to the
' installation of the pipe. Fine grading of the outlot could not be performed during the winter
months under frozen conditions nor can it be conducted now during the spring thaw when
the soils are very saturated with the frost thaw occurring. It was mutually understood with
' Mr. Guthmueller that final grading, cleanup and restoration would not be completed until
late spring or early summer, pending weather conditions.
All throughout the process of resolving this issue the City has attempted to maintain close
communication with your association president, Mr. Guthmueller, and we will continue to
do so until the matter is completely resolved. Given that this work was completed under
' winter conditions, I have no doubts that some cleaning up of spoiled material, riprap and
general cleanup of the area will need to be completed in late spring /early summer when soil
moisture conditions permit. I assure you the City has every intention of cleaning up and
1 conducting final restoration of your area.
I would recommend that a field meeting be held at the site with City staff, project engineer
and the association board member representatives present to discuss final grading of the
outlot, cleanup items and any other items you wish to discuss concerning this work. I will
contact you to set up this meeting in a few weeks when weather conditions are more
1 favorable to clearly evaluate the site. In the meantime, by this letter I am also requesting
the project engineer, William R. Engelhardt & Associates, and the City Maintenance Street
Superintendent remain off the association property and that contact be made with one of
the board members at least 24 hours prior to accessing the property. Again, I will contact
you in a few weeks or so to set up this field meeting. Thank you for your letter. Your
cooperation and patience in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely,
1 CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Charles D. Folch, P.E.
1 City Engineer
CDF:ktm
1
1
Ms. Alyce Fuller 1
March 31, 1993
Page 4
c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
Mike Wegler, Street Superintendent
Bill Engelhardt, William R. Engelhardt & Associates
Mayor Don Chmiel
City Council Administrative Packet (4/12/93)
Louis Guthmueller, 7095 Red Cedar Cove, Excelsior, MN 55331
Jim Hofer, 7098 Red Cedar Cove, Excelsior, MN 55331
D. Prillaman, 7064 Red Cedar Cove, Excelsior, MN 55331
S. Maney, 7078 Red Cedar Cove, Excelsior, MN 55331
C. Shelby, 7068 Red Cedar Cove, Excelsior, MN 55331 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CITYOF
1
CHANIIASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
March 30, 1993
1
Mr. Craig L. Anderson
7507 West 77th Street
Chaska, MN 55318
Dear Mr. Anderson:
1. Mayor Don Chmiel discussed the concerns raised in your letter of March 19, 1993, in regard to
park acquisition west of Lake Minnewashta with me. Labeling the west side of Lake
Minnewashta as park deficient is an undisputed designation. Rest assured that the city has
identified the need for a park in this area; beyond that however, a special fund entitled "The West
Minnewashta Fund" has been established to assist in the procurement of a neighborhood park in
this area. This park is to be centrally located along the Parkway, and at least 10 acres in size.
1 The current balance in this fund is $150,000.
The Boley property was not considered as a site for acquisition due to its topography, and the
' fact that it is located south of the central Minnewashta district and borders Victoria on two sides.
Four parcels north of Lake St. Joe are currently being considered for acquisition. The city has
initiated preliminary discussions with one of these owners, and has been approached by realtors
' representing a second parcel. The acquisition of park property in this area is a high priority, and
the process to facilitate this purchase is underway.
' If you have additional questions in this regard, please contact me.
Sincerely,
Todd Hoffman
Park and Recreation Director
pc: Don Ashworth, City Manager
Mayor and City Council
Park and Recreation Commission
r
s PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
c , / cc , �,,Me
JM"CO r, 'MK N LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. MULE. rWNKCn
RDIERT L HOFFMAN ALM1 i. KILDCW
JACKr pALr ATTORNEYS AT LAW KAThJt M. NEWMAN
C. K@•NETH O NCOREN MICHAEL E. 41ARON
OE fALD 11 rf rr LL CO M ITY I KnottA0
ALLAN E. MVLLIOAN GARY A. VAN OLIVE•
.IAM1$ C• IR+CKEI .N DANIEL l SOWLES
1
EDWARD J OMSCOLL 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER T9FOM vLAfitCYIeH
/
JCNN D FULLA7IR 7P00 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH TIMOTHY d MA
HUNK
*MAT
K I SOTO AIM M. ANDERSON
WAY BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 66491.11 O4 DONNA L. ROIAC
CHAALES S MODLLL MICHAEL W RCHLEY
CIMIrTOM+tn v DICTZCN TELEPHONE 1812)83E-3800 M.CHALL A. ROSERTION A, GRAY
JOHri R noun F AX 0119 R98-3:133 R98-3:133 CAR
LIMA Y A RINNEr,I
ND H. ntn l I
TNDMA° ► OTOLTMAI IK IMNNCN K. MLCAMDMpvC
MK:MA[L C. JACKMAN GHRIF'O►NCR J NARKIRTNAI
JOHN E. DIEHL W ILLIMI C CRIFFITH, JR,
JON* Mr itRZfW6 I tITII IN J. FTLrr ENIIAOCN
THOMAS J FLYNN DANIEL W VCSS 1
JAM[e P. QUINN MARK A. nom Taco I. Ant/MAr+ JOIW n IAA
?STEM R. SECS JAMES K. MARTIN
JERCME N, KAmKI THOMAS J SCYMOVR
OEAAID L MK MICIIACL J. PAITI%
JOHN S. LUNDCIVI*T F#[D[RCK K. HAWIR 1.1
DATLE HOLM Dq+$tRTo • MARY L. Yee
THOMAS t. HLMMRLY, JR. LARRY D. MARTIN
JOIW A. COTTER' AANE I MINER
S,ATA At t Rf,TMWNL►R MARCY R. KRE+SMAJN
MAIIIft 1 ►, LOLA
OF COVNOIL
.EIIM C MDIRSO
IT H
JOSEM iTit
MEMORANDUM AL00 ADMIT'[D n W ItCCNSN
TO: Urban Wetland Coalition 1
FROM: Mike Robertson
• DATE: March 29, 1993 II
RE: Update on Legislation
Good new to report this week on our legislative efforts. Prospects II
now appear good that legislation extending the interim program will be
passed this year by the Minnesota Legislature. i
A bill extending the interim program and delaying the implementation
of the new rules has been introduced in the Senate by Senator Joe II Bertram and in the House by Representative Jeff Bertram (H.F. 1405 and
S.F. 1304). The interim program would be extended until March 1,
1994, thug allowing time for review of the new program by the
legislature and an opportunity for the legislature to take action in II the 1994 session. Representative Willard Munger, author of the
Wetlands Conservation Act, has indicated that he will support an
extension of the program, but will not allow any further changes in II the law this year. The House bill passed out of Representative
Bertram's Agriculture Subcommittee on Friday, March 26. At that
meeting, Ron Harnack indicated support for an extension until January
and distributed a fact sheet comparing the interim and permanent
II
programs (attached).
The bill will be heard in the House Agriculture Committee today, II Monday, March 28, 1993 at 10:00 a.m., and possibly in a hearing in the
Senate Agriculture Committee from 12:00 noon to 2:00 p.m. It is
expected that the bill will be re- referred to the Environment II committees.
we will keep you informed of further developments.
Attachment II
MAR:CK3s
II
II
.f •
s
I r.,
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
in t;a Comparison of Interim and Permanent Programs
•. •o
1 . ter & Soii
w
• rtes
1
I INTERIM PERMANENT
Who's in Charge? Many local government units Greater MN: Counties /cities or
(LGUs) can accept responsibility, their designates will provide
I but are not penalized if they don't. 'seamless" coverage. In Metro:
There are parts of the state where WMOs, cities or towns for their
jurisdictions overlap, end also areas designates) are required to develop
I where no LGU has accepted
responsibility. Also, there is clear jurisdictional boundaries for
the entire metro area. State
questionable authority over mining agencies will act as LGU for
projects and projects on state land. projects on state land.
I .
Exemptions Exemptions for agriculture, forestry Ag•tand is defined and ag use must
and development are being continue for 10 years to qualify for
improperly interpreted resulting in ag exemptions. Development and
I land use conversions under these infrastructure approvals and
exemptions (see examples). forestry activities are clarified.
1
No -Loss There is no 'deminimus" amount or Deminimus and no-loss categories
1 no -loss category; minor projects establish some minor projects
may be held up during review. excluded from regulation.
I n for
Compensation Only Permanent Wetland Preserves den o re s m e nsatio plans through
Easement program is available.
appeal process. Enacts Wetland
I Preservation Areas which provides
possible tax relief for wetland
owners.
1 Appeals /Notification Landowner and /or affected parties Appeals process established
can only appeal LGU decisions through SWSR for landowner and
through court system, affected parties who disagree with
LGU decision.
Project Review No requirement for Technical Three member Technical
I Evaluation Panel. Most have been Evaluation Panel can be called
used only after the fact, when a upon by Landowner or LGU to
problem has arisen. make scientific determinations,
I _ thus minimizing disputes.
- more •
1
1
WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT r
Comparison of Interim and Permanent Programs 1
(Continued)
1
INTERIM PERMANENT 1
Wetland Replacement The avoid, minimize and then The rules establish specific criteria
Sequencing replace requirement is and tests for sequencing, Including
I
inconsistently applied from one a findings of fact and alternatives
LOU to another. analysis.
Replacement Ratio Wetland function, values and type Replacement will be based on
not often considered; replacement function and value 'assessment to
of acreage is only requirement. No ensure 'no -net loss` of acres and
credit for restoration of partially public values. Credit for
drained areas. restoration of partially drained
basins is possible.
Integrity /Quality No monitoring or deed recording Monitoring period and construction
1
required to ensure long -term standards insure perpetual
viability of replaced wetland. existence and functioning of
replaced wetland. 1
Wetland Banking No state wetland banking system. State wetland banking program is
established which provides a
practical off -site replacement
option for landowners impacting
wetlands. i
Training Basic administrative training and BWSR will offer extensive
I
materials for Interim are in place. administrative training to LGUs
aft@t the Perrnangnt Rugia
finaljxed. 1
4.1.1 onefM
1
1
1
1
1
1
EXAMPLES
1) City XXXX gave an agricultural exemption (+It1) to themselves on a piece of recently
purchased city property that contained a 10 to 15 acre type 3 wetland which is now
being drained without replacement for a housing development. This valuable wetland
1 on the edge of the Minnesota River Valley provided flood . control, wildlife habitat, and
recreational opportunities to the neighborhood surrounding the wetland area. The
Permanent Rule would have saved this wetland, or as a last resort, required
1 replacement as the ag exemptions are not allowed where land will be converted to
some other use within 10 years.
1 2) In XXXX city, the LGU gave an agricultural exemption to a private developer, who had
recently purchased the property, who then immediately filled several wetlands totalling
about 2 acres without replacement for a housing development. Again, the Permanent
' Rule language cited in example 1 would have required avoidance or replacement.
3) In XXXX county a landowner proposed to use an exempt wetland as replacement for
a non - exempt wetland that was to be filled. Because the landowner threatened to
simply drain the exempt basin f loss is prohibited d It the LGU
Permanent was
Ru e
without any option. This type
o
r which prohibits using exempt wetlands that are drained /filled for replacement for 10
years.
1 4) In XXXX county a landowner building a hunting cabin proposed to exercise the
silvicuitural exemption #15 as he was planning to cut down several trees for the
building site. Since the statute language is unclear about how much timber harvesting
' constitutes a silvicultural operation, the LGU Issued the exemption rather than face
a legal challenge, and the wetland was filled for a permanent road without
1 replacement. The Permanent Rules state that this exemption applies to roads
constructed for the primary purpose of silvicultural operations.
1 5) In XXXX county a mining company seeking to expand operations had to get approvals
from two LGUs for the unavoidable wetland Impacts (the project bordered on two
jurisdictions) and also had to secure approval from the DNR for other aspects of the
' project. Under the Permanent program one jurisdictional LGU is identified and for
permitted mining projects the DNR will act as the LGU thus providing one -stop
comprehensive project review.
1
1
1
1
1
LARKIN, HOFFMADN, DALT & LINDGREN, LTD. 1
Attorneys at Law
1500 Northwestern Financial Center
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55431
Telephone (612)835 -3800
FAX Numbers (612)896 -3333 or 896 -3265
MULTIPLE MESSAGE COVER SHEET
DATE: 'M'1C7.C.'h J /9 93 PAGES: e (INCLUDING COVER SHEET . 1
FROM: L f JCS /(Z4.4 vCY) FILE NO. /9596 -66
TO THE FOLLOWING 1
NAME: 9 OQ�rL Q�t- �h.PJL. NUMBER: t#'/Lo 0
NAME: 1 J / Q,CL.Q-4. NUMBER: 937- 5 73 9
NAME : (, 3 CZ[ tic �v7 NUMBER $ 77 9 — Q 8 3`A 1
NAME : / C /"Gl �.J NUMBER: 835 - 7O0 '
NAME: li'4 ?7 NUMBER: 755— 09'75 1
NAME : /C-z NUMBER : /0 S/ -- 'yZe7 /off
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** M E S SA0 E * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
err - 5 a-C
1
1
1
1
TAE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS ATTORNEY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY NAKED ABOVE. IF THE READ
OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT TEE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EXPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE TO DELI
IT TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR
COPYING OF THE COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. 1
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE ImmEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE.
AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE To US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE.
THANK YOU.
1
1
Cc / irr e F' : ►�
Barr
Engineering Company
8300 Norman Center Drive
Minneapolis, MN 55437 -1026
Phone: (612) 832-2600
Fax: (612) 835.0186
1
1 March 26, 1993
Mr. Paul Krause
City Planner
City of Chanhassen
690 Coulter Drive
1 Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
Dear Mr. Krause:
Enclosed is a copy of the 1990 -1991 Lake Water Quality Inventory prepared
for the Riley- Purgatory -Bluff Creek Watershed District. After you and /or the
City's consultant has reviewed the information, if you have any questions or
would like to meet to discuss the data, please give either Hal Runke or me a
call.
' As I mentioned to you on the phone, I apologize for not sending this
document to you sooner. This program has been in existence since 1972 and I
believe that you have copies of all of the other data collected by the District.
' You also mentioned that the City's consultant has been collecting water quality
data. I would appreciate receiving a copy of this data, if available, so that
we can incorporate this information into the data that the District has since
1 1972.
Sincerely,
1
Robert C. Oberm r
c: Mr. Conrad Fiskness
Mr. Ray Haik
1
1
1
EAGAN NEWS RECE 'EUU 1
AP u? 1993
CITY ur t,r,Hrar7RSSEN 1
MARCH 1993
CITY OF EAGAN VOLUME 16 NO.1
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD PHONE: 681 -4600 1
EAGAN, MN 55122 TDD #: 454 -8535
1
THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
1
1993 EAGAN ARBOR DAY PROGRAM INSIDE
The City of Eagan will be celebrating its seventh annual Arbor Day Program on Cable TV Update 2 1
Saturday, April 24th. This year's program will be held at Captain Dodd Park on Country Road Construction.., 4
View Drive, in the southeast section of Eagan. City Tree Sale 6
Festivities will begin at 9:00 a.m. with an Arbor Day Proclamation by the Mayor and Dog Licenses 8
II
II
unveiling of the 1993 Arbor Month Poster Contest winner from Eagan's schools. This will Library Notes 8
be followed by a tree planting demonstration and the planting of trees in the park by Smoke Detectors 10
program participants.
Water Conservation 11
Each child will receive a free Arbor Month poster, balloons, and a seedling to plant Hero highlights 12 1
at home. Participants will also be treated to free refreshments.
Individuals, families, and community organizations are encouraged to join in this
special tree planting and community Arbor Day celebration. Participants will not only have
1
fun but learn something about tree care, while helping to beautify one of Eagan's park and CITY MAP
green space areas.
Those wishing to participate in the program are asked to register with the Eagan The City of Eagan map which is 1
Parks and Recreation Department at 681 -4660, TDD phone: 454 -8535. sponsored by the Eagan Lions Club in
conjunction with the City of Eagan will be
distributed with the telephone books in 1
March by the Volunteer Fire Department.
p.. G ,q The map contains updated information
� regarding zip codes, streets, parks, recre-
ational activities and school district bound- 1
L n � aries within the city.
(.� (�( Although these boundaries are up-
E ¥ to -date, anyone purchasing or building a 1
A A home in the city should contact the school
R T H D district in which their home is located to
confirm that the district listed on the map 1
is the correct one. By doing this, confusion
EARTH DAY 1993 or misinformation will be avoided.
The City of Eagan is sponsoring an Earth Day Festival on Sunday, April 25, 1993, 1
from 1 p.m. - 4 p.m. at Thomas Lake Park.
The event is organized to educate and entertain children of all ages. You will learn
about our City's recycling program, the water quality of our local lakes, hear more about
waste reduction and recycling from a magician, learn about birds of prey from a Raptor CITY OF EAGAN
1
Center presentation, experience our parks with fun nature activities and much more. Again Mayor.
this year, we are organizing a walk and also a bike with different distances to choose from Thomas Egan
The Festival is FREE
1
Refreshments will be provided. Councilmembers:
Pat a Shawn
We ask that participants in the walk or bike gather at the park at 12:45 p.m. Sandra ra Masin Ted d Wachter
W
We hope to see you there! 1
1
1 ill ..t i
TREE TIPS .• . )
1
SEVENTH ANNUAL EAGAN TREE SALE. .
Il The Eagan Parks and Recreation Department will be rating ring trees for sale to % 6:
Eagan residents again this spring. Residents interested in purchasing trees are asked ;y; '� .i �
10 fill out the registration form on page 1 and to return it . by snail, to the City of Eagan : ;c4• - . • II; v
iii no Inter than Friday, March 25th i .• r ?r.
A random drawing of registration fortes Will be made by the Eagan Advisory
Parks, Recreation, and Natural ResourcesComm issionat their Aptii ist meeting. The : PERMITS AVAILABLE
s u c c e s s f u l registrants will be notified by Mall cif the eitact location and time for Patti) : FOR BOULEVARD
I of the trees on Saturday, May 1st. LANDSCAPING
This year the City will be offering eight varieties of hardwood and evergreen
trees. They are Sugar Maple, Norway Maple, Suunisiit Seedless Ash, American In the interest of promoting commu-
1 Linden, Pin Oak, Radiant Crab, River Birch and Black Hills . Spruce.. With the nitybeautification, the City code allows for
exception of the spruce, all treet . will be bare snot stock. the planting of trees and shrubs within
Quantities will be limited to a total of 750 plants. For this reason, *re will be right-of-ways and boulevards under City
a maximum of two trees per family. permit Permit criteria takes into consider-
Residents desiring additional information may contact the Eagan City Forester ation the location and clearance for under-
at 681 -4300, (TDD phone: 454 -535), between 7:00 a.m. and 3:30 P.M. ground utilities, sidewalks, street design,
schedules for major construction, and ve-
I hiclelpedestrian safety.
Interested parties may obtain a per -
CITY REQUIRES TREE CONTRACTOR LICENSING mit application and instructions from the
I Eagan Municipal Center, 3830 Pilot Knob
If you are planning to hire a professional contractor for fret removal or tree mod, Eagan, MN 55122. Once a permit
maintenance this summer, you should be are that the City requires all tree service application has been received and under -
1 companies to be licensed through the City Clerk's office. This licensing requirement was ground utility locations marked, it will be
put into place in 1990 under an ordinance change adopted by the Eagan City Council. reviewed by the City Forestry and the En-
, The purpose of the ordinance is to protect homeowners, businesses, and other gineering Divisions. If the application is
property owners from the hazards associated with tree removal, stump grinding, chemical approved by the City, a permit will be
I spraying, and other types of tree maintenance work. issued at no cost to the applicant
Under the new ordinance, tree contractors are required to provide the City with proof In some cases, a permit may be de-
of general liability insurance, security bonding, Workers' Compensation Insurance, and hied if, in the opinion of the City, these
ii a commercial pesticide applicator's license. plantings will become a visual obstruction
for vehicle/pedestrian traffic or if the plant-
ing space is too limited because of utilities
I or sidewalk locations.
4
�, If you would like more information
�i'� ty on the boulevard tree planting permit pro -
K "`° - = ,,■ gram, please contact Tom Schuster, Eagan
1 " City Forester, at 681 -4300, TDD phone:
454 -8535.
I As a point of clarification, the ordinance does not pertain to professional landscap- EAGAN GARDEN
CLUB
ing contractors who are hired to do general landscaping work such as sodding, tree and
ii shrub planting, retaining wall construction, or ground cover installation. The Eagan Garden Club Will
At the publication of this newsletter, the following tree maintenance contractors are Bold its annual plant sak from 9 a.m.
II presently licensed with the City of Eagan: •:to 3 p m on Saturday;MayS. The sale
will 1. S & S Tree Specialists, Inc. be held at Trapp Farm Park, Wit=
I 2. A.C. Tree demeans Run Road. Perennials, =It.
3. Davey Tree Expert Company als, and hanging baskets Will be sold..
:Profitsgo to commuzutyprojects. Some
4. The Tree -Stump Company ' advance ours will be taken. For
I Residents and other property owners desiring an up- to-date list of licensed tree • information, call Marcia Easton 4541
maintenance contractors should contact the City of Eagan at 681 -4600 (TDD phone: 454- 6711.
8535. t
1
I ARBOR DAY .
J I
ARBOR SPONSORS RESIDENTS ENCOURAGED TO PLANT TREES
RECOGNIZED While the City is taking on many arbor related projects this year, it is only through 1
The City of Eagan wishes to the dedicated involvement of all City residents that Eagan can truly have a successful Arbor
extend a gracious word of apprecia- Day and Arbor Month. For this reason, the Mayor and City Council are encouraging li
lion to First Bank Fagan and Frank's residents to join in this special celebration by planting trees in the home landscape. Trees
Nursery and Crafts for their contribu- can offer many benefits to the homeowner by providing shade and color and by attracting
lions and support of Arbor Month backyard wildlife and song birds.
programs in the community. This Trees also represent one of the best investments that homeowners can make to I
year the Eagan Forestry Division and increase the value of their property. For example, a Sugar Maple purchased at the Eagan
these two local businesses have joined Tree Sale will cost S22.00. Within five years, the homeowner can expect the tree to increase
in a cooperative partnership to spon- to a diameter of about two inches and attain a height of 12 to 15 feet.. Under the State's II
sor the fifth annual seedling distribu- "Shade Tree Evaluation Formula," the tree would then have a value of about $76.30, II
lion and tree conservation program in offering homeowners a 347% return on their investment.
the City's elementary schools. With few exceptions, almost any species of tree available at local nurseries is well
Thank you, First Bank Eagan suited for the home landscape. Among the most popular trees are: 1
and Frank's Nursery and Crafts, for
making available this specialopportu- Maple Hackberry
nity for our community's youth! Ginkgo (male only) Ohio Buckeye 1
Kentucky Coffee Tree Ash
TIPS ON TREE Ironwood Honey Locust
1
PLANTING Oak Flowering Crab
Linden or Basswood Poplar
Once you have made your landscape
1
choices, following some simple steps will River Birch Mountain Ash
ensure better health and growth of trees. Japanese Tree Lilac All evergreen species
1. Make sure your planting site is
clear of any underground utilities. The i
Gopher One -Call system at 454-0002 has •• EAGAN REPEATS TREE CITY U.S.A .
been established to locate these under- : DESIGNATION
ground facilities at no cost to the caller. 1
2. Dig the planting hole at least two For the sixth consecutiveyear,the City ofEagan has been awarded distinction
times as wide as the root ball or planting pot as a "Tree City U. S.A." communityby theNational Arbor DayFoundation. To gain
but no deeper. The root mass should be set this recognition, the City has been required to annually meet the four following
on undisturbed soil. standards of achievement:
3. If you wish to amend the soil in the Standard planting hole it is important to remember 1- 1�rtactiveireeboardordeppa :tment. InEagan , spse, the Advisory . III
that the plant will eventually have to remember Park, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, City Council, and Forestry
mate to the soil in your yard. Agents like Division serve to fulfill this requirement. 1
compost or manure may be added but at Standard 2 - A community tree ordinance. The Citycturentlyhas ordinances
least 2/3 of the soil used for backfill should which regulate the control of Dutch Elm disease and other urban forest pests,
be the original soil from the planting site. planting and maintenance of trees within city right-of-ways, licensing of commer- I
4. Contrary to old methods, it is now dal tree care companies and tree preservation/reforestation in new developments.
suggested that pruning at the time of plant- Standard 3 - Acommunityforestry ororraut with an annual budget of at least
ing be done only when absolutely neces- 52.00 rer cepita. This itquittineni is met through the City's annual forestry
sary. Broken, interfering, or diseased . and JAnAccaping Projects in City Parks-
branches should be removed. Otherwise Standard 4-A rDabservanceandprocIaxnaon.Since 1957 the City
all branches should be left intact to provide has held a number ofArborMonth activities in the community including an annual
maximum leaf surface to produce food Arbor Day tree planting program, public tree sale, and poster contest/seedling 1
during the tree's first year in its new home. distribution in the third grade elementary classes in Eagan.
5. Finally, mulch the base of the tree At the present time only about seven percent cf Minnesota's cities are
with wood chips or bark chips. This helps recognizedby the Tree City U.S.A. program. la celebration ofEagan'saccomplish-
to reduce drying out of the root ball and meats, aTree City U.S.A. flag will be flown at the Municipal Center during Arbor 1
protects the tree from desiccation. Wood Month in May and Tree CityU. S.A. signs will be displayed at the primary entrances
chips are available at the County's compost to the commnnity.
site or local nurseries.
.1
.
•
• .
. ..
1 11111 6. EAGAN ANNUAL TREE SALE .. •
)
1 r -i
k\Ov
1 CITY OF EAGAN 7TH ANNUAL
PUBLIC TREE SALE. J e
1 SATURDAY, MAY 1ST, 1993
Indicate Quantity Desired : ; -!�
(Limit 2 Per Column)
I 1st 2nd 3rd , —
Choice Choice C
Sugar Maple 8 -10 fL S22.00 il
Norway Maple 8 -10 ft 815.00 ill •
Summit Seedless Ash 8 -10 R
$15.00
American Linden 8 -10 ft 816.00 —I /
Red Oak 6-8 ft 817.00
Radiant Crab 6-8 ft S11.00
II River Birch (3 stem) 8 ft
824.00
Black Hills Spruce 24 inches 817.00 TREE SALE
Name: INFORMATION SHEET
1 Address: SUGAR MAPLE: 50 -75 feet at ma-
turity. The largest and finest of our native
Phone: (Home) (Work) maples. Wonderful shade tree. Rich au-
tumn foliage. Very hardy.
Complete this registration form, clip and return to: NORWAY MAPLE: 50-60 feet at
Tree Sale maturity. Vigorous growth with excellent
I Eagan Maintenance Facility branching. Glossy foliage. Straight trunk.
3501 Coachman Point Grows well in poor soil.
Eagan, MN 55122 SUMMIT SEEDLESS ASH: 50-
II NOTE: Registration forms must be received no later than Friday, March 26th. Do feet maturity. Fast growing, straight
not send money with your registration! trunk, and upright growing habit. Very
ADDITIONAL DETAILS:
hardy. Fall color yellow.
AMERICAN LINDEN: 60-90 feet
1 — Registrations will be drawn at random. at maturity. A rapid grower with a large
— Successful registrants will be notified by mail as to the species availability and open crown and fragrant yellow flowers.
exact time and location of the tree distribution. It's large leaves and dense foliage give
I — Payment will be made at the time of pick -up; prices include state sales tax. excellent shade.
— The tree sale will be limited to a total of 750 tress. RED OAK: 40-60 feet at maturity.
— Residents are limited to two trees per family. Rapid growing oak. Sharply pointed leaves
1 — While the City assures that these trees come from reputable local nurseries, it does
not extend a warranty for replacement turn bright red in. fall. Broad pyramidal
shape.
RADIANT CRAB: 15 -20 feet at
L
maturity. Deep pink flowers. Small bright
red fruit. Compact, symmetrical growing
tree. Very hardy.
RIVER BIRCH: 25 -30 feet at matu-
Auxiliary aids for persons with 1 city. Does well on upland soil. Reddish
disabilities participating in City activi - The Eagan News is distributed brown exfoliating bark Goldenyellowfall
ties will be provided upon advance
four trines a year as a he service by color.
P�
notice of at least 96 hours If a notice of the Eagan City Council. The newslet- BLACK HILLS SPRUCE: 35-45
less than 96 hours is received, the City teris prepared Sh the office ofthe feet at maturity. Shapely ornamental, with
will attempt to provide such aid. City Administrator. short, bluish foliage. Shears easily to make
/ specimen tree.
A
1
1
1
Mr. Mayor & City Council:
Thanks so much for the lovely plant and
words of encouragement while I was in the
hospital. Things are looking up, and I should
be back with all of you soon. Your thoughtfulness
means a very great deal to me.
1
Your thoughtfulness 1
is very much appreciated.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
. 7)
A 1 .. e-- c.
, .... i , ... , , ,../ /... _c_ ,/,'
41-.•--.."-- • , ' '
i / _ _4/, ,' -
/
....., f . .,7&...) _ _
• - / ( s f ... _...., x“:..“1. r•
/-:::, • .-- - 't-- • C , ' i '. "i ' , - it_ 4 /<
1 ._. ,
-.1 .-. ' '--) (."-c './- o °urn,
1 -
--/ /, i .)_ . , t/..,.. Alit. adult day program
,
- --- /1/
i I 1 1 ' z -. 4..:._ , - c - 7 / I- It-.. LA -1' I- s) C, -- 4- 1 - i L c 1 4 4 % - • • ' , -
I
/ -
C I - 1... < /,, t-e <2-Lx,:_--7 .,-- :... - 1-
,
I
! --
- .
/0/ ((._AL — , -/-c --L e c... „, v.:.., .
I L - - .
74 _, c ,. _,.. ,.. )..., ,..• 1 ,...-.. i c.:( ,--t—_-,,/ L / ” -.7' c - 1 e' / I (
• I .1 • ' C._ / . , f 6.-' e -el— / 7 (1 i ,-,-/
I C 0 I ol Cross Lutheran Church
-1151 Higl a \ - , ,7v
C c 7 .' L- ,- -"-.• ' '-" - .
Excelsior. MN 55331 " /1 : _. = i• z •
,
I , ,
N I /
.C.- / j;_, ( - 1, ' " - ''''''' r /Z / ‘ r-. 1 • ---
I
I . .
- -.. t ,..„ . ,,, c ip .lr- ,,• 0 • -
- ,i---
I .1..
1 3
. • 1k' - so.' illE t
.11 1 a • hit. ig i - ;
4.4. .14 . * 4 11 4 /F. 16 j F ir F r ; H i • 1 i
4 ta• 4 4 1 ig 4 g Ir.i s - Nr r ill —•- .
' 4 4 — - • IF ' ' . . 4 A
,„....,.... . . ,,, ,
1 ...; . = - ,,,,,,, -- ."..........!-,, " • - , k.
--:. 4. , ' --t-- r- "..... 4:: -...'-' ''''
I . — i' Ir , _
-.: ,:... •
1 -,,_ ••
. _ • .
*"' - 41- , P;N . .
I . r a . , .14k
'4 1.1
2. ' I+ i •
tE - '.. -.1e4r - - - 11 '
5
. . -
l 1 ■:■•■
. . - i „' ' . - ' • . .. — 1 .=__ -
1
1
1
Mr. and Mrs. Bofferding 1
March 26, 1993
Page 2
concepts that are going to be incorporated into the Highway 5 Corridor Planning Project. I invite
you to review this material and feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. I
would be happy to keep you posted as to progress and events in this area in the future.
Sincerely, 1
Paul Krauss, AICP
Planning Director
c: Ci ty Council
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUCH P. A. A/0.
Attorneys at Law
l Thomas J Campbell (612) 452-5000
Roger N Knutson Fax (612) 452 -5550
Thomas M. Scott
Gary G. Fuchs
James R. Walston
Elliott B. Knetsch
11 Michael A Broback
Renae D Steiner March 19, 1993
II
Deloitte & Touch
I 400 One Financial Plaza
120 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
. 1 RE: Chanhassen Audit
a Dear Sir /Madam:
Our office is legal counsel for the City of Chanhassen. You
have asked for our response on pending or threatened litigation in
=_` which we represent the City. Our response is as follows:
1. LOWELL CARLSON AND JANET CARLSON v. CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
:I a) Description of the nature of the matter. Petition for
Writ of Mandamus. The plaintiffs seek an order directing
the city to initiate condemnation proceedings. The
plaintiffs allege that the City's actions in prosecuting
Mr. Carlson for ordinance violations amount to inverse
condemnation.
:=. b) Progress of the matter to date. ' The City filed a
Counterclaim in March 1993. Plaintiffs had let the action
-: remain dormant for more than one year. The City Council
=1 allowed plaintiffs an opportunity to construct a
building, but the plaintiffs refused.
.. c) How the City has responded. The City has interposed an
Answer denying the claim and is vigorously defending the
lawsuit. The City filed a Counterclaim in March 1993,
seeking an injunction to permanently abate the nuisance
I and for an order forcing the Carlsons to comply with the
zoning ordinances.
1d) Evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome
I and estimation of amount or range of potential loss. In
our opinion the City has a good defense. The potential
monetary loss is deemed to be minimal. The p ary thrust
of the plaintiffs' suit is for an order �� the
City to condemn the property.
( L 2 19
t C!TY OF C�1
Suite 317 • Eagandale Office Center • 1380 Corporate Center Curve • Eagan,
-3
1
Deloitte & Touche
March 19, 1993
Page 2
1
2. MOON VALLEY AGGREGATE, INC. v. CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
a) Description of the nature of the matter. Plaintiff seeks 1
to have the Chanhassen mining ordinance declared uncon-
stitutional. The City has counterclaimed seeking an order 1
that plaintiff must comply with the ordinance.
b) Progress of the matter to date. The court has determined
that the ordinance is constitutional and that plaintiff
must submit an application. The extent of any conditions
that the City may impose upon plaintiff's mining
operation has not been decided by the court. A decision
is expected in April or May 1993.
c) How the City has responded. The City interposed an
Answer, filed a Counterclaim, and is vigorously defending
the case.
d) Evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome
and estimation of amount or range of potential loss.
Plaintiff is not seeking monetary damages. The court has
already determined that the mining ordinance is enforce-
able.
1
3. DEBORAH CARPENTER RAND v. CITY OF CHANHASSEN.
a) Description of the nature of the matter. Plaintiff is a 1
former employee of the City claiming sex discrimination.
b) Progress of the matter to date. The Summons and
Complaint has been served on the City, but never filed
with the district court. The matter will remain dormant
until the plaintiff decides to file the Complaint.
c) How the City has responded. Prior to the district court
suit, the plaintiff filed a Complaint with the Minnesota
Department of Human Rights. The City responded to the
Complaint and the Department determined there was no
probable cause. Plaintiff then filed the present action
in district court and the City has answered the Complaint
and denied her allegations.
d) Evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome
and estimation of amount or range of potential loss. The
City's insurer has accepted indemnification of the
claims, with certain reservations. The City has a strong
liability defense and its exposure to any potential
monetary loss is minimal.
1
1
1
Deloitte & Touche
' March 19, 1993
Page 3
4. ASSESSMENT APPEALS. One assessment appeal is pending.
' 5. CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS. There are several condemnation
proceedings pending in which the City is the plaintiff.
6. LAWSUITS OR LITIGATION INSTITUTED BETWEEN DECEMBER 31, 1992,
AND THE DATE OF OUR REPLY. None.
7. UNASSERTED CLAIMS OR ASSESSMENTS. We are not aware of any
' unasserted claims or assessments. In the course of performing
legal services for the City with respect to a matter
recognized to involve an unasserted possible claim or assess-
ment that may require financial statement disclosure, whenever
we have formed a professional opinion that the City should
disclose or consider disclosing such possible claim or assess-
,
ment, as a matter of professional responsibility to the City,
we would so advise the City and would consult with the City
concerning the question of such disclosure and the applicable
requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
11 No. 5.
Very truly yours,
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT
& FUCHS, P.A.
1 BY:
Elliott B. i .ch
' EBK:srn
cc: Don Ashworth, City Manager
�1
` II
1
•
OVX e
it fc"'-4 Ear
COTTINGTON MARTI, INC. ? ° 199: 1
1
ADVISORY '
From: Scott Cottington, Jeff Larson
Cottington Marti, Inc. 1
Date: March 18, 1993
1
The City of Eden Prairie and other interested parties are working together
to oppose the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. This packet has been
put together in an effort to recruit other allies and interested groups
opposed to the actions of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
and Met Council.
If the MAC and Met Council give approval to expanding the runway at Flying
Cloud to 5000 feet without changing the classification from minor to
intermediate use, they may attempt to do the same thing at other regional
airports in the future.
Your help is needed in contacting your local press, and in voicing your
opposition to the members of the MAC and Met Council.
If you need additional information please call us at the number below
or Craig Dawson at the City of Eden Prairie.
Thanks for your help.
1
1
11
i
8120 Penn Avenue South, Suite 116 • Minneapolis, MN 55431 • 612/881-8061 • Fax: 612/881 -4502 1
1
'City of Eden Prairie
I i Offices
21
rai e
7600 Executive Drive • Eden Prairie, MN 55344 -3677 • Telephone (612) 937 -2262
r
Office of the Mayor
p ougias B. Tenpas
' Dear Interested Citizen:
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is continuing to pursue expansion at Flying
' Cloud Airport in Eden Prairie. The expansion includes an 1100 foot extension of one of the
runways to total 5000 feet and to allow heavier aircraft to use the airport. It also includes
additional hangar area development and land acquisition which affects the residents in the area.
' The expansion proposal is intended to provide relief to the Minneapolis /St. Paul International
Airport and is targeted at smaller corporate and private jet users.
This expansion is being opposed by, among others, the City of Eden Prairie, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, and Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud Airport (a 600 member local citizens
group).
The purpose of this packet is to inform you of the controversy, to provide you with
background material, and to encourage you to become more involved. Your help is needed
to stop this expansion!
Expansion opponents list five main objections to the plan. (These objections are more fully
presented in Attachments 2 and 3).
1. The airport currently has less than one -half the number of operations of its
' historical peak in 1968. The Metropolitan Council says that the Airport is not
expected to reach even 80% of its capacity until 2008. There is no need for
increased capacity.
2. MAC estimated the project will cost a minimum of $11 million. Others believe
it will run as high as $20 million. Without a proven need, it is a misuse of
taxpayers' money.
3. There are many unanswered questions with respect to the environmental impact
on water quality, the Minnesota River bluffs, and the Minnesota Valley National
Wildlife Refuge.
4. There are laws in place which specifically prohibit this expansion without the
approval of the State Legislature. This expansion also directly conflicts with
existing and proposed land uses which have been endorsed by the Metropolitan
Council.
1
1 ==
Recynetl Pace
5. This expansion is not being proposed as part of any broader plan for the
management of the Metropolitan Reliever Airport System. Also, the status of
Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport has not been determined, and there is
no reason to expand other airports in the meantime. 1
What are the next steps in the process and how can you become involved?
1. The MAC has forwarded the long term comprehensive development plan for the
airport to the Metropolitan Council for its approval. The Council may review the
plan as soon as its April 1, 1993 meeting.
You can make your views known to the members of the Metropolitan Council
now, and at the meeting.
2. The MAC is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which requires
at least a 25 day period to receive public comment and will include at least one
public meeting.
You can contact the MAC Commissioners now to express your concerns, and
during the comment period when the EIS process is underway.
There may be other forums in which citizen input is sought. We will advise you as those forums 1
are identified so that you can be heard.
In the meantime, please contact Craig Dawson at the City Offices at 937 -2262 for more
information. Thank you.
Si cerely, /
641 l
Doug T pas
Mayor of Eden Prairie 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
CONTENTS OF THIS PACKAGE
1
Attachment #:
1
1. Names, addresses and telephone numbers of the members of the Metropolitan Council
1 and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC).
2. More complete discussion points articulating the reasons for the opposition to this
1 expansion.
3. Discussion points and charts published by Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud, the citizens
group opposed to the airport expansion.
4. Letters from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service stating their opposition to the expansion.
1 S. A memo from L. Lehman & Associates, the technical consultants hired by the City of
Eden Prairie, outlining some of the environmental concerns the City has on this project.
former Legislator Gordon Voss explaining 6. A letter from form gi P g the legislative intent of a 1980
law which makes it illegal to lengthen a runway beyond 4,000' for a "minor" use airport
without specific legislative approval.
7. A summary of the recently released Legislative Audit pointing out that 1) airport needs
1 projections for the MSP airport are greatly inflated and that 2) development needs, at
least at MSP, are "further off in the future than initially forecast ".
8. Representative news clips.
' 9. A listing of what you can do to become more involved in stopping the expansion at
Flying Cloud Airport.
10. A list of people for you or your organization to contact for more information on this
project.
1
1
1
1
1
111- . . . .
Attachment -1 . 1
•
METROPOLCrAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION 1
Commissioner Business Address /Phone Listing
1
SCHILLING, Hugh R.
Chairman Re h kamp ,Pau l
airman LIME, John
Horton Holding, Inc. Commissioncrllimle Horner, Inc. 411 West Lyon St. II
P.O. Box 9455 8300 Norman Center Dr. #1260 Marshall, MN 5625
Minneapolis, MN 55440 Bloomington, MN 55437 507/532 -4522
612/378 -6440 - FAX: 627 -5700 612/893 -0641 FAX: 893 -9052
GASPER, Alton J. LANEGRAN, Virgi Stia 1
Acting Vice Chairman Commissioner
3M /Ind. Chemical Products Div. 578 State Office Budding
Bldg. 224 1N - 04. 3M Center St. Paul, MN 55155 1
St. Paul, MN 55144.1000 612/296 -2909 FAX: 297 -5609
612/733 -6153 PAX: 733 -1271
IAVAASEN, Tim 1
BRATAAS, Mark G. Commissioner
Commissioner Comm. Workers of America
Mayo Clinic - Emeritus Staff Local 7200 1
Rochester, MN 55905 3521 East Lake Street
507 -284 -2691 FAX: 507- 288 -4511 Minneapolis, MN 55406
612/472 -3027 FAX: 722 -1274
DEL CALZO, Jan 1
Commissioner MANCINI, Nick
Minneapolis City Council Commissioner
307 City Hall Mancini s Char House
Minneapolis, MN 55415 531 West 7th Street
612/673 -3192 FAX: 673-3940 St. Paul, MN 55102
612/224 -7345
ER1CICSON, Laurel W.
Commissioner MEIUcKEL, Thomas 1
20 South 26th Avenue East . Commissioner
Duluth, MN 55812 • Print Craft, Inc.
218/728 -1693 FAX: 218/628 -3245 315 Filth Avenue NW
St. Paul, MN 55112
1 612/633 - 8122 PAX: 633 -1862
GAAPER, Kenneth 'Chip' MOGELSON, Jack
Commissioner Commissioner 1
K. Charles Development Corp. Teamsters, Local 320
P.O. Box 24628 3001 University Avenue SE
Edina, MN 55424 Minneapol MN 55414
612/829 -0890 FAX: 829-0890 612/331-3873 FAX: 331 -8948
O'NErLL, Patrick * ** ****e*** * *i * * * * * ***** * ****
Commksioner
1
O'Net71, Burke, O'Neill,
Leonard & O'Brien COMMISSION CONTACT: •
800 Norwest Center
55 East 5tb Street Lynn Sorensen, Commission Secretary
1
St. Paul, MN 55101 Metropolitan Airports Commission
612/227 -9505 FAX: 297. 6641 6040 - 28th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55450
PETRON, Faye N. 612/726 -8186
1
Treasurer
Route 6, Box 204
Little Falls, MN 56345 Business - 11/92
612/632 -9367 FAX: 1-632-2583
1
1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL MEMBERS
1 V ` Clinic Dottie 1 ietow 545- 584811
1317 Kilmer Avenue South 291- 6453 o
St. Luis Park, MN 55426 291- 6453 vin
1
....5,.. AWO A/ / - 7.-4 / 7 PP
1 Council District ...... ; - , 0/k'.
1 Stephen B. Wellington, Jr. 647.0362 h 9 Roger Scherer 537. 9749 11
I t 2257 Gor don Avenue 292- 9844 o . 12001 Bass Lake Road 627.0810 o
St. Paul, MN 55108 291- 6527 vm Plymouth, MN 55442 291.6482 vm
1 2 Dede Wolfson 221- 0558 h 10 Jim Krautkremer 560- 8022 h
1117 Goodrich Av. 228- 0338 o 6425 Shingle Creek Drive 297. 5530 o
St. Paul, MN 55105.2725 291- 6326 vm Brooklyn Park, MN 554452639 291.6485 vm
1 . Patrick C. Leung 636- 7408 h 11 Polly Peterson Bowles 920.914411
1598 . 23rd Avenue NW 333. 1511 o 6020 Ashcroft Avenue 291- 6486 vm
New Brighton, MN 551126514 291- 6336 vm Edina. MN 55424
1 4 Carol A. Kummer 722. 0370 h 12 Sondra R. Simonson 881. 5975 h
4818 30th Avenue So. 296- 4281 o 2815 Overlook Drive 884- 7152 o
I Mpls. MN 55417-1306 291. 6508 vm Bloomington, MN 55431.3910 291- 6487 vm
5 Martha M. Head 377. 4402 h 13 Mary H. Smith 475- 1388 h
� "- 1616 West 22nd Street 827- 4006 0 515 North Ferndale Road 291- 6488 vm
1 = f� Minneapolis, MN 55405 291- 6509 vm • Orono, MN 55391
6 Barbara Butts Williams 588. 1204 h 14 Bonnie D. Featherstone 890. 0889 h
IV-.-Z 2222 Memorial Parkway 831- 8355 0 908 Woodlawn Court 291. 6489 vm
Minneapolis, MN 55412 291.6395 vm Burnsvtlk, MN 55337.3627
1 7 Esther Newcome 429- 2714 h 15 Kevin Howe 454- 6534 h
2374 Joy Avenue 291. 6399 vm 1763 Lansford Lane 671- 3142 o
Whke Bear Lake, MN 55110-7409 Mendota Heights, MN 55118 291- 6524 vm
1 8 Susan Anderson 757- 4968 h 1 E. Cra1g Morris 436- 5789 h
11031 President Drive NE 291.6523 vm 16412 7th St. Lanes 663. 3166 o
Blaine, MN 55434 -1722 _ Lakeland, MN 55043 -9447 291- 6506 vm
I 663- 3339 (fax)
1 rife j ag m h - home o — office v — voiceful! . t ' I
1 ' J
Metropolitan Commissions
1 Metropolitan Airports Commission ' MAC 726- 1892
Metropolitan Transit Commission MTC 349- 7400 "A N C W ni e'll g
I Metropolitan Waste Control Commission MWCC 222.8423
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission MSFC 331 0386
Regional Transit Board RTD 292.8789
1 Metropotkan Parks and Open Space Cottunksion MPOSC 291.6320
1 .
i% -- -- - =-- '= February 1993 - -
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL DISTRICTS 1
4 wu . , u I • ..I
.
1
••.1 1 44111.41
1 41..14 /.r4 .1 A1. 1
11 8.... ltO 41 41.[
sf.mtascip p
• t pt It [ 1 {•rt 1 .114.,0•
t •IC1 \11•1 It ■IIt!N
11 11 40.4.41. 41. 4,1144,1 Ian alfrrl
• 11
I .t.[ttu 11 111•1141, i e' «•0.'1
• *must 1.44 14 N 4444 111[ 9 I
N .Atut 1414$41 N 444 uo i 1 �- ^_-
Yte Ott �t «1CN,I.. 4 .......n
7 1tf4u1 /7 ► » pt..
It ct000 it t
t ll.L M IlttctMtl ANOKA CO. (
7 1
•11. N• !I N4114.84% 44$4/1 owner
COI Yw /Yt 1
!� nw on4.a 11
I.t 111 uat[• wu taut
48 MA 4r.4411 411 If. 4*.II May I0.1 • t.t1 s 1 wt.. Se..I1t
• l+aE I
I
ARM-- County Boundary « me •a«• Munlcips160undary -•,r.., I/nw 8.8,8 1
M.4 1. t•1. 14.1.1 11
i -'t= - Township Boundary 8 MOM 1
4 M.[
WI
• 61/144*•[ Itttt MIS W A $HV. VON CO.
l!. 10 1
•1$144• l• 4I. watt SNOWS .. Y .Y /I 4r -r `__'_
•/14[1/•..,/ YMI. 1 4 Mt I •nit4l►tA
ji Walla' it /1!1111! N co. MOW
1 11.414
ti•t14
41440t1; .
t 1 :
0P [►In[trI • lttl 1
14•ou.4.K{ 131N/w nr »16161 Nra (, '
M ETR0LITAN 4 WI 4 4 4 10 1 11 , 44 ,,,,,, 4
COUNCIL � . :uii t ► ••• 4 1i:1 ___ _
044 Us -WA 1
.l»• tA ll
i
1
*411*84874 ft. W1 ' 4t► «w. 44•44•
141■ 1• � N M. T .
40t1r•.OpO 1 IWTr /fQM.4 .• 4 l . i:. '
41.41 «■.I.
1 - • illy ..: 1 . mot H■.Nt •
_ 1 1 • oat '::A MIA g t a w
1
411• • - t{
.swat _ -- n4i" tux: 4, q4 4
• S 4011. t 1 l lf' »tu.n t
4.610(14 I NA4o61 1� tN6•O IN. 41.114
4Itu11 11. .w.
I •041011111.1.
1 - A.
LAt /N••
1
CAAV711 CO 44444 M114ft IItf4M ewe et.....
Jy
AN
_.iu4/ II c"'s«1 DAKOTA CO.
M1ut4 NIL
14/4 1 eN ' jJ Ol»ltle!» [ 1 KUM *48140.4/ - • 1 1
WSW* ...41.1C1 I ammo 1 V atllt •Kl4T »*1408• ,
t eal
��p 1 ( - [' t041441tlt ea 1 •404$144 wt �tee4 J le �. - - -r
r4. 18.441470
61.61[,:■ 1
t�J 14 I I / I *14$41-» 1 1......... 1 y f4 61U I Mi*N 4,t I (,1444 64[n•W 41»/1 ( n ; w«t »w I
' /1Ye1 I 1 [ttlriit•I i I 1
„..4�,..,0 44.4'4 aCO� CO. 1 IL ,„
__... 1 I
� N YYt(t
S t � J 0..� Th.. ^
It l4tuf O[l1 /•lt *l
i *UM � CtOl. lnal •cysts. lowns Noes 14{RRw ( 1
W
I 1 114 NaMq t
�Q� --/�1 1 1 ~Mfg 414114414.44
A fi
1
; t- 1
»rlt. I t0 41, Mitln/lt JI......./ 1 IOIOWA Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities Area 1
The Council members and their districts are as follows: Chair - Dottie Rietow
t - Stephen B. WetlIngton, Jr, S - Martha M. Head. 9 - Roger Scherer. • 13 - Mary tt Smith, 1
St. Paul Minneapolis Ftyaaounth Orono
I - Dale Wolfson, 6 - Barbers Butts Williams, 10 .. Jim Krautkremer 14 - Bonk D. Featherstone,
St. Awl Minneapolis Brooklyn Park Burnsville 1
- Patrick C Leung, 7 - Esther Newcomc, 11 - Polly Peterson Bowles, 15 - Kenn liowe,
New Brighton White Bear Luce Edina Mendota 11e1ghts
4 - Carol A. Kummer 8 - Susan Anderson. 12 - Sondra P. Simonso 16 - E. Civil Morris,
Minneapolis Blaine Bloomington Lakeland /J 1
PulAration No. 31491010
1
Attachment #2
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST EXPANSION AT
FLYING CLOUD
' 1. There is no need for increased capacity at Flying Cloud
Flying Cloud currently handles less than 200,000 operations per year. The airport's
' capacity is 350,000 operations, according to the 1990 Regional System Reliever Airports
Study conducted by the Met Council.
This study estimates that Flying Cloud will operate at only 80% of capacity by 2008.
The Metropolitan Airport Commission projects 379,000 operations per year by 2010, but
' they have historically over - projected. For example, the MAC's 1977 Master Plan
projected 440,000 operations in 1985 (the actual number was 176,000) and 500,000 in
1995 (again, the actual number in 1992 was less than 200,000).
' It should be noted that, while Flying Cloud's official capacity is judged to be 350,000,
the airport actually handled a high of 465,000 operations in 1968, without instrumented
' airways or any runways longer than 3600 feet.
Overall, the traffic trends at Flying Cloud are decreasing, not increasing.
' 2. Without a proven need. it is a misuse of taxpayers' money
' The MAC estimated the cost for runway expansion and hangar construction at $11.7
million, others believe the land acquisition costs have been underestimated by 50% - an
error which could increase the project cost to $20 million.
Also, this expansion would dramatically diminish the development capacity of 200 acres
near the airport - and eventually the construction of 300 housing units. This will
negatively offset the City's tax base and hamper the City's ability to retire debt on
regional systems such as the Metropolitan Sewer Interceptor.
3. There are many unanswered questions with respect to environmental impact.
See Attachment #5.
4. There are laws in place which specifically prohibit this expansion without the approval
of the State Legislation. This expansion also conflicts with existing and proposed land
uses which are endorsed by the Met Council.
Minnesota Statute Section 473.641 Subd.4 states - 'Notwithstanding any other law, the
Metropolitan Airports Commission shall not use revenue from any source, as described
•
1
. I .
by section 473.608, for construction of air facilities to expand or upgrade the use of an I
existing metropolitan airport from minor use to intermediate use status as defined by the
metropolitan development guide, aviation chapter, adopted pursuant to section 473.145."
This law was passed in response to a proposed expansion at the Anoka County Blaine 1
Airport. The law also applies to the proposed expansion at Flying Cloud.
Please refer to the letter (Attachment #6) from Gordon Voss, Former Legislator and the
Statute's author.
As for the conflict with planned land use, both the 1968 and the current 1982 Eden ,
Prairie Guide Plans depict compatible land uses around Flying Cloud Airport with its
present boundaries. These plans are endorsed by the Metropolitan Council. The
proposed expansion will make the airport incompatible with our approved land use
designations.
5. This expansion is not being proposed as part of any broader plan for the management of I
metro reliever airports.
The Metropolitan Airport Commission has indicated its desire to divert Minneapolis /St. I
Po
Paul airport (MSP) traffic to reliever airports such as Flying Cloud. Yet the MAC's own
estimate of diversion is only 2000 operations by 1995, 4000 operations by 2000 and 7000
1
operations by 2010. This represents less than a 1% diversion of MSP traffic.
More to the point, however, is that Minutes of the Legislature Audit in a report released
1
on February 17, 1993, concluded the MAC and the Met Council had overstated the
capacity problems at Minneapolis/St. Paul airport. They also concluded that the need for 1
runway development, at least at MSP, is "farther off in the future than initially forecast ".
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
■
s
•
TABLE 111-1
Metropolitan Council of the Twin Cities
Regional System Reliever Airports Study
ASV CAPACITY ANALYSIS
1
EBi+ting 1993 1998 00} 20
Annual X Capacity Annual % Capacity Annual % Capacity Annual X Capacity Annual % Capacity
3/Beyer Airport ASV Qperations Utilized pperatlons ucitl :e9 Bastions Vtilitsd Cognitions ljt111ze4 operations 4t1t1tc4
.noka County - Blaine 230,000 200,000 87.0% 226,102 98.3% 251,904 109.5% 281,130 122.2% 313,579 136.3%
t. Paul Downtown 260,000 151,869 58.4% 173,728 66.8% 194,225 74.7% 217,506 83.7% 242,824 93.4%
ouch st. Paul 230,000 37,830 16.4% 44,878 19.5% 51,041 22.2% 58,025 25.2X 66,788 29.01
= rystal 355,000 172,074 48.5X 188,652 53.1* 211,300 59.5% 237,071 66.831 265,844 74.9%
tying Cloud 355,000 186,699 52.6% 208,195 58.6% 229,776 64.7* 254,540 71.7X 281,803 79.4%
aka Elmo 230,000 65,000 28.3X 79,242 34.5% 88,106 38.3% 97,268 42.3% 107,292 46.6%
.make 230,000 64,000 27.8% 64,782 28.2% 72,549 31.5% 81.240 35.3% 91,640 39.8%
OTAL - Rsllsysrs 1,890,000 877,472 46.4* 985,579 52.1% 1,098,901 58.1X 1,226,780 64.9% 1,369,770 72.5%
•
s`
•
Source; Advisory Circular 150/5060 -5 "Airport Capacity and Delay."
Aviation Planning Associates, Inc. .
" 4
- - 111111 - - - - - - - - - - - - - all - -
ZERO Attachment #3
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
Is This Expansion Really Necessary?
Aviation Demand •
The Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) would have
us believe that expansion of Flying Cloud Airport is needed
to accommodate growing general aviation demand. However,
an examination of the facts would lead an impartial observer to a very different conclusion.
Consider these points:
Operations at Flying Cloud (takeoffs and landings) peaked in 1968, and have been
declining ever since. They are currently less than half the 1968 level and far below
MAC's "worst- case" forecasts.
The number of aircraft based at Flying Cloud has been declining
yt g hnmg steadily for the
past ten years and is well under capacity. There are now fewer planes based at
Flying Cloud than there were in 1969.
The national trends are the same — the number of general aviation aircraft and the hours
they are flown are stagnant or shrinking. The U.S. Department of Transportation observed
that "General aviation has been in the midst of a slump since the early 1980's. General
aviation hours flown, miles flown, and active aircraft have all declined since 1984.
Deliveries of new...general aviation aircraft have dropped nearly 91% from 1979 to 1989.
Sales of piston aircraft have fallen off so severely that all major U.S. manufacturers have
suspended production... Sales of turboprop and turbojet aircraft have also dropped..." '
What about the future? The Metropolitan Council's recently completed study of reliever
airports found that in twenty years, half of the airports in the system will be under 60% of
capacity , and only two will be as high as 80% (Not now, mind you — twenty years from
now).
MAC's forecasts of growing operations at Flying Cloud Airport are substantially at variance
with the current trends in general aviation, both locally and nationally. And MAC'S
forecasting track record is rather poor. MAC's own figures show that the actual operations 1
at Flying Cloud are substantially below even their 1987 "worst - case" forecast.
What about the supposed demand for larger jets to use Flying Cloud Airport? (Keep in '
mind that business jets comprise less than 2% of the general aviation fleet in the U.S. —
only 4500 planes in the whole country.) There is absolutely no indication of any increase
in the number of small or medium sized jets wanting to use Flying Cloud Airport. MAC
has yet to present a shred of evidence to support this claim.
General aviation activity, now or in the foreseeable future simply does not justify expansion. 1
14180 West 78th Street, Suite 200 • Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
1
ZERO
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
It's Not a Safety Issue — It's a Convenience Issue.
Safety
MAC has repeatedly stated that safety is the major reason for lengthening
the main runway at Flying Cloud Airport from 3900 feet to 5000 feet. On
the surface, this is a compelling argument. After all, who could oppose
' safety improvements? But closer examination and careful thought reveals some problems
with their case. Let's examine this "safety" issue further —
1 First, no one disputes that Flying Cloud Airport is perfectly safe for the aircraft that
presently use it, and for which it was designed. Now it's true that some of the larger planes
that use Flying Cloud aren't able to take off fully loaded on the hottest days of the year,
1 and there's no question that a 5000' runway provides more margin for error and is easier
to operate on than 3900'. But wouldn't 6700' be even safer? St. Paul Downtown Airport
was built specifically for business jets, has a 6700' runway, and is more lightly used. True,
1 it's not as convenient for many users, and this is the real point — It's not a safety issue,
it's a convenience issue.
Second, extending the runway won't really increase safety. Right now there are planes
using Flying Cloud, for which a 3900' runway is marginal. If the runway is extended to
' 5000', these planes will have plenty of room. But what will happen, just as it did after the
1979 expansion, is that some larger size aircraft will start to operate at Flying Cloud, again
with small margins of safety. The situation won't have improved a bit; in fact you can
' argue that it will be worse.
Third, if safety is MAC's primary concern, why have they also proposed raising the weight
limit on jets allowed to use Flying Cloud Airport by 50 %, from 20,000 to 30,000 pounds?
And finally, if MAC's professed concern for safety is genuine, why did they seek a waiver
of the FAA safety standard that calls for a 1000 -foot object -free area at each end of the
runway MAC wants to extend? (U.S. Highway 169/212, which carries over 20,000 vehicles
per day, is only 600 feet from the east end of the runway.) MAC found a way around this
regulation through a technicality – they won't have to count the easternmmost 500 feet of
the runway under most conditions. To meet this safety standard fully, MAC would have
had to move the whole runway an additional 500' to the West, at a tremendous additional
1 cost. So much for safety.
1
1
West 78th Street, Suite •
14180 t, a 200 • Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
.1
ZERO
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud 1
Overabundance of System Capacity Demonstrates No Need for
System Capacity Expansion at Flying Cloud Airport '
The airports in the metropolitan area are currently forecasted
to operate at approximately 45% of capacity in 1993, according
to the Metropolitan Aviation Development Guide, issued by the Metropolitan Council in
January 1990. For intermediate and minor airports, the Guide projects that for 1993
operations will reach only 39% of capacity. '
For the year 2003, intermediate and minor airports will reach only 50% of capacity. In
particular, by the year 2003, St. Paul Downtown Airport (into which MAC and the St. Paul
Port Authority have recently poured millions of dollars for improvements) is projected to
reach only 35% of capacity, and Flying Cloud Airport only 60% of capacity.
With this tremendous excess capacity in the metropolitan aviation system, no rational
justification exists for expanding Flying Cloud Airport. At a minimum, MAC should be
required to follow the Metropolitan Council's own planning guidelines that call for "more ,
use of underutilized facilities" before more money is spent to needlessly expand Flying
Cloud Airport. A very substantial, usable investment of taxpayers' dollars is already in
place in St. Paul and should not be wasted. '
Prudent Government Plannin g Necessitates Resolution of the
System Planning International Airport Dual -Track Process
1
Since 1989
the Met Council and MAC have spent millions of
dollars studying options for the Twin Cities' international
airport. MAC has not yet determined whether it will build a new major airport or improve
MSP. A decision to build a new international airport in Dakota County would leave MSP
as Minneapolis' "Midway ", the perfect reliever airport. As such, MSP would be the
111
preferred destination for corporate jets and would completely eliminate any alleged need
for expanding Flying Cloud.
A backdrop to the dual -track process is the financial health of Northwest Airlines. With
luck, Northwest will survive its current crisis relatively unscathed. However, if it does not,
all of the MAC's projections for air traffic in the Twin Cities metropolitan area will be
extremely overstated. All in all, the smart move for MAC would be to look long term and
wait for resolution of the larger issues before spending millions to needlessly expand Flying
Cloud Airport. ,
14180 West 78th Street, Suite 200 • Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
1
ZERO
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
1 The rational way to assess the merits of any proposed public works
Cost — Benefit project is to compare the costs of the project and the benefits to be
' Analysis derived from it — both economic and non - economic costs and
benefits. But MAC has failed to provide or conduct a cost - benefit
analysis of the proposed expansion plans for Flying Cloud Airport.
1 Why won't MAC conduct a cost - benefit analysis on the Flying Cloud expansion plans?
' It may be that MAC knows that a business case can't be made for this expansion. No
business in the world would invest this kind of money to gain the meager benefits that
might accrue.
It may be that MAC feels that since the money is "just sitting there" in the FAA Trust
• Fund that they don't have to justify the expenditure.
It may be that MAC would be embarrassed that the expansion would be shown to be a
needless duplication of facilities that won't bring another nickel into the region .
' The only, proponents of this plan are the MAC staff, who may feel that more and bigger
airports mean job security, and some airport operators who think the government should
1 spend $20 million to bring them more customers and who hope that the expansion will save
their businesses.
1 The Metropolitan Council's planning guide states: "Public investments in the region's air
transportation system should be made on the basis of need and the ability of the
metropolitan area to support them over time in relation to other metropolitan needs and
investments." No impartial observer could conclude that the proposed expansion of Flying
Cloud meets the Met Council's aims of cost - effectiveness and "prudent expenditure of
resources ".
With the federal government facing an enormous deficit, with the State of Minnesota
cutting program after program and scrambling to find funding for highway and transit
programs that are urgently needed, with cities, towns, and school districts faced with cutting
services, raising taxes or both, it would be a disgrace to spend so much of our precious
' resources on this project. There must surely be places the money is needed more.
Any benefits from this expansion would be very meager and enjoyed by a very few, while
1 the costs would be exorbitant and borne by many.
1
14180 West 78th Street, Suite 200 • Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
1
ZERO
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
MAC Reneges On Its Agreement with Eden Prairie
Ordinance 51
The 1975 Master Plan for Flying Cloud Airport (FCA)
recommended that the southerly east -west runway be extended
from 3200 feet to 3900 feet in length. Considerable concern was
expressed during public hearings, and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC)
moved to ban jets from Flying Cloud. Legal action was initiated by a jet owner, and the
court ordered MAC to conduct hearings to determine whether to allow jets at Flying Cloud
Airport. It was at this juncture that MAC introduced Ordinance 51, which allows jets at
Flying Cloud Airport, but restricts them to those with a maximum take -off weight of 20,000
pounds or less and prohibits jet training operations at Flying Cloud.
The subsequent public hearings produced so much controversy that MAC decided to form
an ad hoc advisory committee to make recommendations regarding Ordinance 51. The
committee was composed of Eden Prairie residents and airport users and one of the main
concerns was jet operations at FCA, both contemporary and future. The committee
eventually endorsed the adoption of Ordinance 51 on January 11, 1978, but with several
recommendations. A key recommendation stated: "Both the Eden Prairie City Council and
the Metropolitan Airports Commission should commit themselves to defend, through all
available legal channels and court appeals, any attempt to liberalize or strike down
amended Ordinance 51. ".
MAC acknowledged acceptance of this condition the following month. In a letter to Eden
Prairie Mayor Wolf Fenzel dated February 23, 1978, MAC's Director of Operations and
Environmental Affairs Claude Schmidt reported that MAC "...unanimously adopted all of
the recommendations of the Ordinance 51 Ad Hoc Committee." Based on these actions
and assurances by MAC that this expansion of Flying Cloud Airport would be the last, the
residents and City of Eden Prairie dropped their opposition to MAC's plans.
Less than ten years after the "final" expansion of Flying Cloud Airport and their
commitment to uphold and defend Ordinance 51, MAC introduced new expansion plans
for Flying Cloud Airport. Incredibly, the proposal includes a recommendation to
substantially alter Ordinance 51, by raising the weight limit on jet aircraft from 20,000
pounds to 30,000 pounds — an increase of 50 %.
We believe that MAC must be required to live up to its agreements with respect to
9 P g P
Ordinance 51. Its ongoing obligation to Eden Prairie cannot be casually discarded. Eden
Prairie has done its part; it's now time for MAC to do the right thing and withdraw the
expansion plans. Any other course of action is a breach of MAC's commitments to Eden
Prairie.
14180 West 78th Street, Suite 200 • Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
I II — Mr • s MN MI • • MO r MN — ... — — — ... —
c,, 1975 FORECAST VS. ACTUAL
..,
E FLYING CLOUD OPERATIONS
0
CES
Thousands
600
500 -
400 -
300 -
200
100 -
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 L 1 1 1 1
65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99
ACTUAL — LOW FORECAST * HIGH FORECAST
Source: M.A.C.
87 FORECAST vs. ACTUAL
Flying Cloud Operations
Thousands
500
400 -
300 -
200 - `i
loo-
0 '1'1'1'1'1'1'1'1' 1'1'1' 1'I'I'I'I'1'I'I'I'I'1'1'
65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11
Year
ACTUAL 1 LOW FORECAST * HIGH FORECAST
Source: M.A.C.
MI NM INIOIMIIIIIMIIIONIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIMIIIMIIIMIIIIIIMIINIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIN
I NN — r I r• — MN — — — NM r• MI r E NM I
GENERAL AVIATION F
1989
Single IEraerae IPnstoffi OM
\\ Rotorcraft 3%
'Ilknmbojet 2
Turboprop 3%
/ 'non Liston RIM
Total Aircraft: 219,737
T .] WALL SIRI J - _ ,
. /941/ rm,. Jima f-d Cenrfo•r� / ,rC AO:, fenrurd.
.* * - Ai,owrn auisser TIIunS1)AY. SEPTEMBER 2(. - 1991 y� ors swam.. 11)VIA 1
•
Cleared for Takeoff
1 Taking Flight 1
r � , ra v el Is Off, Airlines i Yet cities from Ftttsbur;ih to San Jose, struction But the charges will be listed
Calif„ are adding giant terminals and run
I ways as if the roaring Vs were still only to cryptic codes on tickets. As air
Ailing, but Airports _ t5 around. Confident that a big rise in airline ports raise rental race to cover band pay 1
nm ports ents, airlines also may pass en the costs
traffic is in the offing. they are raising Mli to travelers In other special surcharges.
just Deep Expanding lions to Improve unused facilities, And they Thous of bondholders also may be
are lavishing money on thins such as at risk. To finance the expansion, airports
wood•paneted conference rooms, stainless• have floated a staggering S30 billion in
1
Boosterism and Bonds Fuel I steel pain trees and tax•abatements -at bonds, which typically cover T55e of con
the same time that urban highways and struction casts. They are counting on a
bridges are crumbling. weak revenue source - landing and space -
Projects Even as Estimates A►i told, airports-owned by !o^_al and rental fees from struggling airlines -to pay
state governments-plan to our as much thorn off, If the airports are wrong, they 1
Of Need Are Scaled Back as S50 bii!ion to :u construction in the next may default or turn to a city or rounty to
five years, double what they spent through Step in. and local tares could go up to
out the inns. Newark International Airport cover the obligations.
Empty Gates, More Coming has started a 52 billion expansion and repo- - What's going to happen when a weak 1
..
vatien. though traffic has plunged 24% hi carrier goes troke and can't pay the fees?
t five years ar,d its biggest carrier is the ft's a prescription for disaster." says Theo
Sy JO Th1A: t DAM. hobt'l d Continental. Memphis plans a naw dote H3Cris. an aviation consultant In Vir
$rprf nPpO nJ a '. . STREET J rn . +L 5117 million runway, despite a 23°,'a decline Iola • 1
D EP1 "EP.- •Phis is one of the Last places in traffic since 1986. Atlanta breaks ground g Already, the building craze Is beginning
that wouid need a ni .v airport. this fall on the nation's largest. !nterna• to exact its tail. bfemphis's airport has halt
The tree major airport here ser tlonal terminal and is scoping nut sites for
seven million fewer passengers in 1''J') a second airport. Never Mind that Con to cut Staff 12s. In part because of soaring
than in 198E The seCC•nd biggest airline debt payments, In the last 10 months. 1
course C. which h, ids cne•fitth of th, air Stan�' ard & Prior's rating service has put
put
s!mrvine Denver. Continental. is teetering 1n port's gates has been empty for nine the bend issues of five airports on its Cred•
Chapter t 1, and a whole corridor of ga[Fs months, boarded Up and patrolled by sego !t Watch list (though it has since taken two
is literally roped nit' for lack of use. Arid rtty g,�ar
far from falling apart. the airpoi t got a "it does make you wonder," says An Please Turn to Page A�. C�lturr�n 1 1
S2 00 million facelift that was completed in dre.•.h Goetz of Deni university Center
1357• for Transportation Studies. 'What's going
Yet city officials in Denver are i.lanning on here •
to mothball the airport In two years. in fa- 1
vor of a brand new one And it won't be f,u°ss Min Pays?
jtr,t any airport. At 1 cost of ¶.2.4 billion, it Travelers wi l get stuck paying for Fart
will be the most expensive in history and of this - although they may rot realize it.
will sprawl over 53 square miles, twice the For the first time. most airports will soon
size of Manhattan, charge every 0.S. passenger a S2 to S12 tax 1
Across the U.S., the nation's airports for each round-trip, collecting uawards or
are in the midst of a building binge that St billion a year solely to fund new con-
fltas in the face of a plateauing demand for — ...
a
•
irline travel. The airline industry is tee!- Smatt Plans ' 1
ing frnrn record losses in 1990 that forced
four of the nation's 12 major carriers to Or Wishful Thinking?
fife for Chapter 11 bankruptcycourt pro. . Airports ate o,1 a building binge in memidst
tection. After years of double-digit gains, of a long•te■m travel slump. A sampling of
1
air traffic has been fiat for three years, some of the projects being planned: =•
and analysts don't expect any big uptutn • . • . • TRAFFIC TREND] I for years • --
A1Rpotn PROJECT • 1991 1996 =91
Gentler ' $.2.4 billion ' 3% - 21%
new p!rport
Memphis. 5177 million -- 9 -23=
. runway 1
-
expari510n
Atlanta $300 mltiion 20 6
-.Int'I terminal'
• Pittsburgh $690 nrlliian• -• 6 - 7 1
• • • •.new termlr:a! _
Newark S2 billion re• - 1 - 24
. developm nt• _ 111
'Sir per" year 21587.1990 ..
Semi: Aver aurtorxes , ,
-IA their major carriers,, ." "` s'•n'" Lines now ,�� £f :� '• ', •- `- ll - " itA AI[ hole (q - y " `l iiliii 111 the
elk :Atwater. Fla.,
I, of the city s traffic. b r renovations T he; and about bills owed
(nr exantp)e, has a era' termit►gl, a voce No l ne can go in there with Delta co square feet s oll
for gage cl e, a s ea n w er fi ate l i
� s s City °
I strong, ^says Alfred Checchi, co-chairman the airport, is vacant. ShI1,rKanone one-third of
on some days earlier this year of Northwest Airlines. which rejected the ternationa Airport Is building as Cit
"You could shoot a cannonball throu;h idea of moving a hub there. {m i Yin
some of these lace But once a forecast !tope, al b ' a little mild,"
places nnt hit an }•one,•' p , sports a.re additional runway." the airport's rt's i`ir, Duba of little faith,°
saes Robert Young, an attorney fighting reluctant to a +ljuat their predictions down- who doubt the wisdom at expanding. se
I Denier's responds to those
project. "We're nee fig the ward. When Pittsburgh's airpr,+rt authority you don't build, the
ghost towns e, some , t h issued boners in 1983 for a new terminal -- attract the airlines n y ' ov won't able to
To be sere, some of the construction which will cost more than half a billion dot-
clearly is required for modest upgrading3 lays— investors were told to expect steady forced byatrli es that phnsions are I.
I
clearly Aging or equi overcrowded modest ra most growth in passengers in each of the next 10 Lambert St. Louis Air being
of the building binge all F. ! 9911 , hoard unused gates. I
,z is fueled by funds r ye- , thou b, traffic had fallen eight more gates for S45 matron next year •
bnasterism and easy money. The funds are 5%. Yet when Pittsburgh put out a second even though its hub carr�ivrrt plans to add
happily raised by easy rno writfng firms that bond Yet
!art year to raise still more co . TWA, doesn't
profit on new bond issues. Many bond is- money for the terminal. use many of Its gates at full
sues get glowing traits from bend -ratio y year p
did t adjust Its holds 2S year leases o n S2 the airport's
city, h m
for�ca�ts. And this �
(isms that sometimes don't update bOnd- ttlelr g ain. dropping 6:0. tip. Competitors at the airport, g p passenger 78 gates and refuses to give any of them
count is down once again.
public revleus of the increasingly bleak "Forecasting is more an art than set- are out of c rte. mPamvhile,
market for air travel. Cities, meanwhile, once," expiarns Alan Stewart, an assistant Mom, pace and d
1 , airport authority. demanding more
way to promote director at the dr "We asked TWA about Its `ateS says
I often see airports as a wa
tourism, attract jobs and put their names
on the map, all at the same time. They Finally, At t G e Sa 0 m i million l l on to 74 g ates, the to Donald Aubuchon, assistant airport direc-
view multimillion anliar erpa.ttsionc and for 7S tor. "They said. no ' •'
renovations as the way to attract the air• burgh terminal is running gates, the c t Wooing united lines. per gate of some airport projects. Amen!• None of the risks seers to be making
ties Include arches that "bring to mind the Hedrick, the airport direr en airport officials hesitate And nowhere are
Lam, Hedrick, all eat Ed
Mr In Columbus, d Asked the city to Edwardian rail stations,"
to a brochure; according the more e ager to expand and to spend
approve constructive of tier. new lure; �? minion wort y
few rove c ago, he o gates a tures tnurai and "meditative gardens"; t In t i n mi te
g ot a surprising man- arid a planned F S2.4 win United Airilnrs first s tota for the new
date: "Then said tq baud l0, They had a p 0- (c " ?t•hiett ceiling in a S2.! billion roject—
real positive attitude about the future main torminal rr trrt the size of two football airport in the V.S. since 1974—the totally as.
here." Ds So far, six i t thorn fields.
complete '' gates have been "iCs really ►a sumed more than $ou million of United
completed' One inn t u ,e j the have
ell five y great to have a vaulted cell- bond debt, financed the construction of the
oo at n about half of h ti and ing —until 'IOU start payi th e higher air• alr)lne's private club for t'ip ;. and will
Columbus has assumed S15.5 of million more conditir_•ning hills," says James Murphy, spend half a billion dollars on improve -
debt. But city officials Bar it's a an aviction consultant in Alexandria, Va. meow that will benefit tended. as well as
of b Invi intent. They o ial traffic will It's easy to get carried away," continental. But Denver tna en
ga will he ready. pick up. and elr ett it does. the Piling on too mart , features steer of such Obvious robif Y t
have l
gate will wort' against (urine airlines Though they The new site is an ISO roard r cab ride de
Underlying will
ter building boom is the fits. airlines don't like paying the accom• When the initially may be drawn by the fringe belle. (Turn d'�wntown.
I ques nderl 'I nation that the current slump
is just n temporary, at the
blip s ! the
time constttrn Is partying higher rents. With its neon airport public •le new air rt wa s
uct completed. airports streaked Pie vaters and Ptej palm trees, n told the of strong a new airport war
say there Uct be r oI etel Of new cos- the Les Vegas McCarter, AIr o t has to traffic. ceded because of strong growth in ale
say t h e airlines -. pO n e n _ Pra. charge airlines sg3 a spare foot for ba w But Federal thinking d turned out to be
I tim and that they will be x pa. r pace — one + the g' wrong Fedora! ass experts g, had o'o
to tl. Ithy enough ga ^e cltitrrt s , highest rates that 54 million 25senge e � 1 -tied
pay for alt t new services. of any airport in the U.S. Several carriers in and out of Denver by 1993. They later re-
p r a year would fly
to So Fast even sued the a!rport brief�y overt e
charges. Passengers paid for it in the end. duce year f ter De ve a had i ssued only a
narlo
Travel experts say that sa;tg�uine see• d ?red. Air travel zoomed several carriers imposed a 57.50 departure and started after h2d lsstied bonds
is outdated. cited in the charge at r
19Sps is o u t se dlscc ;utnt carriers ke ,t crop- Las V egas for several years. dais are pressing Lion. Now tonal offn • 1
ping up, and cheap (aces were prevalent. expansions
Airports insist othe.on fo take
the airlines delays. its Ctirren rt. to cu t D uper Sta
Fell the new airport• to cut a1
Now monopoly and
roarer and hire prices are they've of + ti travel I
I commonplace, and the chances p f ice sare h eu got. they when left at the mercy ton Al;v notor Lous In the !?Sns for
PeopleExpress and $9 fares are remote. reneges o n the promise to set l up f a hull eeanipe Jr, a con t ors. Put, with traffic
� of tad oe3ther and
skies. They mega terriers dominate the "It's the price of deregulation," says John d'�wn, delays have fallen f0�e since 19og
n Only a few me
major hub strong
enough to set
a few v Dube. ien�tEeture deregulation ins rat s that are far worse—and
o her major ss h en' dell. -
sites. And they are particularly unlikely to in 1979, the f ederal go.ernment dictated tntC a whole new ai
pot aren't build-
set up at airports which a rival carrier al. airline -
ready up at agnates, routes. Now i t is more difficult to Undaunted.
Yet airpnr( off!cials continue predict an airport's reeds, e local rsupport
promoters have
1 to offer Out the Door rrtountEd a major campalgtt to win bullish predictions of a surge in air travel o ws(heir - lai b? t
to justify their expansion tuts — and anslon des' ,, to got burned four times. Its 2►r Kaness City knows the hazards well_lt rt was conconstruction or l s! te, a t. At the backdro tree
sell bonds to pay . p of
for It ell. in the 91 c onc re te and freshly churned
In raising funds for a new Seen million which later pulled our d located s at St. cf Stand binacula has
� Included an for visitors to
terrTiiiral, Atlanta's major airport, Harts- Louis. T the hit rt opened its t S t.
and
field, forecasts a hefty 30% increase in three times to airlines promising to build tale In the va panorarrla of giant cranes
passengers by the end of the decade. It hubs. Braniff International Corp. set up a And at the existing airport 18 miles to bulldozers tailin away.
predicts two major airlines will use It as a hub first, then went out of business. In the west, electronic
hub. Yet traffic is off 20% this year alone, can Eastern, which later dropped grit
e
The airpnr t has lost a major tenant In the and sold Its space billboards rattle off an
,
ndl 'es st of glowing moved...2.e00
statistics; "e
demise cf Eastern Airlines. a development iff I. e if n l people w orking ce to the e reorganized Bran- million cubic yards o! earth
tha will ir e il
r • and ahead o at the site. schedule... ... Uncles budget
-"
h1 , R— 1 2 -9 75 F R I 1 r_. : 00 USFI•JS TCFO — ES ,
Attachment #4 1
_ • 1
c`�- ~t t, �, United States Department of the Interior 1"i% ., . =�
R FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE milimmilmmilmms
� � Twin CiucN Ficld Office "�� MI
4, 3_ .e 41 East 80th Start
Bloomingron, 55425 -16M
t■ RI;PLY Ril i:a rOr I
I NI•.• 'A: Vil,TC.R1
MAR 121993
Jean Johnson 1
City of Eden Prairie
Eden Prairie City Hall II 7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344
Dear Ms. Johnson: 1
As per your request for additional information regarding the extension of one
of the Flying Cloud Airport runways, we are still researching the potential
impacts of the project. The airport lies adjacent to the bluffs of the II
Minnesota River, a critical bird migration corridor for waterfowl. including
swans, wading birds, neotropical migrants. and birds of prey. The two large
wetland comclexes of Grass Lake are very attractive to large concentrations of 11 waterfowl. This wetland lies directly under the approach for Runway 36. The
other two runways are perpendicular to the Minnesota River and its adjacent
wetlands, which are part of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge. II The Refuge was established due to the quality of fish and wildlife habitat
along this portion of the Minnesota River.
The runway extension will allow Flying Cloud Airport to be used by higher 1
speed jet aircraft. This will directly result in a higher birdstrike
probability due to the higher landing and takeoff speeds. The actual
probability of a birdstrike could be determined by a study similar to the
II
Fergus Falls Airport Study conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
Animal Damage Control.
There are alternatives which are currently available for these higher speed 1
aircraft such as using Holman Field in St. Paul. Therefore, we do not support
the extension of any Flying Cloud Airport runways. If you have any questions,
please call Mr. Nick Rowse of my staff at 725 -3548. II
Sincerely.
4171/114u4)
1
'Lis
Field Supervisor II
cc: Dick Wetzel, U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal Damage Control. St.
Paul. MN II
1
II
M
c...' N: „ ', „iit T . see •air
lt
1 =
O F United States Department of the Interior ri.
N A C
- -C . � 'POW a FISH AND WILDLIFE iLfi\ 1C •11111i r
-- - .° Muui ,.,tt, Volley Nut if %%lid1de licluf;e UM mo
r ,Ar "' :1815 East Ant titrvoq
Illuuutingt. M inttrsq,tu r,r142r, 16l,( Attachment #4
September 17, 1991
I Honorable Doug Tenras
City of Eden Prairie
Attn: Craig Dawson
I Eden Prairie City Hall
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
1 near Mayor Tenpas:
I regret not being able to send a representative to the meeting held this evening
II of September 17th concerning expansion of the Flying Cloud Airport. However, I
would like to express our concerns with the project. The Minnesota Valley
National Wildlife Refuge's (Refuge) is part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife (F.:S)
Service. The Twin Cities Ecological Services office is also part of the FWS and
II we have coordinated our comments on this issue with that office as well.
Our understanding Is that there is a proposal to expand the existing Flying Cloud
Airport and to change the approach and lake off flight patterns sending air
I traffic out over the Minnesota River valley and over the Refuge. These proposed
changes near large wetlands which attract significant waterfowl and waterbird use
The use of the same airways by
( ' present a serious threat to public safety. waterfowl /waterbirds and aircraft are not compatible.
The Flying Cloud Airport is located on a bluff overlooking the two most
� ' productive units on the Refuge. The Refuge units are used by several groups of
large migratory birds. Traditionally, a major migratory stopover fut waterfowl,
the area also attracts large concentrations of outer waterbirds, most notably
!I tundra swans, pelicans, double- crested cormorants, great blue herons and great
egrets. In addition, the Slue Lake Heron Colony, one of the large rookeries in
the metropolitan area with over 800 nests, is located in the area. The agree is
also becoming a notable wintering area for bald eagles.
11 because of the significant hist.oLics1 use of the floodplain area adjacent to the
il Flying Cloud Airport by migratory bltda and the threat that they present to air
traffic in the area, we cannot support airport expansion at this site. To
deliberately increase air traffic in un area known to contain large numbers of
waterfowl, other waterbirds and eagles is to deliberately create a hazard for the
air traffic.
11_
In addition to the concern expressed above, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
/: is one of the federal agencies charged with ensuring that President Bush policy
of No Net Loss of Wetlands is followed. Therefore., w4 wuuld also be opposed to
il .
1
2 I
any filling or altering of wetlands that may be planned as part of the expansion.
There is alau likely to be a negative impact on the Refuge due to noise and its
impact on the public using the Refuge. The Refuge feaster plan calls for
development of hiking, biking and horseback riding trails on the Refuge unit. The
trails will join trails connecting Eden Prairie and the 72 mile long Minnesota
Valley State Trail. An increase in air traffic and deliberately routing it over
the valley will detract from the natural experience the visitor to the Refuge
would hope to get while on the Refuge. The Refuge is a unique national treasure
that is a valuable asset to all the adjacent communities. The FWS is protecting
the lands within the Refuge boundaries but it will take community commitment and
involvement to protect the area from threats from outside the boundaries.
The Fish and Wildlife Service will continue to participate as the Flying Cloud
Airport Expansion enters the formal review process. If you have any questions
regarding our position on this matter feel free to call we at 854 -5900 or Paul
Burke at 725 -3548.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Larson
: Refuge Manager
cc: Eden Prairie City Council
1
1
•
•
1.
1
1
1
Attachment #5
1
L. LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
1 1103 W. Burnsville Parkway • Suite 209 Burnsville, MN 55337
Telephone: (612) 894.0357 FAX: (612) 894.5028
March 11, 1993
1 •
Mr. Craig Dawson
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344.3677
Dear Craig,
L. Lehman & Associates, Inc. has reviewed the Flying Cloud Airport expansion
documentation sent to u$ and has developed the following comments with respect to the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Draft Seeping Decision Document (EAW/DSDD).
1. It appears the normal EAW/DSDD acceptance and approval process was
interrupted and not completed in the normal manner for such environmental
1 review documents. The timetable for continuation of the review process is not on
schedule.
2. The EAW seems to contain substantial errors. Specific errors relate to the need
for alteration of water resources, well closures, connections to water supply and
depth to ground water. The supporting documentation directly contradicts the
EAW in these issues. Additionally, the bluff region is a sensitive area with
respect to ground water according to a report prepared by the Minnesota
Pollution control Agency in June, 1989, Ground Water Contamination
Susceptibility In Minnesota.
3. The EAW ig based on an old expansion design, not the currently proposed plan.
1 4. The environmental effects cannot be determined until the design of surface water
impoundments is complete. The use of infiltration basins or lined catchments
determines the point of impact of any surface water contaminants. Until this
part of the design is complete, environmental effects cannot be determined.
5. Control of surface water runoff will be a key part of the ground water protection
plan to be prepared by the MAC. This plan, however, does not need to be
prepared until October 1, 1993. As discussed in comment 4, these plans need to
be in place before the environmental effects of an expansion can be determined.
1
1
Mr. Craig Dawson 1
Page 2
March 11, 1993
6. An environmental baseline from which impacts can be assessed has not been
established. The current site conditions must be known before proceeding. No
shallow wells exist on the property to establish baseline conditions in the Upper
or Lower Drift aquifers. These shallow aquifers are highly susceptible to
pollution.
1. No indication is given that fill to be used in construction has been tested to 1
determine if it is already contaminated from runoff at the airport.
8. It is not clear if extension of Runway 9L/27R has been figured into the volumes 1
of fill.
I hope these comments are useful to you. If you have any questions, please feel free to 1
call.
Sincerely, 1
L. LEHMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
(%0,4...:14-'4d;,-AmCda--"-) I
Linda Lehman 1
President
LL:as 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 November 27, 1992
Attachment #6
1 The Honorable Sidney Pauly
17450 West 78th Street
Eden Prairie MN 55344
•
1
I Re: Minnesota Statutes Section 473.641 Subd. 4. Notwit any other law,
the metropolitan airports commission shall not use revenue from any source, as described by section 473..608, for construction of
air facilities to expand or upgrade the use of an existing metropolitan airport from minor use to intermediate use status as defined
by the metropolitan development guide, aviation chapter, adopted pursuant to section 473.145.
1
Dear Sidney:
•
we discussed I am recounting my understanding of the meaning and intent of the above
1 stated statute. Subdivision 4 was adopted in 1980 as part of an omnibus appropriations bill of
that year. Representative Paul McCarron and I were 'nci al supporters
The metropolitan airports commission (MAC) was considering
airport. principal
There was considerable expenditures to len the sion.
1 runways at the Anoka County Blaine g
local opposition to
changing the use classification of the airport as the public felt betrayed since the MAC had
1 never exercised its zoning authority over the years to mitigate effects of an airport use
change to accommodate larger aircraft.
1 The principal distinguishing feature between minor and intermediate airports is runwa y
Iength. Runway length is highly correlated to aircraft size and aircraft size is in turn
1 correlated to airport classification. Incidentally, although the classifications "minor" and
"intermediate" may appear to be unique to Minnesota the airport characteristics were
1 essentially copied from federal airport classifications of different names but similar purposes.
1 would imagine one would have a pretty powerful argument that changing runway
lengths
the development guide to be different from federal standards for small airports w uld be an
1 attempt to subvert the purpose of this statute.
• McCarron and I believed that other communities might be subjected to similar indiscretions
by, MAC in the future so the language was drafted making. the statute metro
purpose of Subd.. .4 was` simply i� � area. wide. The
p y prevent MAC•fio�u insidiously changing minor airport use
1 to larger aircraft without the approval of the Minnesota legislature.
•
▪ I hope this information is useful to you. If I can provide further information please feel free
I to call.
1 Sincerely, •
1 Gordon 0. Voss .' " • • • ._ •
•
1
- • State of Minnesota
Office of the Legislative Auditor-
Centennial Office Building i St. Pau'. MN 55155
612/296-4708
Attachment # 7
AIRPORT PLANNING • A flawed analysis of future noise annoy-
ance for communities around MSP, and
February 19, 1993 • An erroneous analysis of trends in hubbing 1
activity at MSP (the use of MSP as a con -
I n December 1988, the Metropolitan Council necting point for travelers).
completed a study of the long -term adequacy of
the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport For example, in 1988, the Council's consultant esti- r
(MSP). The study raised serious questions about mated that, without expansion, airport delays at
MSP's physical and environmental capacity to han- MSP would grow from 14 minutes per aircraft in
dle future aviation activity. As a result, the Coun- 1988 to 50 minutes in 2008. In contrast, MAC's 1
cil recommended, and the 1989 Legislature consultants estimated that delays would grow from
adopted, a "dual- track" planning process to study 2 minutes to 6 minutes. The Council's estimate for
both MSP expansion and new airport development. 1988 was not consistent with MSP's experience.
In addition, more recent studies confirm that the 1
Although the seven -year planning process is now Council's estimates for 2008 were not reasonable.
only about half completed, the process has become
quite controversial. We were asked by the Legisia- We also found that the technical work of both the
I
tive Audit Commission to examine the technical Council and MAC needs to be more clearly pre -
adequacy of work already completed by the Metro- sented and summarized for policy makers. In addi-
politan Council and the Metropolitan Airports tion, the two agencies need to better coordinate 1
Commission (MAC). In addition, legislators ques- their efforts so that they are using similar methods
tioned whether recent changes in the airline indus- of analysis.
try should prompt changes in the scope or timing
of the planning process. Despite these problems, we conclude that: 1
We found that both agencies have done some good • The dual -track process should be contin-
. planning work and have conducted a process ued, although the need for more runway
1
which is open and accessible. However: capacity appears to be farther off in the
future than initially orecast.
• The Council's consultants and staff have y
used a number of questionable methods to The 1988 adequacy study overstated future capac- 1
reach key conclusions in past studies. ity problems by overestimating future airport op-
erations, particularly regional airline operations,
The technical problems we found with the Coun- and by using questionable methods of analyzing 1
cil 's studies include: airport adequacy and estimating the benefits of ca-
Use of an inappropriate method for deter - pacity enhancement. In early 1990, both agencies
• revised their forecasts of future operations and pas-'
mining airport adequacy, senger activity. We found the revised estimates of
• Significant overestimation of current and total operations to be reasonable, although we sug-
future airport delays, gent some changes to certain categories of aircraft 1
operations. Revised passenger estimates are prob-
• Substantial overestimation of certain bene- ably too high primarily because we think that both
Ms of capacity enhancement at either MSP hubbing have overestimated the future level of
hubbing activity.
1
or a new airport,
1
1
1
Bascd on its revised fore- Airport Operations at MSP that both agencies -
cast, MAC staff tents- closely monitor North -
lively estimate that west Airlines' financial
additional runway capac- B0 Thousands condition and recom-
1 ity may not be needed mend changes in the
until 2005 or 2010. dual -track process if
Given the uncertainty in 800 1988 Fort warranted.
1 the airline industry, how-
ever, it seems reasonable 400
Actual 1990 Forecast Finally, we recommend
to continue the dual- that the Council exam -
track process as sched- ine the need to protect
I uled. Initial estimates 200 viable expansion options
suggest that improving at MSP. Currently, the
MSP could prove to be o Council has authority to
I costly. Consequently, a 1972 1982 1992 2002 2012 limit development in the
comprehensive and tech- Year new airport search arcs
nically competent analy- but has not worked
sis of the benefits and enough with communi-
1 costs of the various options for improving capacity ties around MSP to ensure that future development
needs to be done before MSP is expanded or does not limit the viability of MSP expansion op-
closed. tions.
1 Continuing the dual -track planning process would riopies of the report are available from the Pro -
help the region reach an informed decision pro- gram Evaluation Division. If you have any
I vided that the Metropolitan Council takes prompt questions, please contact Roger Brooks, John
action to upgrade the technical support it receives Yunker, or Elliot Long at (612) 296 -4708.
from consultants and staff. We also recommend
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
.1
Attachment #8 1 '
7ba.ts4etropoi!tan Airports Commission wants to expand Flying Cloud Airport in Edon Prairie, but many residents are opposed. I
On the ground at Fl " C11 di
N
Eden Prairie residents oppose airport's .
i�p p sex ans�ori
. .
By Norman Draper other small "reliever" airports The MAC fburtrl it in s taddes. "We have
Sta1TWriter should be siphoning off much of 1 Kipp, city p anner an and Sta said Scot
anff
liai
the private- plane traffic at the big More than 200 airport opponents son to the Flying Flying g Cloud Airpo
If officials at the Metropolitan airport. showed up for a community Advisory Commission, which was
Airports Commission (MAC) meeting two weeks no during appointed by the council. "We'r
have an airfield of dreams, it ad. Pius, MAC predie•tions show that peak tiaration season, a time not formulating any attack at tbi
joins Eden Prairie's Flying Cloud a lot more airplanes ale going to when Yerkes said 50 to 75 people. point."
Airport. Enlarge the airport into be flying in and out o f the Twin would have been a good turnout.
the surrounding countryside, they Cities area over the next decade He said he expects 500 people for A key question is just how much
say, and the airplanes should or so, and they want Flying Clow{ Tuesday's City Council meeting, influence the city can exert o
Come. to be able to pull its weight. when the airport will be tt:e pri- MAC'S •clec:ision. The cotnmis�
But there's an obstacle. To do that, they say, two of its mary topic of discussion. Sion recently completed an env'-
mnmentaJ assessment worksheet
runways have to be lengthened •— Anticipating a large crowd, the en the project. That is a prelimi
Plenty of Eden Prairie residents one by 1,100 fete, the other by council has decided to meet in the • nary survey of the effect such
like the airport just fine the way it 400 feet -- to handle safely the Eden Prairie High School auditor project will have on the environ�
is and don't want it getting any bigger corporate jets in use these riurn.
bigger. They fear that a bigger days. They also want additional t an ine aide wildlife, air gtiali- •
ty an
airport with more planes would hangar space and a safety buffer Yerkes, who is president of Zero d wetlands.
increase noise and reduce proper- of open space in which land use Expansion at Flying C1,ud, a viii- In the case of the Flying Cloud
ty values. would be strictly Limited. zens' group, said airport expan- expansion proposal, a more le-
sion opponents were liked when tailed environmental impact
"We don't see any need for it out MAC officials say they can't pre- they recently discovered that one statement will follow. MAC. ai
here," said Steve Yerkes, an ac- 'dial how much increased traffic of the runways to be extende planner Mark Ryan said th
countant and po rt r
prominent airport would result directly from the int- would have to he moved an addi- worksheet process revealed that
opponent who lives near the air- provements. They project that tional 5001 feet to the west because among other things, that there are
Pon. takeoffs and landings at the air- it didn't meet new federal sten- Indian burial mounds in the riper
■
purt 11 will increase somewhat re- dards r spacing between a sun- way construction zone and tha
"I moved out here knowing the gardl ss of whether there is any way and a road. there is the potential for ground
airport is there, but to make a expansion. water contamination from con -
major expansion like this, I think, The MAC is asking for a waiver struction of the runway extension
is just plain.w•rong." In recent years, total operations at of the new standards, Schmidt and additional hangars. .The en
Flying Clout have increased only srtd. Barring that, the new regula- vironmental impact statemen
The Flying Cloud Airport is part modestly after a his dropoJT from tiaras will set back construction, will deal with these and othe •
of MAC's plan to ease the traffic the late 1960s, when Vietnam which the agency hoped could be- effects in more detail.
burden at Minneapolis -St. Faul War veterans were using their gin text year. -
International Airport, MAC ofli- G.I. Bill benclits to take flying
vials say two runways must he lessons there. t
Acs :.ording to Schmidt, MAC en.
Lengthened to make Flying Cloud Yerkes said the vpponcnts' inner the final say on what happen..
diate goal is to persuade the City once the statement is completed, •
safer for the planes that already Gary Schmidt, who manages re- Council to oppose the expansion. but he said the city can have a
use it. liever airports for the MAC, said The council has yet to take an
it ex e : d to encounter signiticant' influence nn that de
p cte unter local op- official position, and is studying vision. •
But it's also been MAC policy for position to expansion. its legal options.
years that Flying Cloud and five
l S_s 1
w� TTV ` bt,s.
1
1
1
s Hying Cloud Airport expansion plans
.
1 sLAN su., I ov- heading for Metro Council decision
t'} I ` Ily Richard Crawford ding hangar capacity. planning for the Twin Cities
I On the other side is the city of region, has approval power over
All the players appear buck- Eden Prairie (see accompany- any airport improvement that
Attachment #8 led up and ready to tackle a pro- ing story), and a local citizens costs more than $2 million.
posed expansion of Flying Cloud group called Zero Expansion at A Met Council vote could
Airport in Eden Prairie. Flying Cloud. The Eden Prairie come as early as next month, if
On one side of the aisle is the side — as the citizens group questions about the proposed ex-
. Metropolitan Airports Commis- name indicates — is opposed to pansion are adequately resolved
sion (MAC), a state agency that expansion plans. between MAC and Met Council
1 owns and oversees metro -area The Metropolitan Council, staff members.
airports MAC has proposed an however, may have the most The city of Eden Prairie is
$11.7 million expansior>,ak- Flying important role in deciding taking an active role, having
Cloud that includes a Z:Lot whether the airport expansion budgeted $10,000 for a public
extension to the southern of two becomes reality. The Met Coun- AIRPORT: To next page
east -west runways, and expan- cil, which conducts long -range
Airport •
I From previous page about 225,000 flights at the air - 30,000 -pound weight class are
• port in 1992. An expansion at quieter than many older, lighter
relations firm and $10,000 on Flying Cloud could also help planes, Ryan said.
technical consultants to fight divert smaller planes from the "But there's nothing that says
I expansion. Minneapolis tional St. Paul Interns- the older, larger, noisier aircraft
"We question if there really is Airport. couldn't fly in there," said Steve
a need for expansion," said MAC, however, has a history Yerkes of Eden Prairie, a board
Eden Prairie Mayor Doug Ten- of overprojections, according to member of Zero Expansion.
I pas. "I really believe if enough Eden Prairie planner Scott "The expansion would be a
people understand the facts, Kipp. Back in 1977, Kipp said, colossal waste of money,"
' there's no need to expand the MAC projected there would be Yerkes said. "MAC's traffic pro-
airport. We'd like to build some 440,000 flights in 1985 The actual jections are ridiculously high."
' consensus to stop this as early as number of flights in 1985 was Yerkes said there are 600
we can." 176,000. families on the Zero Expansion
MAC •representatives main- "Let's look at reality," Kipp mailing list. The group, he said,
fain the expansion is warranted said, is pleased with the actions the ci
I to accommodate aircraft that Representatives of Zero Ex- ty has taken so far.
already use Flying Cloud. pansion at Flying Cloud say they Yerkes said the pending Met
"The runway expansion is are concerned about the pro- Council decision on the expan-
more than justified according to spects of larger airplanes and sion is a critical step in the
I FAA planning criteria," accor- more noise at the airport. process.
ding to a report prepared by a But MAC officials maintain "We hope the Met Council will
consulting firm for MAC. that large airline jets would not quash it right there," Yerkes
1 "Strong support from aviation use an expanded Flying Cloud. said.
users also indicates that the run- "That's not going to happen," If the Met Council approves
way extension is needed. The Ryan said. plans for expansion, that would
need for building -area expan- One component of the expan- likely trigger an Environmental
sion is based upon forecasts. sion plan would be to increase Impact Statement. That, Yerkes
I MAC receives numerous in- the maximum weight of aircraft said, would be another crucial
quiries concerning availability using Flying Cloud from 20,000 phase in the decision- making
of hangar space at Flying Cloud pounds to 30,000 pounds. process.
'
Airport." Newer aircraft in the 20,000- to
Although Flying Cloud is a
safe airport now, according to
MAC staff member Mark Ryan,
I an expanded runway would im-
prove the safety environment.
A longer runway could allow
planes to fly in a broader range
I of weather conditions, said
Chauncey Case, a Met Council
planner who specializes in
airports.
I A point of contention between •
MAC and Eden Prairie officials
is the projected number of air-
craft that will fly in and out of
I Flying Cloud in the future.
MAC estimates that there
could be as many as 379,000
daytime flights in and out of Fly-
I ing Cloud in 2010. There were
MN ' MI IMII MN IIIII MN I OM NM r = 11111111 I I MI MN M
6. p SMLog. 9-is -- i
Airport
Hundreds a laud From page 1A Airport Adviso Commission, "I've never mowed m
pp PaS Advisory y lawn
_ said safety is an issue. at 4:16 in the morning, but it pro -
avr Ort opponents Prairie ' Road and more in- For a pilot, he said, "there's bably would have the same ef-
p pp trusive landing lights. nothing more valuable than run- feet on my neighbors," Jessen
MAC predicts an increase in way in front of you, and nothing said.
traffic at Flying Cloud whether more useless than runway Other council members E
But Flying *Cloud business managers or not the expansion is approv- behind you." agreed there are issues to be 1
ed. But if the runway is extend- A recent study showed the air- resolved, including continuing .
defend plan to extend runways, land ed, takeoffs and landings would port pumps $27 million into the noise complaints and the
increase by a third, and there local economy annually, Olson credibility of the MAC after the.
3 900 to 5,000 feet to a ccomodate would be four times as many jet said, but the airport must - late runway plan change. •!
By David Christenson 3,900 operations, Yerkes said. change as aviation shifts toward . The council did not take an of-
larger jet aircraft. To meet "To have four times that larger planes and corporate ficial position on the plan, and,
Renewed controversy over federal rules, the runway may amount of jet traffic is almost users. members said they are waiting
Flying Cloud Airport expansion also be shifted 500 feet west and unthinkable in this area," he "By limiting the airport slze, for more information from the #
heated up the Eden Prairie High away from Highway 169 -212, but 1
P � said. we are taking away an oppor- attorney general and a :meeting ;
School auditorium Tuesday as MAC • s requested a waiver of Expansion opponents said tunity for corporate aircraft to with MAC officials. • 1
opponents and supporters filled thatfi e. there is no growth in general consider us, and limiting our op- Mayor Doug Tenpas said he
the room. • plan also includes a , aviation — the category which portunity to make a sale," he had more questions than
Airing opinions before the 1 ! 7 1 1 t extension of the nor - includes corporate jets and said. "The effect of the lost sale answers, but in his opinion,. "the'
Eden Prairie City Council, thern runway and purchase of other small planes — but MAC . ripples through our city and has , aiport has been an asset, and I
several expansion opponents — 253 acres of land, part of which wants to shift traffic from other multiple effects." think the airport can continue to
many of which were recent ar- would be used for new building metro area airports to Eden • Olson told the council, "do not be an asset in its present state." '1
rivals -J listed concerns about space. Prairie. let the zeal of a .few make you Tim Anderson, MAC director1
flight noise, pollution, loss of Steve Yerkes, organizer of the The argument that a longer '' believe that represents the view of airports, .said the agency is'
taxable land, loss of property new citizens.' group Zero Expan- runway would be safer for of a neighborhood." s basically "stopping the process" ;
value in surrounding sion of Flying Cloud Airport, larger planes is "a phony Some residents complained of plan approval to seek the
neighborhoods and other possi- said the runway shift is a "ma- issue," said Scott Mace of Zero about low -flying planes and lack Federal Aviation Administra -'
ble effects. jor change" in plans late in the Expansion. of response from airport of- tion waiver to forego the runway
The Metropolitan Airports process, and it could lead to "If there are planes using the ficials when pilots violate volun- shift.
Commission (MAC), owner and lower plane approach elevations airport which can't use it safely, tary anti -noise procedures. An environmental impact
operator of the airport, has pro- over homes, relocation of Eden they should get the hell out," City Council member Marty statement must be done on the
posed an expansion of Flying Mace said. Jessen, who lives near the air- project, and more public input
Cloud's southern runway from AIRPORT: To page 27A But Jay Olson, manager of port, said he has logged disturb- will be invited during the state -
Thunderbird Aviation • and a ing jet takeoffs and landings as ment writing process, Anderson
member of the city Flying Cloud early as 4:16 a.m. and as late as said.
. 11:42 p.m. -
Airport expansion need not proven
E?. NE lb— 3 -- cf f 1
—
Back in 1988, when the ',
that MAC's intention is to turn
!Metropolitan Airports Commission Flying Cloud into an intermediate Airport opinions
(hMAC) came to the city of Eden D < *.. a•. "; airport with the function of reliev to the editor:
Prairie with a consultant's report on ti 1 , ' �j ing Twin Cities International. The Metropolitan Airports Corn-
:the possible expansion of Flying •, .., , The reason for this concern is mission (MAC) has temporarily inter-
:Cloud Airport, the city's input to ",y based on previous attempts to turn ntjtted its plans to expand [lying Cloud
;then, was negative. Since then, Flying Cloud into an intermediate Airport, pending an FAA ruling on a
MAC has continued to pursue . . airport. Before a limited runway variance MAC has requested.
; expansion, and with nothing really ,� , , expansion was approved in 1979 to It is extremely important that the
new in their proposal the city's i' � the current 3,900 feet, MAC residents of Eden Prairie use this lull
:position should continue to be indicated its desire to turn Flying to convey their opinion on the pro -
,negative. Cloud into an intermediate airport. posed expansion to the members of
There are numerous technical George Bentley In the mid- 1980's, after failing the Eden Prairie City Council. Al-
;and legal issues surrounding this
g g to get Anoka County Airport though the city's jurisdiction in this
' osed expansion, The L Word
P ro P P many more designated at an intermediate matter is uncertain, we are told that
than can be properly discussed airport, MAC once again stated its the Metropolitan Council — which
'here. However, there are a few clearly states that virtually all of the intentions to make Flying Cloud an must approve MAC's plans for this
:fundamental issues that are at the projected increase would come intermediate airport. Council expansion — will strongly consider
core of the expansion debate. from jet traffic, and calls for an member Paul Redpath served on a the city's position in its decision-
; The crux of the issue is that extension of the southerly east /west committee which, after consider- making process.
MAC wants to expand the airport runway from its present 3,900 feet able debate and argument, finally We urge everyone to call or write
.to allow more private jet traffic in to 5,000 feet to accommodate this dissuaded MAC from its intentions the Eden Prairie City Council ntent-
Flyinl Cloud Airport. This state- additional traffic. toward Flying Cloud. bers this week. Let them know how
:ment is not inflammatory rhetoric, The problem is that the report is But only a few years later they you feel about airport noise and other
it is simple fact taken directly from basically flawed and incomplete. It were right back with an expansion forms of pollution. Let then know
'the consultant's report which is the does not justify the need for plan for Flying Cloud, asking for a how you feel about crowded skies.
• .basis for the expansion proposal. expansion of Flying Cloud Airport runway length of 5,000 feet. Now, Let them know how you feel about a
The consultant'- report is within the entire metro airports 5,000 feet is not long enough for an possible erosion of our real estate tax
accompanied with' creased traffic system. It looks at Flying Cloud in airport to be designated as an base. And ask them how Eden Prairie
projections for F y rig Cloud. It a microcosm while ignoring the intermediate airport, but 5,001 feet could ever benefit from this expan-
macrocosm of metro wide need. is. sion. Your opinion is important to
The report also assumes a Even if Flying Cloud is never them, and will help then, decide what
projected growth in airport usage redesignated as an intermediate is best for Eden Prairie.
that many knowledgeable people airport, a 5,000 foot runway will Steve Yerkes
advise is unrealistic. Even with significantly increase jet traffic, President
these high traffic numbers, the with the subsequent noise issues, Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
consultant's report goes on to say and will dramatically impact on our Eden Prairie
that 95 percent of airport traffic guide plan for land uses for most of
projections for the next 10 years southern Eden Prairie.
would be adequately served by the The people who live in the area
present facilities. of the airport, as well as the rest of
Where is the need? What is the the community, deserve to live
ability of the rest of the metro without this constant effort to
system to handle excess traffic? If , expand Flying Cloud. They should
handling excess traffic elsewhere is not have to constantly organize and
a problem, why is it a problem? fight against something for which
These and many other questions there is no proven need. MAC
relating to the report remain should back off and choose the "no
unanswered. build" option.
This gets to another issue that
has not been discussed very much (George Bentley is a businessman
lately. What is MAC's long - terns and former Eden Prairie City
• intention for Flying Cloud Airpoi Council member.)
MI MI NE INIII NM I EN • ' NM 1111111 NE N I NM ' NM NE
1
.,0•Ncw ( I 1 ( /1 Z_
City forming strategy to fight runway plan I
By Mark Weber formally oppose the expansion proj- exaggerated in order to justify the
Eden Prairie city officials said ect, and said Tuesday it will press expansion. They point to a 1975 pre-
Tuesday they'll ask the Metropolitan several points as the review process diction that '85 operations would to-
Council to postpone its review of an advances: tal 440,000; in fact, the total was
amended plan to expand Flying Cloud * The city will attempt to throw 176,500, according to the city.
Airport. the issue into the legislative arena by * Finally, the city indicates it will
The city council. meeting in regu- exploring a 1980 law restricting air - assert that MAC has underestimated I
lac session, said it would spend at ort spending that would change an costs for land acquisition by about 50
least part of that extra time planningeld's classification from minor percent, based on current land sales
strategy to oppose the expansion to in ermediate. The law defined minor — an error that would increase total
proposal put forth by the Metropoli- airports as facilities with runways not development costs to as much as S20
I
tan Airports Commission (MAC), exceeding 4,000. Although that million. They call that an "unwise
operators of the local airport. number has been pushed upward in investment."
The MAC is seeking Metro Coun- intervening years, City Attorney The council said Tuesday it may
cil endorsement to expand an east- Roger Pauly argues the legislation also begin checking I
S g into the cost of
west runway 1.100 feet, to approxi- may still be tied to the lower number. hiring technical experts to fight the
mately 5,000 feet, so that small jets • MAC's amended plan for Flying MAC proposal, much like the city did
can be better accommodated. The plan Cloud recommends the allowance of in the case of the Flying Cloud Landfill
also calls for added hangar space. In jet aircraft with a maximum takeoff expansion.
I
all. the proposal requires the addition weight of 30,000 pounds -- 10,000 Pressing the city to act is the anti -
of abort 168 acres and the price tag pounds more than is allowed under expansion citizens group called Zero
has been put at approximately $11.7 the current Ordinance 51, a restric- Expansion at Flying Cloud. Its presi-
million lion for Flying Cloud that was ap- dent, Scott Mace, urged the council to
I
The Metro Council's Systems proved in 1978. The city claims that move quickly.
Committee is scheduled to review the MAC, at that time, pledged to keep "Let's not wait too long, and be
proposal Dec. 8. if approved at that the restriction in place; MAC offi- too reluctant to commit money to this,"
meeting. the tull Metro Council could cials disagree. Mace told council members.
I
see the airport expansion proposal by * The city contends that MAC "It's going to take some money to
mid - December. said council transpor- projections for flight operations to- stop this, but it's in the best interests
tation planner Chauncey Case tailing 379,000 by the year 2010 are of the city."
The city council voted in June to I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
.. 'urban Publishing) Eda ct p( a„ r; E W5 Thursday, June 4, 1992
i City makes official
itsoppa&tionto
1 �
EP airport expansion
By Mark Weber pansion- related questions raised in a public
I What Eden Prairie City Council mem- meeting last September. Anderson said
hers had been hinting for months was made MAC does plan to address those questions,
official Tuesday. but is hindered by at least one unresolved
The council, by resolution, said it op- issue related to the expansion.
I poses a Metropolitan Airports Commission MAC is asking for a waiver from new
(MAC) plan to expand Flying Cloud Air- Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
port — and will muster "all appropriate rules that require a 1,000 -foot clear zone at
administrative, legal and other actions any runway's end. The east- west - runway is
I necessary" to back that opposition. currently within 500 feet of Highway 169 -
MAC has proposed extending a 3,900- 212, meaning westward expansion of the
foot, east -west runway to 5,000 feet in runway may need to be greater than the
order to more safely accommodate small 1,100 feet which MAC originally proposed
I jets, and is also proposing to expand the — unless the rule waiver is granted.
local airport's building area. With the FAA yet to be heard from,
But the expansion is opposed by an Anderson explained Tuesday, "It's a little
Eden Prairie citizens group called Zero premature right now to address the issue."
I Expansion at Flying Cloud, which asked Anderson said he wasn't surprised by
the council to formally oppose the MAC the city's consideration of the resolution.
plan. Among the group's concerns is in- The council, he said, is "reacting to
creased airplane noise. public pressure, and I guess if I were in their
I Zero Expansion President Steve Yerkes shoes I might do the same thing."
called the city stand important. While the Anderson reassured officials Tuesday
city has limited say over the expansion, that MAC wants to retain a dialogue with
agencies that do have authority — such as the city.
I the Metropolitan Council -- have already Mayor Doug Tenpas agreed, but said it
indicated they will strongly weigh city would probably take new information to
concerns, Yerkes said. sway the council from Tuesday's position.
"This is significant in that it shows the "I think this is a move we feel comfort-
city is behind us," Yerkes said following able with now," he said.
I Tuesday's action. But, "It's not the end of Environmental studies on the proposed
the line by any stretch of the imagination," expansion have been on hold because of the
he added. "This is another step along the waiver request before the FAA. Also on
way." hold is MAC's request that the Metropoli-
I The resolution was approved without tan Council approve S5 million in funding
council debate. But officials did hear from for the runway expansion and $7.5 million
MAC Director of Airports Tim Anderson, for an expanded building area.
who said he fears the resolution "breaks the The city council cited the probability of
I trust between the twdof us," referring to the increased noise, the lack of detailed expan-
city and MAC. sion plans, and the failure by MAC to show
City officials have expressed frustra- significant benefits from the project as rea-
tion with MAC's delay in answering ex- sons to oppose the plan.
1
1
E.p. Iz - 10 -°t
Agency staff
suggesting
airpclan
needs work
By Mark Weber
Eden Prairie opponents of the
expansion of Flying Cloud Air-
port are finding mixed news in a
Metropolitan Council staff recom-
mendation on the matter.
The recommendation made
Tuesday suggests that the airport's
operator, the Metropolitan Air-
ports Commission (MAC), put
more work into the proposal. But
the document generally supports
the premise of airport expansion.
Among the suggestions by
Metro Council staff are that MAC
submit additional information on
funding, feasibility, and surface
and ground water management.
Gary Schmidt, manager of
reliever airports for MAC, said
those are tasks the agency can
accomplish. But the hoped -for start
to runway expansion in 1993 could
be delayed a year if the recom-
mendations are adopted by the
Metro Council, he added.
"Overall, I don't think they
raised an objection to the plan
itself," Schmidt said about the
report. "They have raised issues
we're going to have to address."
Scott Mace, head of the Zero
Expansion at Flying Cloud group
opposing the $11.7 million plan
for runway expansion and addi-
tional hangars, acknowledged that
the report seems to endorse MAC's
proposal.
However, he disagrees that
issues of overall need and air-
plane noise have been adequately
addressed by MAC, as Metro
Council staff suggest.
"We're glad they recom-
mended suspension of the plan —
it does point to some of the envi-
ronmental problems," said Mace.
"At least they put MAC on notice
that there are deficiencies in the
plan.
"But we disagree with their
conclusions on (use) forecasts and
noise."
The report is expected to be
debated by council members next
week.
1
- 6. p. 5AILott
1 Council affirms _ -1,-ct-2.
n ai airport
1 stance on rp
Vote unanimous "against expansion
1 By David Christenson .the private jet industry, accor-
ding to MAC staff members.
The Eden Prairie City Council But Eden Prairie airport
I gave its official "thumbs down" neighbors, organized as Zero
opinion Tuesday on a proposal to Expansion at Flying Cloud, say
expand a Flying Cloud Airport a longer runway will bring
runway. - heavier, noisier jets.
I The council voted unanimous- City residents filled the Eden
ly for a resolution opposing the Prairie High School auditorium
Metropolitan Airports Commis- about six months ago as Zero
sion (MAC) plan, which would Expansion sought an official
I lengthen the airport's southern council stance on the issue. The
east -west runway and add council gave MAC a chance to
hanger space for business respond to questions raised at
I expansion. that meeting, but Zero Expan-
The runway extension, the sion members argued a six-
controversial part of the plan, is month wait was long enough.
needed to improve safety in Ian- "It is the opinion of the air-
' Airport ding and take-offs for larger
planes that are the standard of `_ ' A pORORT: To page 15A
I From page 1A discussion. Metropolitan Council to stop fun -
The council's resolution states ding for the project. Anderson
ports commission that a move of opposition to the expansion bas - said the Met Council does not
this kind at this time breaks a ed on past council opinions have authority to stop funding
I trust between the two of us," discouraging jets and heavier for the project unless it changes
Tim Anderson of MAC told the planes at the airport, and the overall plan for airports in
council. because the expansion "would the metropolitan area.
MAC is waiting for a ruling almost certainly result in in- MAC will make its decision
I from the Federal Aviation creased noise and the use of the based on "the good of the
Administration (FAA) on the airport by jet aircraft. "' - metropolitan area as a whole,"
design of the runway expansion, The expansion "has not been Anderson said.
I and answers to city questions shown to provide significant As for answers to issues rais-
would be premature before the benefits to the city or ' ed by the city, Anderson said
FAA's decision, Anderson said. metropolitan area," according "we understood we would have
MAC has sought a variance to the resolution. . _ our day in court." He said he
I from federal rules to allow the Scott Mace of Zero Expansion was not sure what the airports
runway's east end to remain said MAC had no good reason to ' • commission will do about a
within 1,000 feet of Highway delay answers to city and response now, "when they (the
169-212. If the variance is not citizens' questions about the City Council) don't really want
I allowed, the runway's west end need for the expansion, an issue to listen."
might be moved 1,600 feet fur- which is not affected by the run- Meanwhile, the FAA Des
ther west and closer to residen- way design. Plaines regional office is con-
.
tial area to accomodate a "I don't think we can raise our sidering the variance on runway
I 1,100 -foot lengthening. hands and declare victory at this proximity to the highway, but
Mayor Doug Tenpas respond- point," said Steve Yerkes, presi- Anderson said he would not
ed that he is "comfortable" with dent of Zero Expansion. " predict exactly when a ruling
the council's decision based on But members of the citizen's might be returned.
I information the city has now, group said they hope the city's
but the council is open to further stand will _ influence the
1
N eighbors want c toi ty to
a i rport plan..
By Mark Weber Airport Advisory Commission. lion at Minneapolis -St. Paul International generated with runway extension and the '
Neighbors asked city of Eden Prairie "There are more questions than an- Airport. additional traffic predicted for Flying Cloud.
officials to oppose Flying Cloud Airport's swers at this time," said Mayor Doug Tenpas The city's say in the matter is still being Other speakers alternately likened
expansion plans Tuesday, during a meet- following two hours of testimony. investigated, with Eden Prairie officials MAC's plan to a "boondoggle" and corn-
ing held to vent residents' concerns about "It's going to be my position that, at this awaiting an opinion from the state Attor- pared local opposition to the Soviet coup.
the proposal. point in time, we need more information." ney General's Office. But City Attorney Another, Scott Mace, described the pro-
After going eye -to -eye with 300 -400 MAC, which operates Flying Cloud Roger Pauly cautioned Tuesday that Eden posed expansion as the agency's "field of
people in the high school auditorium, the Airport, has begun an environmental re- Prairie may have limited authority to deny dreams" — as in, "If we built it, they will
Eden Prairie City Council expressed seri- view process that could lead to runway the expansion, based on case law. come."
ous concerns about plans to extend an expansion and the acquisition of some 250 Those views were countered by Jay
airport runway from 3,900 to 5,000 feet in acres to accommodate the expansion, which Airport called 'field of dreams' Olson, a Richfield resident and general
length. includes room for new airport buildings. Meanwhile, citizens opposing the ex- manager and president of Thunderbird
But the council made no formal deci- MAC officials have said expansion at pansion have formed an organization called
also wants to Aviation, located at Flying Cloud Airport.
sion to oppose the airport plan, saying it Flying Cloud will improve safety for small Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud. Steve Olson asked city officials to let the envi-
et more information from business jets and, when combined with ronmental review process continue.
g J Yerkes, the leader of that group, said Tues- "Do not let the zeal of a few let you
(MAC) ) and the citAirports
s own Flying mission
Cloud in the metro area, will help conges- day that one of the group's primary con- believe they represent the views of the
( city's Y g P g terns is the additional noise that would be
neighborhood," Olson said.
MAC Director of Airports Tim Ander-
L ,�� N EW s I son also asked city officials to allow MAC
its "day in court." Anderson and others
.– I from MAC were in the audience to hear
residents' views, and the airport official
said there will be additional chances for
public testimony.
But Anderson also said the review
` process has been temporarily halted. MAC
is seeking a Federal Aviation Administra-
tion (FAA) variance that would return
expansion plans to a 1,100 -foot runway
extension westward. MAC and the city
were recently informed that new FAA
requirements would require a 1,600 -foot
extension — the original 1,100 feet plus
500 that needs to be lopped off the east side
because llighway 169 -212 is in the clear
zone.
That recent change in plans was one
criticism which city council members
shared Tuesday, with Councilman Rich-
ard T. Anderson saying the change creates
"a whole new ball game."
Councilman Marty Jessen perhaps had
the harshest criticism. Jessen said he has
heard airport traffic near his home as early
as 4 :16 a.m. and as late as 11:42 p.rn. Ile
also questioned whether MAC has appro-
priately substantiated the need for the
expansion, and whether the agency can
4. limit the . impaq 011$i".
"Until some of these credibility issues,
enforcement and other things are ad-
- — . - - - w — — dyes. ':he s real q u e f
wh Imo lie . itch n
.2.7. <.vr) SRILOtiZ Cc-7. tH, \aVL
Airp ort lan moves Zero Expansion has argued
that longer runways would allow
larger, heavier and noisier
MAC revises lan to revive process I planes to use the airport.
P P Along with $5 million for run -
David Christenson when Federal Aviation Ad- way construction, which would
' ministration (FAA) rules also lengthen the northern east -
A runway extension plan for changed, lengthening the safety west runway from 3,600 to 3,900
Flying Cloud Airport in Eden zone required near Highway feet, the capital improvement
Prairie is moving again after 169 -212 and affecting 500 feet of plan approved in committee in-
being Bounded for more than a the runway's east end. eludes $7 million for 1995 con -
year. One alternative proposal was struction of additional hangar
"If all goes well, we may see a 1,600 -foot westward shift of the and business space.
some construction in the runway runway, which would have mov- Yerkes said his group ques-
area in 1993," said Gary ed flight operations farther from tions the need for more hangar
Schmidt, director of secondary Highway 169 -212. MAC also space, because airport use has
airports for the Metropolitan sought a waiver of federal rules not increased substantially in
Airport Commission (MAC). limiting operations near the the past four to five years.
An 1,100 -foot westward exten- highway. In the current pro - Zero Expansion leaders are
sion of the airport's southern posal, the 1,600 -foot option and
asking the group's members to
east -west runway was included the rule waiver are dropped. attend the MAC meeting, set for
in a 1993 budget passed by The result is a scaled -down 1 p.m. Oct. 19 in room 301, mez-
MAC's Planning and Environ- version of the plan for the run- zanine level, Lindbergh Ter -
i ment Committee last week. The way, still lengthening it from minal, Minneapolis -St. Paul In-
I plan is expected to be con- 3,900 to 5,000 feet for easier use ternational Airport. The group is
sidered by MAC Oct. 19, and by large private and corporate expected to have time to speak,
then will be subject to approval planes, but limiting use of about but the meeting is not a public
by the Metropolitan Council and 500 feet of the runway's east end hearing.
review for an environmental im- for some flights. The group will ask for further
pact statement. staff study of the proposal's
Recently, the plan hit a snag RUNWAY: To page 2A economic justification, and a
new public hearing because
- - residents may be confused over
j l the recent variations in the plan,
Runwa Yerkes said.
Runway extension will
From page 1A "definitely not make a signifi-
cant change in operations at the
The current proposal is airport, argued Jay Olson,
1 designed to end the year -long general manager of Thunder -
stall in the approval process bird Aviation Inc. and member
created while the FAA con- of the city government's Flying
sidered the rule waiver, accor- Cloud Airport Advisory
I ding to Schmidt. Commission.
As MAC staff members Flying Cloud will never be
studied the effect of the waiver, more than a reliever airport for
"the percentage of flights it af- small-plane traffic, Olson said.
I fected was relatively small," he
said. The runway extension will
create a safer landing area for
Schmidt said it is also a larger planes, and weight
recognition of neighborhood con- 'restrictions will be loosened, but
I cerns about the proposed "there isn't a one- to-one cor-
1,600 -foot westward shift, which Tespondence between weight
critics said would have required and noise," he said.
excessive land acquisition and Take-offs toward the east end
I moved noise closer to
southwestern Eden Prairie of the runway will be limited by
the latest version of the plan.
homes. "Does that put a crimp in our
But the Eden Prairie citizen's style? To a point," Olson said.
1 group Zero Expansion at Flying But prevailing winds at the
Cloud is still against the current airport are from the west, and
proposal, according to president take -offs into the wind are
I Steve Yerkes. preferred, Olson noted. Take -
"We still oppose the expan- offs to the east, if they must
sion. Whether it's a 1,600 -foot start 500 feet earlier, would be
westerly extension or an able to turn away from residen-
1 1,100 -foot westerly extension, tial neighborhoods earlier, he
it's still a 5,000 -foot runway," said
Yerkes said. "The bottom line "It does contribute to noise
is, we oppose a 5,000 -foot runway control, and we need everything
I no matter what the configura- we can get to manage noise out
lion is." there," Olson said.
•
Attachment #10
FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:
At the City of Eden Prairie
Craig Dawson - Assistant to the City Manager
Chris Enger - Community Development Director
Jean Johnson - Zoning Administrator
City of Eden Prairie
7600 Executive Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612) 937 -2262
(612) 937 -7411 (FAX)
The City Attorney
Roger Pauly
250 Prairie Center Drive
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612) 829 -7355
The Eden Prairie Citizens Group
Scott Mace
Zero Expansion at Flying Cloud
14180 W. 78th St. Suite 200
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612) 949 -6989
•
f
The Public Relations Firm Retained by the City
Scott Cottington or Jeff Larson
Cottington Marti, Inc.
8120 Penn Avenue South, Suite 116
Bloomington, MN 55431
(612) 881 -8061
(612) 881 -4502 (FAX)
1
1
1 CITY OF
-i
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
March 19, 1993
Mr. Roger Gustafson
Carver County Public Works
600 East Fourth Street
Chaska, MN 55318
Re: Proposed 1993-2002 County Highway and Local Minor Arterial Street Construction Program
PW026A
1 Dear Roger:
In discussing the proposed County Highway and Local Minor Arterial Street Construction Program with Paul
Krauss, Community Development Director, some concerns were raised relating to the future and ultimate status
for Lyman Boulevard east of Trunk Highway 101. I explained that you and I have talked about this issue and
what its solution might be for the past year or so. Given the cooperative effort between the Cities and the
' County on the implementation and financing of the proposed overall program, Paul and I would respectfully
request that this segment of Lyman Boulevard be reconsidered for future County classification. In fact, it may
be appropriate for all of us to get together again to discuss this matter further.
Please let me know of your thoughts and if you'd like to meet on this issue.
Sincerely,
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
Charles D. Folch, P.E.
City Engineer
CDF:jms
c: Dave Hempel, Assistant City Engineer
Paul Krauss, Community Development Director
City Council Administrative Section (4/12/93)
1
%i PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
Cc— /PPG ps ckr^ -t`1
r Otto G Bonestroo. PE Howard A. Sanford. PE Michael P Rau. PE Mks B. Jensen PE 1
Bonestroo Robert W Rosene. P.E• Keith A Gordon. PE. Agnes M Ring AI.C.P L Phillip Gravel In, PE
Joseph C ',mien*. PE Robert R. Pfefferle. PE Thomas W Peterson. PE Karen L Wrernen. PE
Rosene Marvin L Sorvala PE Richard W Foster. P.E Michael C Lynch. PE Gary D Knstofitz. P.E
1.1 Glenn E Turner, PE David O. LOskota. P.E. James R Maland. PE F Todd Foster. PE
- Anderlik & Glenn R Cook. PE. Robert C Russek. A I.A. Jerry D. Pertzsch. P.E Kertn R. Tapp P.E
Thomas E Noyes. PE Jerry A Bourdon. PE Kenneth P Anderson. PE Shawn D Gustafson. PE
Robert G Schunicht. P.E Mark A. Hanson. P.E Mark R Roth. P.E Cecilio Olivier. P.E.
A ssociates Susan M Eberkn. C PA Michael T Rautmann, PE Mark A. Sep. P.E. Charles A Erickson
*Senor Consultant Ted K Fielo. P.E Gary W Morien. P.E Leo M Pawelsky
Thomas R Anderson. A LA Daniel J Edgerton. PE Harlan M Orson
Engineers & Architects Donald C. Burgardt. P.E Daryl K Krrschenman. PE James F Engelhardt
Thomas E Angus. P.E. Philip J Caswell. P.E.
Ismael Martinez. P.E. Mark D. Wallis. P.E.
FEASIBILITY REPORT
I
FORCIER PROPERTY AT FRONTIER TRAIL
STORMWATER QUANTITY AND QUALITY ANALYSIS
I
CITY PROJECT 93 -6 -3
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA
MARCH 1993
1
1. INTRODUCTION - PRELIMINARY COMMENTS 1
The Forcier property development is a 7 -1ot, 4.5 -acre subdivision located west of the
intersection of Frontier Trail and Frontier Court, south of Lotus Lake. The location of the 1
development is shown in Figure 1.
1
Although the Forcier property development only subdivides 4.5 acres, any storm higher than
a 10 -rear will produce some runoff into the development from the 63 acres of upstream land. This
} p P P
natural overland drainage route goes through a ditch located where the ponds are proposed (See
Figure 2). The existing 36 -inch trunk system can handle peak flows up to a 10 -year storm. The ,
development must provide ponding and outlet structures large enough to safely handle the
difference between 10 -year and 100 -year peaks, and keep high water levels 2 feet below the lowest 1
house. 1
Stormwater quality is a very important factor in this area because of the lack of upstream
treatment and the proximity to Lotus Lake. The SWMP identifies this area as a high priority 1
location for stormwater quality improvements. Any amount of stormwater quality pretreatment 1
39313.rpt 1
1
2335 West Highway 36 • St. Paul, Minnesota 55113 • 612 -636-4600
1
performed at the development would both increase the treatment efficiency and reduce the cost
of future downstream ponds.
1
2. ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
Several alternatives were modeled to identify the most cost effective drainage elements that
' would meet water quantity and quality criteria. The following is a summary of the alternatives
modeled:
A) One Pond versus two Ponds Alternative: The small stormwater quality treatment
efficiency obtained with one pond, and the high amount of excavation necessary
' to provide the required acre -feet of wet volume with only one pond, eliminated
this alternative in an early stage of the analysis as a cost effective alternative. In
addition, the 6 -foot drop between the East and West ponds would have made
very difficult the construction of one single pond, due to the limited area
mailable and minimum side slope requirements.
' B) Water Quantity versus Water Ouality Design: Due to the small size of the
ponds, using them to limit peak flows during a 100 -year event was proved to have
' no impact in reducing the cost of the downstream trunk system. On the other
hand, rising the normal water levels of the ponds to obtain the maximum wet
volume possible for stormwater treatment purposes was proved to be the most
cost effective alternative.
1
C) Cukert versus Broad - crested weir at the West Pond Outlet: To prevent oil spills
r and debris from going into Lotus Lake, the West pond requires a skimmer
structure. Although the cost of a 36 -inch RCP outlet culvert is higher than its
1 equivalent Broad - crested weir, the higher cost of the skimmer structure for a
Broad- crested weir outlet makes the weir alternative more expensive overall.
1
' 39313.rp1 2
1
�..�°.:... i f i i ! • 3 i i ii.... . ... �,,;....:.;..;, ?:1.., �- " . /
..s<"'�v _,..--,-----,••
i r- - (_ l p ' f f 1 ! i • `
y,�rj''I�"`� " i•- '•.� �...i
^�\ ,,v—+ .._.r"J �,/,h l.�.�`ir (
��.a ta+ ' 17•Swc,� " ` ',�# - te r � '�, z � '� ' "?f
s_.. .t /• / i \ _�vRp.:.x�".,.< t t i\/,,,,T..:
�!r Y . � '�,�' -i s
Y ..c Y "'S.+.. 1 $ ' ^rte - ."...�"�^'.- "= 'F'. _ 'V
•
r. 1 .. i ' 1�R-- ..rtti 'il..J wr =r' `'m' , � .'c`L, • a`'.'� "�' ti..'. 1 •
S; a — i fir .,`,�., " " � _ -h -r s ` ,: =° �yi -1ti' -3
is .. _ . . _ _ 1
• �,...,, n "1...i' ' ,mil .. 74.. ' _ - '- s.- 4.- �"i ., -s . s . :. , f : . .. • • 1/ "21 :1fR•"i
�'.'Y , •.,...,..... 0 •... •,,..,!�r`l„T.t, Te- 5 i r i. .. - 1 I. . ,� lf.r '.sJ ,„,,,,:=;,..:',401..41.1S.,.„. y{y. ." _:�'- JC'.�%�n.L<:�M� C ,... _.. .4 "1 �F5
?' :.i ;� --'r •i' - �Y � � PST ,. ... z.:•. • a,` ,'
- - _ :.;,.z : � . ,.: ' .,-.- ` " .+., 4,7. r —• " '.:c' ` ':;tea;,,;," ^"F',1 - --'ems.
_. . 2 : ^1/!:s�.w/�:.i, \ ii i 't w S'f J�� -'� j'1+'• ii •
, . ,....,:‘,.,,,r - 1
'7.,..)>,,s.' - - r ;w..� .«i'??.:� " ° >; ; :o. <.� ,:
. . � .�r! •�' " \: 2 s. a: ' �� t rs r_ c §� _`a
=PROJECT T OBI � : -�.., . - ':::_.::: .�,�:>
• :.:tip- •",�s:sEz. c
1
i ' i }fit: .1 � 1t •
1
• f ff_R f•.� :ir'�` ' i • te J i
i...S 95 ..!!!5. + i i lI
:4.
,� .'.�° - ' . • ' . s 'sa: e•..,,.: .
... -
'b,. j r , J eer -...�
r-- — 7 —, ...... -L.„.)%._-, ;-i iii , /° h� 1 . ' -- • . -- -: 1500`^:., : >t - � �� { �i , -j
. - - sc=ale in - feet �'' " -,--r f � :: :, ; , , -F —` _ ,
LOCATION MAP Bonestroo 1
Rosene
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA FIGURE 1 A t
Associ soclates
FORCIER PROPERTY AT FRONTIER TRAIL Enptneers6 Architects
2335 West HIghwaY 36
39313R03.DWG MAR., 1993 COMM. 39313 at. Paul, Minnesota 5511
1
3. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS:
1 The proposed improvements for the Forcier ro er are shown on Figure 2. The following
P P h' g
1 is a more detailed description of each one of the improvements:
1 A) Connection of 24 -inch Water Quality Trunk
The 24 -inch trunk is proposed to handle flows up to a 2 -year storm (design
1 storm) from the upstream 63 acres. The flow will be diverted to the 24 -inch
trunk by means of a 2 -foot high concrete wall built in the 8 -foot catch basin as
1 shown in Figure 3. Flows above a 2 -year storm will overflow the wall into the
existing 36 -inch trunk. The inlet and outlet invert elevations of the proposed 24-
1 inch stormwater quality trunk are 919.2 and 918.7 respectively. The total length
of the proposed trunk is 40 feet. Other proposed improvements are:
1
* Remove existing C.B.
1 * Build new 8 -foot diameter C.B.M.H.
* Connection of 24 -inch trunk to new C.B.
1 * Riprap and restoration work.
1 B) Construction of the West Pond
The west pond will be excavated to provide 0.33 Ac -ft of wet volume with a NWL
at 918.7 (See Figure 2). The pond area at NWL is 0.1 acres. Pond slopes of
10:1 are recommended for safety reasons in the first 1 foot of drop. Slopes of
3:1 and 2.5:1 are also recommended for the water quantity and quality portions
of the pond respectively (See Figure 2). Other proposed improvements are:
* Outlet structure: 36 -inch RCP, 25 feet long, 5% slope, Invert =
1 918.7, flared outlet end.
* Skimmer structure
1 * Seeding with mulch
* Riprap and restoration work
1
39313.rpt 4
1
C) Construction of the East Pond 1
The East Pond will be excavated to provide 1.01 Ac -ft. of wet volume with a
NWL = 915 (See Figure 2). The Pond area at NWL is 0.25 acres. Pond slopes ,
of 10:1 are recommended for safety reasons in the first 1 foot of drop. Slopes
of 3:1 and 2.5:1 are also recommended for the water quantity and quality ,
portions of the pond respectively (See Figure 2). Other proposed improvements
are: 1
* Outlet structure: 14' wide rectangular, broad - crested, grassed
weir, 4% downstream slope at Invert = 915.0.
* Seeding with mulch.
* Outlet channel realignment.
D) 42 -inch RCP Crossing Frontier Trail
The existing 36 -inch CMP at Frontier Trail needs to be replaced by a 42 -inch
RCP with a new inlet invert elevation at 910.5 and outlet invert elevation at
909.8. The slope for the new 42 -inch will be 1%. The existing 36 -inch CMP can
not handle 100 -year storeys without producing a serious backwater effect on the
East Pond. To ensure the 2 feet minimum freeboard in lots 5 and 6 and protect
Frontier Trail, we need both to replace the existing culvert and lower the existing
invert elevation. The lowest house elevation at lots 5 and 6 should be raised to
919.0.
It is also possible to add another 30 -inch RCP to the existing 36 -inch CMP to
provide the ]00 -year storm capacity. This option is not contemplated in the cost 1
estimate included in this report. Other proposed improvements are:
* Inlet and outlet flared ends
* Remove and replace existing bituminous path 1
* Riprap and inlet and outlet excavation and restoration
1
39313.rpt 5 1
1
1
I 4. MODEL RESULTS
4.1. Stormwater Quantity
1 Table 1 shows a summary of the stormwater quantity model input and results. Figure
1 2 also shows some of these results.
1
1 TABLE 1
I
STORMWATER QUANTITY INPUT AND RESULTS
1 Stormwater Existing Culvert at
Quality 36 -inch RCP West East Frontier
1 Trunk Trunk Pond Pond Trail
1 Storage volume (Ac.ft) -- -- 0.45 0.34 --
NWL (ft) -- -- 918.7 915.0 --
1 HWL for 100 -year (ft) -- -- 922.5 916.3 914.0
1 Area at WI (Ac) -- -- 0.10 0.25 --
Area at HWL (Ac) -- -- 0.15 0.28 --
1 Outlet structure -- -- 36" RCP 14' weir 42" RCP
1 Peak outflow (cfs) 25.0 48.0 52.7 52.8 58.5
Invert elevation (ft) 919.2 919.2 -- -- 910.5
1 Length (ft) 40.0 165.0 -- -- 85.0
1 Slope ( %) 1.0 1.7 -- -- 0.9
1
1 39313.1pt 6
1
1
4.2 Stormwater Quality 1
Table 2 shows a summary of the stormwater quality model input and results. Figure 2 also
shows some of these results.
1
TABLE 2
i
STORMWATER OUALITY INPUT AND RESULTS
1
Normal Pond Area Wet Outflow P- Removal
111
Water Level NWL Volume P- Concentration Efficiency
(ft ) (acres) (Ac -ft) (ppb) ( %)
West Pond 918.7 0.1 0.33 342.0 24.0
East Pond 915.0 0.25 1.01 222.4 50.6 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
39313.rpt 7 1
1
— E — — — I i r r I M I MI MI r IIIIII N NM IMI
917.3 R. ,
'" o
LOWEST HOU' '
/ / • 919.0 t, '•, 3
'� \ 5
„/". 2.5:1
' N , SLOPE ;
10:1 14'WIEG SEO ,
- -- — — - --- - - - ---
\ SLOPE -� RECTAN6 R
— ,
! ;;i1 1 BROAD- RESTED WEIR
I NW_ 915ft. /� ' �'
.., III V C'.
4 _ Sk
J1 V F
i 36 OUTLET , ! % EAST POND I \ O
DEL RIO DRIVE 10:1 [ -_-' • 1041,43.25 c. y
SLOPE 11n1-916.J 11.
f I .._ _ _ . _ I I I 1... WET VOL, 1.01 fe. -n 1 1 \
\ 2.5:1 Mul - 5252.e c1• 1 1 \ (
\ SLOPE 1 911.8 ow 1.
�\ __ -��r ;..st P ON LOWEST HOUSE \ w \
i li:t/,‘,.-'
f - �nFa EST Rl+q.1 D k O 919.0 °� \
,. HMl -92z.s n.
2 24" O 1% C
it: 11 ...• !. 0..1 -52.7 c1.
�. E`
REPLACEX1iD
\ .r, i• 3GCARP BY A 2-RCP 9 INV.
\-- ' ' 3:1 O INV =910. AND 0.9X/
.\ SLOPE OR ADD 3� RCP O
i iA r - , r, INV =910. AND 0.91G
.aLP a : - CB2 ; - �� \� M0.. 91:
---". ' TOP 925.5 \ 7 /
') � /� INVERT =919 \� "�
INVERT =921 -9
.-� / TOP•923Z 3
0- CO3 INVER1■916.5 T3; "*-
� 2
�' TOP .927.2 :/ OL Q N
SX ��i T, N \%GE I C `_ 4e.
....•„....,,,..
♦
• 4'
e' •
., LEGEND WM ■T' . cei
/. INVERT 1 10.6
, -; — > EXISTING STORM SEWER - -- -.
� / � 7 — — - ) PROPOSED STORM SEWER 9 13.6
L..../ 2r 910.5 1 3
et
C134 � __ � �, � 4 ==a WATER QUANTITY CONTOURS \ 0 50 WO
TOP.936.2 S cale in feet
INVERT -929.9 CL 6l WATER QUALITY CONTOURS ,n
RESULTS OF THE STORMWATER QUALITY /QUANTITY MODELING yy p e a; s e
Co
win Anderlik S
CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA FIGURE 2 ikil Associates
FORCIER PROPERTY AT FRONTIER TRAIL
39313R01.0440 MAR.. 1993 cow 39313
1
1
1
1
1
M
2r
1
8 ' 1
PROPOSED
TRUNK
EX. TRUNK .� ; . EX. TRUNK '
■
OVER FLOW — —
X 36"RCP ; - 24" 12,1- 014 36"RCP X
1 Dia. P N , ■
1 i ' ,
CONCRETE WALL ,
SECTION
1
1
1
DETAIL OF STORMWATER QUALITY
DIVERSION STRUCTURE Bonestroo 1
Rosene
•
CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA FIGURE 3 Anderyk tes d:
Associa ,
FORCIER PROPERTY AT FRONTIER TRAIL
39313R02.DWG MAR., 1993 COMM. 39313 1
5. COST ESTIMATE
A summary of the estimated construction costs (without including Engineering, Fiscal and
1 Administrative costs) for each one of the proposed improvements is shown in Table 3.
1
TABLE 3
CONSTRUCTION COST SUMMARY
1 Improvement Construction Cost
Connection of 24 -inch Water Quality Trunk $5,600
1 Construction of the West Pond $11,525
Construction of the East Pond $6,200
1 Replacement of Existing 36" CMP by a
42" RCP at Frontier Trail $9,475
1
' Table 5, at the end of this report, shows itemized costs for each improvement and includes
Engineering, Fiscal and Administrative Costs.
1 Costs for the 24 -inch water quality trunk includes the replacement of the existing C.B. 2 by
an 8 -foot diameter C.B. manhole.
The excavation cost for both East and West Ponds has been estimated at $2.00 per cubic yard.
' This cost assumes that most of the dirt will be used in -place for radin . It is important to point
8 g P P
out that any change in the assumed excavation cost will affect the total sharing cost by the City
described in the next section. East pond costs also include the realignment of the outlet channel
going oin into the Frontier Trail culvert.
Costs for the upgrading of the Frontier Trail culvert include removing and replacing existing
bituminous roadway at the culvert crossing.
39313.rni 10
6. COST SHARE 1
The following is a description of the proposed cost sharing by the City of Chanhassen and the
developer of the Forcier property at Frontier Trail. 1
1
6.1 Connection of 24 -inch Water Quality Trunk
This connection has the purpose of diverting runoff from the 63 acres upstream the Frontier
development into the proposed ponds for water quality treatment. Although runoff from lots 1 and 1
2 will go into the existing 36 -inch trunk and then into the proposed 24 -inch trunk, its contribution
to the total flow will be very small. Therefore, the City should contribute 100% to the cost of this
improvement. 1
6.2 Construction of West and East Ponds
It was estimated that the developer would have had to provide 0.72 Ac -ft. of wet volume to 1
bring the 4.5 acres of development to NURP stormwater quality standards. The proposed
improvements show 1.34 Ac -ft of wet volume provided. The 0.62 Ac -ft, of extra excavation should
be credited to the developer by the City. Therefore, the excavation and seeding costs of the 1
proposed improvements should be shared - 46% by the City and 54% by the developer as shown 1
in Table 4.
The 100 -year peak flows have not changed because of the stormwater quality improvements. 1
Therefore, all outlet structures to handle 100 year storm events should be provided by the
developer.
The skimmer structure proposed at the West pond would have been a City's requirement for 1
final approval of the plans, and therefore should be provided by the developer. 1
39313.rpt 11 1
1
•
I ;
I 6.3 Culvert at Frontier Trail
The existing 36 -inch CMP at Frontier Trail needs to be replaced by a 42 -inch RCP (or
1 equivalent) to meet the 2 feet minimum free board in lots 5 and 6. The necessity for replacement
I of the existing 36 -inch CMP, or addition of 30 -inch RCP, is originated by the proposed house
elevations in lots 5 and 6. Therefore, the replacement cost should be confronted 100% by the
1 developer.
1 Table 4 shows the proposed cost sharing as described above.
I TABLE 4
1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION COST SHARING
I BY CITY AND DEVELOPER
City's City's Developer's Developer's
I Improvement Share Cost Share Cost
I 24 -inch Water Quality Trunk 100% $ 5,600 0% $ 0
Ponds excavation and seeding costs 46% $ 4,690 54% $ 5,510
1 Outlet structures from ponds 0% $ 0 100% $ 7,525
1 Culvert at Frontier Trail 0% $ 0 100% $9,475
TOTAL $10,290 $22,510
1
1 The cost shared by the City can also be applied in terms of cash credits to the developer.
1
1
' 39313.rpt 12
1
1
TABLE 5 1
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
1
FOR STORMWATER QUANTITY/ QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS
IMPR EMENTS
AT THE FRONTIER PROPERTY ON FRONTIER TRAIL ,
24 -INCH WATER QUALITY TRUNK
1
Quantity Unit Item Cost 1
40 LF 24" RCP, cl 5 @ $35.00/LF $1,400 1
1 EA 24" RCP Flared end @ $400.00/EA 400
1 EA Connect to C.B. @ $700.00/EA 700 1
5 CY Riprap @ $40.00 /CY 200 1
1 LS Remove existing C.B. @ $400.00/LS 400
1 EA 8' diameter C.B.M.H. @ $1,750.00/EA 1,750
1 EA 2' high diversion structure @ $500.00/EA 500 1
1 LS Restoration work (a) $250.00/LS 250
CONSTRUCTION COST $5,600
25% Engr., Fiscal & Admin. 1 40 1
TOTAL COST $7,000
1
1
1
39313.rpt 13 1
1
I WEST POND
Quantity Unit Item Cost
2,100 CY Common Excavation @ $2.00 /CY $4,200
0.5 AC Seeding with mulch @ $700.00 /AC 350
' 25 LF 36" RCP, cl 5 @ $55.00/LF 1,375
1 EA Skimmer structure @ $4,000.00/EA 4,000
15 CY Riprap @ $40.00/CY 600
1 1 EA 36" RCP Flared end @ $1,000.00/EA 1.000
CONSTRUCTION COST $11,525
25% Engr., Fiscal & Admin. 2,900
1 TOTAL COST $14,425
1
EAST POND
I Ouantity Unit Item Cost
1 2,650 CY Common Excavation @ $2.00 /CY $5,300
0.5 AC Seeding with mulch @ $700.00/AC 350
1 100 SY Soddin g overland weir @ $1.50 /SY 150
1 LS Outlet channel realignment @ $400.00/LS 400
CONSTRUCTION COST $6,200
25 %, Engr., Fiscal & Admin. 1,500
TOTAL COST $7,700
1
39313. pi 14
1
1
1
i
42 -INCH RCP CROSSING FRONTIER TRAIL 1
Quantity Unit Item Cost
85 LF 42" RCP, CL 5 @ $65.00/LF $5,525
2 EA 42" RCP Flared end @ $1,100.00 /EA 2,200 1
15 CY Riprap @ $40.00 /CY 600
1 LS Remove existing 36" CMP @ $400.00/LS . 400
1 LS Inlet/Outlet excavation and restoration work @ $250.00/LS 250 1
1 LS Remove /Replace exist. bituminous roadway (g) $500.00/LS 500
CONSTRUCTION COST $ 9 ,475 1
25% Engr., Fiscal & Admin. 2 37 1
TOTAL COST $11,850
1
1
1 hereby certify that this report was prepared by
me or under my direct supervision and that I am
a duly Registered Professional Engineer under
the laws of the State of Minnesota.
"Fof.tAt. 156/.144-put: ex.t/
1
Robert G. Schunicht 1
Date: March 11. 1993 Reg. No. 12105
1
1
1
1
39313.rpt 15 1
CITYOF
i
CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
March 30, 1993
1
r Mr. James Hurrn, City Administrator
City of Shorewood
5755 Country Club Road
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Request for Shorewood to Consider a Friendly Annexation/Deannexation Agreement,
I Most Southerly Lot, J. Scotty Builders, Deer Ridge Plat
Dear Mr. Hurm:
Thank you for agreeing to place Mayor Chmiel and myself as the first item on your City Council
agenda of April 12, 1993. Our request is simple. We would propose to have Shorewood agree
to alloy, Chanhassen to annex the most southerly lot of J. Scotty Builders' plat entitled Deer
Ridge. The request is solely to ensure that Chanhassen continues to receive Community
Development Block Grant funds. Our 1992 allocation was $42,000, of which $4,000 has been
allocated to purchasing the bus for the Sojourn facility, and approximately $6,000 for the South
Shore Senior facility. We have put over $50,000 into these two programs over the past years,
and would expect to do so in coming years assuming that we can find a means by which to
maintain eligibility for Community Development Block Grant funds. Losing Chanhassen's
eligibility will, in all likelihood, place an undue economic burden on other communities,
including Shorewood, currently funding Sojourn programs as well as South Shore activities. We
anticipate representatives from Sojourn and the South Shore Center to additionally be present.
The background, rationale, and other avenues pursued in our attempt to maintain eligibility for
Community Development Block Grant funding can best be provided in my report to the Planning
Commission and City Council. The following has been copied from that report; i.e:
Manager's Comments (3- 18 -93):
J. Scotty Builder's request to allow extension of Chanhassen's sewer and water into
Shorewood for their plat occurred at the same time that we were notified of our loss of
eligibility for Community Development Block Grant funds. Given the size of suburban
Hennepin County, they represent an entitlement area. (You do not need to apply for
specific grants. Distribution dollars are based on the total suburban population.
1
val4, PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
A4
sy X' I' Xa•€ -.keex A,,,„,/,‘ad
.,.e:daca.= ..moo' / 1 1
L 'h ee -Za4.-R___
a ,'a .'E..'c/ 7 1
4 ' '1:4 ‘ 1-4 32 4, cge4; •‘-a7t ,
e-( -' Weede -4 ._444•7 Wef7
4 46 ;2 4 _,-e-e7.k 24. Fz il
e- /i2-e-A:7: - - - - 5 1
r
. 0 • ? - w r 0 a 1 - € . e / Le4e.0 > ,f &et, AdZi• le , X v : .2
__"-v[tedd - ,4- , a-A , ' ZX &At4•EaAl
4-// 4‘144e;iagge;#11
&e: Ai-eocf/d ..40 ;
e J - :- . /
",..e. ' - _ - Zeiee‘ 4_
!4 ¢r
I e e : . .die, dy....e4, cf-ef7 a -/- zdzei,..ie/g
' 7
7e, 1 .6i-e_4(z.i.ae-_ i e
17 i e e e i 1 ' e' ,,,,,szAzil
a , / • - - -,..
L . , 4 0 4 4 , _Gii - a7.41
_Z-e,az, 4 2 A - e - A z e , "ge, A:7 / . -, ecc
. a... - REC - ED 1
i ✓ --- APR 0 51993
c &- 6'i 9 in .�..,. •f! / R
/, , / CITY Ur �nK�vr r�abEh
- - - ,6i � 7o- f‘ 77 1
1
Mr. James Hurm
March 30, 1993
Page 2
1 Minneapolis operates under a separate program. Carver County is not in the CDBG
entitlement area). As Chanhassen is a split -county city, our entire population can be
counted in the distribution formula as long as we have residents in both counties. With
the widening of Highway 5, the two houses which previously sat in Hennepin County
were eliminated by the highway expansion. The final notice received was the last in a
series of appeals at various administrative levels within HUD. Hennepin County
supported us through all of those processes. Although there is a possibility that our
federal legislators will introduce federal legislation to allow for our continued
participation in CDBG monies, the chances of that are unlikely.
In meeting with J. Scotty Builders, staff relayed that we would propose that the City
Council approve the final agreement, but they would condition that upon staff attempting
to appeal to the Shorewood City Council to agree to a friendly annexation/deannexation
agreement for the most southerly lot. If Shorewood would agree to a friendly
I deannexation /annexation for the most southerly lot, Chanhassen will then have re -met the
conditions associated with the CDBG program and retained our eligibility. [Note: We
continue to receive eligibility for 1993 with 1994 being up for grabs.] Our appeal to
Shorewood's City Council will be primarily on the basis of helping us maintain CDBG
monies. They have a direct interest in our maintaining eligibility as we have contributed
over $40,000 to the South Shore Center over the past years and would likely continue to
contribute $4,000 - $6,000 per year to that program. We believe this is warranted since
seniors are mobile and many of our residents frequent both the Chanhassen and South
Shore Centers. With the loss of our contribution, Shorewood/Excelsior /Tonka Bay would
1 likely bear the brunt of those lost contributions.
A second area which we will attempt to present to Shorewood is the fact that without our
1 agreement to extend sewer and water, no more than three lots could have been developed
by J. Scotty Builders. In essence, without our agreement/participation, the taxes
potentially to be received by Shorewood from the proposed six lots would then be
1 reduced to three. Our position will be that by their agreeing to deannex the most
southerly lot, they still will have gained approximately $5,000 per year that they would
not have had had we not agreed to allow the extension of our sewer and water systems.
The above points have been discussed with J. Scotty Builders. They were made aware
of the fact that staff would be pushing for this friendly deannexation/annexation proposal.
Their fear has been that they would somehow become a pawn in the Community
Development Block Grant money debate. We attempted to assure them that staff would
not recommend that we do that, i.e. that we would not recommend that the agreement be
conditioned upon Shorewood's agreement to the deannexation process. Instead, we would
be making our recommendation on the basis that the Chanhassen City Council was
requesting Shorewood to agree to the deannexation process on a voluntary rather than a
required basis. The final decision, however, rests with the City Council.
1
1
I '
Mr. James Hurm
March 30, 1993 1
Page 3
Recommendation
1
Approval of the agreement providing utility and street services to Deer Ridge is
recommended with the condition that staff be instructed to approach the Shorewood City 1
Council and request their consideration of a friendly deannexation/annexation process for
the most southerly lot in Deer Ridge.
In approving this item on March 22, 1993, the City Council acted to change my recommendation
P tY
from "a request" to "a condition of approval." The Chanhassen City Council's action is an
attempt to demonstrate their strong commitment to Sojourn and the South Shore Senior Center.
1
The thought of our losing monies to be able to dedicate to these two worthwhile programs was
seen as monumental, and my Council wanted to demonstrate that these programs are of vital
interest to them. Again, Mayor Chmiel and I will attempt to relay points brought out in the
above memorandum during our presentation Monday evening.
I would like to add two additional points that I was unaware of at the time of making my I
presentation to the City Council. The first point deals with the method of distributing funds
under the federal program to entitlement areas such as the Hennepin County entitlement area
under which both of us receive funds. The formula used by the federal government allows split -
county cities, such as Chanhassen, to include their total population in that formula. For 1993 and
1994, Chanhassen's 12,000 people produce $52,000 in entitlement dollars for the overall
Hennepin County program. The redistribution formula adopted by Hennepin County has
produced a reallocation back to Chanhassen of the $42,000. Accordingly, if Chanhassen were
deleted from eligibility for 1994, the overall dollars back to the Hennepin County entitlement area Il
would be reduced by $53,000 and each of the then remaining cities in the entitlement area,
including Shorewood, would see their allocations reduced by approximately $11,000 (this is an
aggregate number to the communities). The second point was brought to my attention by our
election clerk (see attached memo). Her point was that the new lot will become a separate
precinct with votes then being tabulated for that precinct. The question then becomes how
secretive is your ballot. Jean has requested that the Shorewood Council consider allowing the
southerly -most two lots to be annexed by Chanhassen. In doing such, we would more closely
parallel the two homes that we had in Hennepin County prior to the Highway 5 widening project
which took both of those homes. Although ballots were not totally secretive, you did have four
votes being tallied versus the possible one or two if its solely one home.
I apologize for the length of this letter, but I feel that it is imperative that I make one last point. 1
That point is that if Shorewood agrees to the friendly annexation/deannexation procedure, that
our city recognizes that that is being done solely to act in a cooperative manner with Chanhassen
and to assure that funding continues for programs vital to both communities. If Chanhassen is
successful in its continued efforts to have HUD reconsider their administrative positions, or if
we are successful in obtaining federal legislation reinstating our CDBG position, we will cease
our efforts to pursue the annexation request. Similarly, if other road blocks occur which are
1
1
1
Mr. James Hurm
March 30, 1993
Page 4
beyond the control of Chanhassen or Shorewood, we will similarly cease our request to effectuate
the annexation process, i.e. if the State Annexation Board denies the request, Hennepin County
refuses to recognize the annexation, emergency services to the one or two lots becomes
unworkable, etc. In all likelihood, if Shorewood approves the annexation agreement, it will take
at least six to eight months to finalize all of the other agency approvals that would be required.
By that point in time, we will have known whether our federal appeals have been accepted or
not. These processes should not effect J. Scotty Builders from filing their plat, installing utilities,
or building homes.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Don Ashworth
City Manager
DA:k
Enclosures
L METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
Mean Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St Paul, MN 55101 -1634 612 291 -6359 FAX 612 291 -6550 TTY 612 291 -0904
March 18, 1993
To Local Planning Officials:
Your local government received a letter several months ago from the Metropolitan Council
regarding the need to adopt the Council's Interim Strategy for Nonpoint Source Pollution Control
by January 1st, 1993. Since then a number of local comprehensive plan amendments submitted to
the Council for review have been delayed because the local governments had not adopted the
interim strategy. To avoid similar delays in the future, the Council is advising local governments
on how to proceed in adopting the Council's interim strategy.
The Metropolitan Council adopted the interim strategy for the Minnesota River on May 28, 1992,
and for other metropolitan waters on October 22, 1992. The strategy requires local governments
to amend their local comprehensive plans, land use controls and stormwater plans to incorporate
the Council's interim strategy. The strategy includes the adoption of National Urban Runoff
Program (NURP) wet basin design criteria for new stormwater detention ponds and the urban
best management practices of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency as presented in its manual
titled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas or equivalent requirements. In addition, local
governments must indicate their willingness to cooperate with the Department of Natural
Resources in adopting the revised state-wide shoreland standards.
The Council may require modification of local plan amendments that involve land use activities
that generate surface water runoff unless the local government has adopted the interim measures
described above.
Copies of the interim strategy and a model stormwater ordinance to assist local governments in
amending their land use controls were sent to the designated contact person for each local
government. A forum held on December 15, 1992, for local planning officials explained the
strategy and the model ordinance.
To avoid future delays in the Council's review of local plan amendments, local governments
should follow one of two courses of action:
1. Each local government should implement the CounciI's Interim Strategy as soon as
possible including the adoption of amendments to its comprehensive plan, land use
controls and stormwater plan, or,
2. If the above action is impossible because of time constraints, the local government may
amend its comprehensive plan to incorporate the interim strategy and adopt a reasonable
date by which it will amend its land use controls and stormwater plan. When it has
adopted the latter amendments, it should notify the Council.
Vzi
• 2 1�
• Recycled Paper Ci T Y F r ^ r
IRO
4
Interim Strategy Implementation
1 March 19, 1993
Page 2
In addition, as part of its response to the interim strategy the local government should also
indicate that it will cooperate with the DNR in revising its shoreland regulations and notify the
1 Council after it has adopted the revisions.
Under both 1. and 2. the comprehensive plan amendment should be submitted to the Council for
review consistent with the Council's review procedures. If your government decides to use the
second course of action, you must enclose with your comprehensive plan amendment the schedule
for amending local land use controls and the stormwater plan. The Council will p_91 review the
amendments to local land use controls. After the local government adopts these, it should notify
the Council of the date. If standards and requirements other than the NURP and MPCA best
management practices are adopted, a copy should be provided to the Council for its files.
1 Model language which a local government may use to amend its comprehensive plan is enclosed.
Because this language indicates specifically what the Council is seeking, it will help prevent delays
in the Council's review of local plan amendments.
If you have questions regarding the interim strategy, please contact Carl Schenk (291 -6410) or
Jack Frost (291 - 6519). If you have questions regarding the Council's plan amendment review
1 procedures, please contact Barbara Senness (291 - 6419).
Yours truly,
' Dottie Rietow
Chair
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
MODEL LANGUAGE FOR ITEMS TO BE SUBMTI"1'ED TO THE
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR REVIEW
1. PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
'The (name of local government) will apply National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) 1
standards* for the design of new stormwater ponds and the MPCA's urban best management
practices titled Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas* to the review of any proposed
development occurring in the (city. township or county) to reduce nonpoint source pollutant
loadings in stormwater runoff. The (name of local government) will incorporate these
standards and requirements in its stormwater management plan and land use controls to
implement this policy. 1
2. PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR PREPARING AND ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO
LOCAL STORMWATER PLAN AND LAND USE CONTROLS
The (name of local government) will prepare and adopt specific amendments to its
stormwater plan and land use controls by , 19_. The Metropolitan Council will be
notified after the amendments have been adopted.
3. STATEMENT OF COOPERATION WITH DNR FOR THE REVISION OF
SHORELAND REGULATIONS
The (name of local government) will work with the Department of Natural Resources to
adopt the revised shoreland regulations consistent with the DNR's schedule of priorities."
The Metropolitan Council will be notified following the date of their adoption. (This
statement may be an administrative action and included in the letter submitting the plan
amendment to the Council for review. It does not require official action by the local
government.)
*The local government may adopt standards and other requirements that are
equivalent to NURP and the MPCA's urban best management practices if it
chooses. This is explained in the Council's Interim Strategy to Reduce
Nonpoint Source Pollution to the Minnesota River or Interim Strategy to
Reduce Nonpoint Source Pollution to All Metropolitan Water Bodies. If the
local government chooses the alternative of adopting equivalent requirements,
it should provide a copy of these for the Council's files.
1
1
1
1
1
CCU C4 CeLA I
8 14 ,E Coo.
LARKIN HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN LTD. S�''m� 1.46 1c ,; ,ti
JAMES P LARKIN LINDGREN, PAUL B PLUNKETT
ROBERT L HOFFM AN A T T O R N E Y S A T LAW W ALAN L KILDOW
JACK F DALY KATHLEEN M NEWMAN
D KENNETH LINDGREN MICHAEL B LEBARON
GERALD H FRIEDELL GREGORY E KORSTAD
ALLAN E MULLIGAN GARY A. VAN CLEVE•
JAMES C. ERICKSON DANIEL L BOWLES
EDA ARC J DRISCCLL 1500 NORWEST FINANCIAL CENTER TODDM VLATKCVICH
GENE h FULLER TIMOTHY J McMANUS
JOHN D FULLMER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH TIMOTHY J KEANE
ROBERT E BOYLE ALAN M ANDERSON
FRANK I HARVEY BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431.1194 DONNA L ROBACK
CHARLES S MODELL MICHAEL W SCHLEP
CHRISTOPHER J DIETZEN TELEPHONE (612) 835-3800 MICHAEL A ROBERTSON
JOHN R BEATTIE F (612) 896 -3333 USA A GRAY
LINDA H FISHER GARY A RENNEKE
THOMAS P STOLTMAN SHANNON K McCAMBRIDGE
MICHAEL C JACKMAN CHRISTOPHER J HARRISTHAL
JOHN E. DIEHL WILLIAM C GRIFFITH JR
JON $ SW IERZEWSKI JOHN J STEFFENHAGEN
THOMAS J. FLYNN DANIEL W VOSS
JAMES P QUINN MARK A RURIK
TODD I FREEMAN JOHN R HILL
PETER K BECK JAMES K MARTIN
JEROME H KAHNKE THOMAS J. SEYMOUR
GERALD L SECK MICHAEL J. SMITH
JOHN B. LUNDGUIST FREDERICK K. HAUSER 111
DAYLE NOLAN CILIBERTO• MARY E. VOS
THOMAS B HUMPHREY, JR LARRY D. MARTIN
JOHN A COTTER* JANE E. BREMER
BEATRICE A ROTHWEILER MARCY R KREISMAN
MARIEL E. PIILOLA
OF COUNSEL
WENDELL R ANDERSON
JOSEPH GITIS
M E M O R A N D U M • AL O ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN
TO: Urban Wetland Coalition
FROM: Mike Robertson
DATE: March 22, 1993
RE: Update on Recent Legislative Activity
Over the past couple of weeks I have met with several key
legislators regarding the possibility of amendments to the Wetland
Conservation Act. Senator Jeff Bertram, Chair of the House
Agriculture Subcommittee on Soil and Water Conservation, has
conducted one hearing to begin an overview of the rule proposed by
the Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR). Bertram's intent is
to hold hearings to get a detailed overview of the rule. A second
hearing had been scheduled for last Thursday but was cancelled due
to House floor action. Bertram is interested in having a panel of
perhaps three members of our coalition present comments following
the presentation by Ron Harnack and Greg Larson. He had said that
this would occur on Thursday, March 25 at 4:00 p.m. However, this
schedule may be adjusted due to the cancellation of last week's
hearing.
Representative Bertram will be introducing legislation to extend the
interim program perhaps until July 1994. He believes that the full
ramifications of the new rules must be known before they are allowed
to go into effect.
Several bills have been introduced to amend the Act. Most notable
is a bill by Senator Dille to eliminate the two - for -one replacement
requirement and extend the interim program until January. The
problem we have is that so little time remains before bills must be
passed out of committee. It is very unlikely that Representative
Munger would hear a bill that would eliminate the two - for -one
replacement requirement. Our best hope at this late date in the
Session is to extend the interim program. �
R - ;t� Er,
n i 9 _
Pri n ',L. � ; �.'
- - mom. - m
CHANHASSEN H.R.A. A C C O U N T S P A Y A B L 04 -12 - 93 PAGE
CHECK # A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U R P O S E
,% 048147 120.00 MN LANDSCAPE ARBORETUM TRAVEL & TRAINING
1 120.00 NECESSARY EXPENDITURES SINCE LAST COUNCIL MEETING
Oft
CHANHASSEN H.R.A. A C C O U N T S P A Y A B L E 04 -12 -93 PAGE 2
tlh
CHECK # A M O U N T C L A I M A N T P U R P O S E
4
051070 209.17 DONALD ASHWORTH TRAVEL & TRAINING
051071 32.52 CITY OF CHANHASSEN UTILITIES
051072 20.13 TODD GERHARDT TRAVEL & TRAINING
♦ AND- MILEAGE
3 261.82 CHECKS WRITTEN
•
TOTAL OF 4 CHECKS TOTAL 381.82
A
w
10
•
•
WO
•