Laserfiche WebLink
The long range achievement of land use compatibility was addressed, <br />in part, with a suggestion for land acquisition and insulation of <br />structures. The proposed guidelines refer to "program costs", "fin'_' <br />ancing methods", and "prioritization and implementation schedules", <br />however, there are no solutions given for these needs. The guideline <br />implementation costs received strong objection from cities represented <br />at the hearing. <br />5. The guidelines state that airport operators are expected to partici- <br />pate in a program to eliminate incompatibility in land use due to <br />airport noise zones. I pointed out that the required participation <br />by airport operators is presented as a voluntary act and a provision <br />of penalities for noncompliance via state legislation may be more <br />effective in implementing this request. <br />In summary, it was my observance that most of those attending the hearing <br />generally agreed that land use compatibility guidelines would be a posi- <br />tive step toward noise abatement procedures for airport operations. <br />However, it was also generally agreed that the proposed guidelines placed <br />main emphasis for corrective measures on the property owner or receiver of <br />noise rather than upon those who are creating the problem. In a convers- <br />ation with Chauncey Case from the Metropolitan Council Staff, I was <br />informed that the public hearing record would not be ready for approximately <br />two months from the hearing and that the Metropolitan Council staff would <br />be reviewing and recommending revisions and/or alternate options to the <br />Council approximately in March of 1983. I requested that the City of <br />Mounds View be notified of any further action regarding the guidelines. <br />DWM/dwm <br />c. Administrator Don Pauley <br />R <br />