Laserfiche WebLink
This alternative orients the primary runway in an east -west (9- <br />27) direction. The primary runway is shifted approximately 700' <br />north of the existing 9-27 strip and is also shifted to the west <br />to provide approach clearance over CSAH 116 to the east. <br />Orientation of the primary runway to the east -west direction <br />results in a significant loss of wind coverage, 81.8% at 10.5 <br />knots versus 90.3% coverage with a 16-34 orientation. A <br />crosswind Runway 16-34 could provide the additional wind <br />coverage achieving a combined coverage of 99.1%. <br />The primary runway initially could be developed as 3500' in <br />length and has potential to ultimately be developed to General <br />Utility runway length standards (between 3700' and 4000' in <br />length). Neither of these capabilities are provided by <br />Alternatives A and B. Runway 16-34, as the crosswind runway, <br />would be developed at 80% of the primary runway length resulting <br />in a 2800' runway. The 2800' runway would be situated approxi- <br />mately 800' to the north of the existing threshold. Adequate <br />design approach clearances would be achieved over the railroad <br />and CSAH 116 without relocation. <br />This development concept, however, would require that County <br />Road 56 be closed from Highway 10 to CSAH 116. North -south <br />vehicular traffic would then be diverted to CSAH 116. Addi- <br />tional land would have to be acquired under this concept. How- <br />ever, fewer homes would be impacted than with Alternatives A and <br />B. <br />RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE <br />The alternatives were reviewed with Mn/DOT and presented to the <br />public at public meetings and hearings. Alternative A was <br />recommended as the preferred alternative upon which the Master <br />Plan Study was developed. The Master Plan was adopted by the <br />City in December, 1985. <br />"PRE -STRESS" ALTERNATIVE <br />After the Master Plan Study was completed, the Prestressed <br />Concrete property became available through bankruptcy. The <br />Council commissioned Hakanson Anderson Associates to explore the <br />feasibility of utilizing the property with a new runway <br />alignment which would lessen the impact on residents to the <br />north of the airfield. <br />Two new alignments were explored and an alignment which shifted <br />the runway approximately 700' south with a southeasterly <br />rotation of 13 30' was presented to the Council as the better of <br />the two new alignments using the "Prestress" property. The 15- <br />4-8 <br />