Technical Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

FAA were averaged to determine ratings for this analysis. Implementation . feasibility received a weighting factor of 5. Because Alternative 1 requires no development other than additional hangar construction, it received a rating of 4. Alternatives 2 through 7 all received ratings of 3, indicating a moderate level of implementation difficulty. Alternative 8, which includes the addition of a parallel runway at Anoka County-Blaine Airport, will imrolve coordination with the FAA to secure support for an air traffic control tower. Alternative 8 also provides for a new airport. Before a new general aviation airport can be implemented in Seazch Area "A", considerable effort will be required to determine a project sponsor, conduct a site selection study, complete an environmental assessment, and secure appropriate funds for construction. Therefore, Alternative 8 received a rating of 2. This relatively low feasibility rating is related to the potential difficulty of constructing a new general aviation airport and developing a pazallel rumvay with a control tower at Anoka County-Blaine. A summary of rankings for this criterion is as follows: Alternative $~jng 1 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 5 3 6 3 7 3 8 2 (2) $glection of the Preferred Alternative • The weighted rankings for each of the alternatives aze presented in Table IV- 12. Alternative 8 (new generak aviation airport in Seazch Area "A", pazallel runway/taxiway and air traffic control tower at ?-noka County-Blaine, runway extension at Lake Elmo, and infra-system diversion) received the highest ranking (84) and is considered the preferred alternative. Alternative 6, which received the sewnd highest ranking with a scare of 82, requires the construction of a new general aviation airport is Search Area "A" and a rtttnvay extension at Lake Elmo to aid in diversion of single- and light twin-engine aircraft from St. Paul Downtown. A summary of the • weighted rankings for all of the alternatives is as follows: N•57