My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Technical Report
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Airport Commission
>
Reports
>
Technical Report
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2010 10:49:20 AM
Creation date
5/12/2010 10:39:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Miscellaneous
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
345
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
major airport with a new facility at some as yet undetermined location. The recommended <br />development plan includes contingency planning and development options in the event <br />certain airport development does not occur as expected, or if a new major airport is located <br />in an area generally north or south of the urbanized area. <br />A decision on the major airport relocation will be determined by the legislature in 1996, this <br />becomes a crucial date for priority setting because of the long lead times implicit in the <br />planning/development process. The process typically involves system planning, preparation <br />and/or update of an individual airport comprehensive plan, environmental studies and impact <br />statements, securing of necessary approvals and permits, establish funding and programming, <br />accomplish acquisition activities if needed, prepare bids and select contractors, complete <br />construction, implement operational use, and monitor status. <br />All of these planning and development steps require some degree of coordination and public <br />discussion. Some require public hearings. That process can and does take several years to <br />a decade or more to complete and that does not assume any major legal or political <br />challenges. <br />Rernaunended Reliever System Priorities <br />The following system implementation priorities integrates the various agencies requirements <br />within the context of the overall metropolitan aviation system; also, other regional planning <br />and development activities. Priorities are defined as "High", "Medium", or "Low" depending <br />upon their development schedule in relation to the major airport decision in 1996. The <br />priorities are dmded into several categories: planning (system and airports), navigational aids <br />(NAVAIDS), capital improvements, and land acquisition. <br />A high priority is assigned to those planning activities that should be accomplished in the <br />next five years since they will provide important information for decision making regarding <br />the contingency options and their implementation or non-implementation. <br />High Priority Projects consist of the following: <br />Operations Monitoring - it is important to monitor air traffic activity and aircraft use <br />on a wntinuous bases. This serves as a check on the aviation forecasts and the <br />resulting facility needs and investment requirements. Only three of the seven reliever <br />airports have air traffic control towers and allow reasonable recording of flight <br />activity; however, these towers are not manned on a 24 hour basis. Accurate activity <br />information will be important in the next several years due to a potential historical <br />shift occurring in the ownership and use of single engine aircraft. Rather than rely on <br />assumed towered/non-towered airport traffic relationships it is proposed in the <br />reliever study that acoustic counters be acquired with which to refine local data base <br />for use in preparing future forecasts. • <br />General Aviation Fee Structure Analysis - as the airport system has continued to <br />develop the cost of development, operations, maintenance and services has increased. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.