Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Otto - Whatever I say is not binding; FAA has a policy that landfills are <br />not compatible with airports. Gateway's size of facility will acoannodate <br />piston aircraft and FAA guidelines are that any sanitary landfills within 5000' <br />of an airport would be deemed non -compatible land use. Because of AIP funds, <br />the Federal government would be participating $4,000,000 worth and they will <br />not risk their investment by having another agency mitigating it. Airports and <br />landfills are incompatible land uses but I would be doing a disservice to say <br />that-yhee-an airport is there, the landfill is not going to be there. <br />Ernie Larsen - 7220 153rd Lane Nw - Can Ramsey afford $535,000 or $1,310,000 <br />for an airport that would benefit 50-75 people - the majority of which may not <br />live or work in Ramsey? IF we have the money, would we be wiser to spend it <br />extending the sewer to that area to attract business and industry? Can the <br />City afford to sustain and operate an airport if it beanies a reality? What <br />economic benefit will this be to the City and resident taxpayers? Who would do <br />the Environmental Impact Statement? Can we obligate State funds for this <br />development or are we making an assumption based on past practice? If we <br />really want an airport, is this the proper location? Compliment the Commission <br />on conducting this pthl is forum. <br />Chairman Ippel - Whether Ramsey can afford this facility is something to be <br />looked at. Up until this study we did not know the cost of development and <br />maintenance. Businesses and pilots in the region were surveyed to determine <br />potential need and use of this facility. It will take more than people fran <br />Ramsey utilizing the airport to make it financially feasible and self- <br />supporting. There are Ramsey residents and businesses currently using the <br />facility and there have been businesses expressing a desire to came into Ramsey <br />if they can know that the facility will be upgraded and be there. This airport <br />master plan presented tonight, if adopted, will initiate additional phases of <br />the study which address these concerns. Cannot answer if it would be wiser to <br />bring in sewer and water rather than an airport to attract business. This <br />Commission survey similar airport facilities in the region and saw what those <br />facilities attracted to their respective communities. This Commission surveyed <br />communities hosting airport facilities and the general response was that their <br />airports did bring in development and employment. Attracting development is <br />very competitive in this region and it is hoped that an airport would set <br />Ramsey apart from the other communities. There is an increasing trend for <br />small businesses to use corporate airports since deregulation. Airport <br />facilities do have revenue generators like hangars; hangars are developed as <br />needed, pay for themselves and produce revenue. Another way to produce revenue <br />is lease the land to hangar developers and those developers are taxed <br />accordingly for the improvement. <br />Mr. Otto - The State subsidizes airport operating expenses; a facility the size <br />of Gateway would be eligible for $5,000/year. <br />Chairman Ippel - With respect to economic benefit, it is hopeful that the <br />airport will attract industry, employment and additional tax base for the <br />caimunity. Commercial establishments are taxed 4 times as much as a <br />residential unit and the additional tax base brought into the.aoamunity should <br />hold homeowner taxes down. Using tax increment to finance the airport would be <br />a way of paying for the airport through revenues gained from development in <br />August 21, 1985 <br />Page 6 of 14 <br />