Laserfiche WebLink
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />DRAFT MASTER PLAN STUDY <br />Written Comments <br />Fifty-nine letters of comment .were received after the public hearing <br />and are categorized as follows: <br />Opposed Neutral Favor <br />29 2* 28 <br />*In favor if property acquired, opposed if not. <br />A number of both opponents and proponents submitted comments of a very <br />generic nature indicating their positions for or against improvements <br />without elaborating. <br />Among the most commonly raised issues are: <br />1) Residents who prefer rural character of area and who want no <br />development <br />2) Airport will decrease property values <br />3) Noise/safety concerns <br />4) Need other City improvements before an airport <br />5) Let general public vote on issue/tax dollars expended <br />6) Improvements benefit a chosen few <br />Brief responses to comments follow the order above. <br />1) "No Development, Maintain Rural Character" <br />Development will occur. The issue facing the City is how to <br />control, influence, and guide development to meet the overall <br />goals of the City through the long term. obviously, it is a <br />_ concern to the City reflected by the hiring of a City Planner, <br />the establishment of the economic development and airport <br />commissions, and actions of the City Council. <br />2) Decrease Property Values <br />Historically, properties have not been negatively impacted by <br />airports, particularly of this size. A number of comments <br />expressed that the airport will further erode property values as <br />did the landfill. The commission has briefly reviewed sale vs. <br />list price and average selling time of homes in the immediate <br />vicinity and those compared favorably with general market <br />conditions. <br />