My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
04/16/86
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Dissolved Boards/Commissions/Committees
>
Airport Commission
>
Minutes
>
1986
>
04/16/86
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/22/2025 9:34:32 AM
Creation date
2/23/2004 9:28:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Document Title
Airport Commission
Document Date
04/16/1986
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
Chairmam Ippel noted letters from the following supporting the Gateway Airport <br />and it'Is upgrading: City of Elk River, Anoka AVTI, Virgil Barnes (Gateway <br />FBO), Ralph Dickenson, Waltek Inc., Cargill Research Farm, United Power <br />Association. Chairman Ippel noted letters from the following supporting <br />Gateway's inclusion in the National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems: <br />Metropolitan Airports Commission, Representative John Hartinger, Congressman <br />Gerry 6ikofski, Senator Durenberger, Senator Boschwitz, Representative Darby <br />Nelson. Chairman Ippel noted receipt of letter from FAA confirming Gateway's <br />inclusion in the National Plan of Integrated Systems. Chairman Ippel noted <br />receipt, of letters from the following declining consideration in the <br />engineeximg consultant selection process: Ayers Associates, Progressive <br />Consulting Engineers, Bolton & Menk, Howard Needles Tammen and Bergendoff, <br />Barrienfos and Associates. (See attachment). <br /> <br />Mr. Merland Otto To Update Commission On Revised Itinerary And <br /> Timetable On Airport Project And Development Of Priorities And <br /> Steps: <br /> <br />Mr. Otto presented the Commission with the following attachments and reviewed <br />their contents with the Commission: (See attachment) <br /> <br />1. Steps In Development Of Airport Construction Projects. <br /> <br />2. Gateway North Major Project Steps/Tentative Program. <br /> <br />3. Gateway North Tentative Schedule. <br /> <br />4. Excerpt from U.S. Department of Transportation Circular On Land <br /> Acquisition And Relocation Assistance. <br /> <br />Mr. Otto stated that he has received a number of calls over the last several <br />months fromlandowners interested in the airport progress and when acquisition <br />will take place. Land acquisition programs are not entered into until after <br />environmental approvals. Land can be acquired at any time, but prior to being <br />reimbursed for those funds an environmental approval has to be gained and the <br />site has to:gain FAA endorsement. The grant application includes a certain <br />amount Of dollars to acquire a certain amount of land; a 10% cushion is <br />provided; for acquisition costs beyond that 10% cushion, Federal funding <br />participation decreases from 90% to 50%. Mr. Otto stated that he feels it is <br />the city's obligation to inform any prospective buyers of property in the <br />airport zones that there is an airport study in progress and the uncertainties <br />associated with it. If existing property owners question whether or not to <br />make improvements to their property, they should feel comfortable doing so as <br />later acquisition at a fair market value would take into consideration those <br />improvements made. Mr. Otto cautioned agains making any written comments or <br />statements regarding the subject of land acquisition. To insure the land is <br />available for airport improvements, the City can consider going into 'Rights of <br />First Refusal' agreements. That process does mot cost a great deal and it <br />assures the City an opportunity to match and offer for purchase of property. <br />The City can also set up a non-profit organization to begin acquiring property <br />as a pro~ective type acquisition. The element of risk with both of these <br />methods is that it assumes the environmental approvals will be granted and <br />there will be reimbursement at some point in time. Another method is <br />development moratorium. It behooves the city to establish a moratorium to <br /> April 16, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.