Laserfiche WebLink
this option new available. <br /> <br />Merland Otto gave the following synopsis comparing Alternate D (utilizing <br />Prestressed property and rotating runway layout 10 degrees and 30 minutes) and <br />Alternate E (utilizing Prestressed property and rotating runway layout 13 <br />degrees and 30 minutes) to Alternate C (present airport runway layout): <br /> <br />Alternates D and E would eliminate from Alternate C (present layout plan) the <br />need to acquire 13 residential homes, 2 businesses and 46 acres of undeveloped <br />land at (Dst of $1,294,000.00. <br /> <br />Alternate D involoves acquisition of Prestressed property, trailer park, <br />relocating ~ 70 residents of trailer park, one residence on Hwy. 10, auto sales <br />and trailer and 103 acres of land at an estimated cost of $1,552,000.00. <br /> <br />Alternate E involves acquisition of Prestressed property, 15 units in the <br />trailer p~rk, auto sales and trailer, residence on Hwy. 10, residence on Cty. <br />Rd. #56, one undeveloped lot and 125 acres of land at an estimated cost of <br />$1,370,000.00I. <br /> <br />Wind coverage renains virtually the same with Alternates D and E and Cty. Rd. <br />#116 will still require relocation. Runway shift would have a minimal affect <br />on airplane traffic patterns. <br /> <br />Mr. Otto stated that Alternates D and E do not present a significant benefit <br />over the present proposed plan. <br /> <br />~q~ ~iS~ussion Reaardina Settina Of Priorities For Furthe$ Study On <br /> <br />Chairman Ippel stated that this Commission should agressively pursue inclusion <br />in the NPIAS (National Plan of Integrated Airports System) because the entire <br />project hinges on whether or not Gateway can obtain inclusion. ~he cost to <br />pursue inclusion is $1,000.00, 80% of which is eligible for reimbursement from <br />the State. <br /> <br />Motion by ~issioner Stauffer and seconded by Commissioner Seibert to <br />recommend that City Council authorize an expenditure to pursue inclusion of <br />Gateway North Industrial Airport in the NPIAS. <br /> <br />Amendment by Commissioner Sieber and seconded by Commissioner Erickson to <br />include in the motion that the Airport Commission is not recommending that <br />Gateway North Industrial Airport be developed as a municipal airport; the <br />Commission is only recommending pursuing inclusion in the NPIAS which is <br />necessary in the event there is airport development seeking Federal funding. <br /> <br />Further DiScussion: Mr. Otto stated that one of the criteria for inclusion is <br />a public agency or body willing to sponsor the airport; there is no obligation <br />to have an. airport if inclusion in NPIAS is obtained. Commissioner Seibert <br />stated that the ~endment clutters the motion; through past discussions and <br />minutes it should be very evident that there are a lot more steps to go through <br />before the City is obligated or committed to develop an airport. Mr. Otto <br />reaffirmed that inclusion only makes Gateway North eligible for Federal funding <br /> December 4, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />