08/12/87 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

maximum development alternatives should be considered uncertain. The potential exists for public pressure to prevent these improvements, and meetinq necessary federal approvals/criteria for other improvements should not be considered as foregone conclusions. Alternative 3 Adding a Search Area A airport while making no improvements to other airports would onlS create 1/2 of the regional capacit~ needed to serve expected growth. As wi'{h Alternative 1, mos't Of th'e 'new demaHd 'would be forced to locate at airports outside the re§ion, causing a 20 percent drop in regional accessibility, with the average new aircraft owner r_e_qu, iring a 45 minute drive to find storaqe'for his/her plane. Alternative 3 is therefore i'nadequate. Alternative 4 Alternative 4 provides adequate regional capacity. A slight su.r.p.l, us of _cap. acitS exists in the west metro area~ while substantial.capaci, ts. is available in the east. Accessibility is approximatel~ the same as is exper}enced today. As discussed under Alternative 2 aboye, manS of the conditions necessary to achieve the maximum capac, ity at other airports in the system should not be taken for granted. Subalternatives considering variations of Alternative 4 are discussed below. DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS AND SUBALTERNATIVES Of all the alternatives considered only maximum - development of the existing system, plus a new minor airport in Search Area (A) provides sufficient capacity to meet forecasted demand. However, on examining this alternative on an east and west subregional basis, it is apparent that the original system imbalance, identified in the Aviation Guide Chapter, is satisfied. On the West Side there is a surplus of some 13 aircraft storage units while on the East Side there is an apparent excess of 248 storage units. Several options for balancing the demand and capacity for Alternative 4 were assessed. One, was to add more capacity at the new Search Area (A) Airport. This approach was rejected, since 350 storage units was considered the upper limit possible without parallel runways and a tower. A second option was to consider the use of "demand management" techniques to absorb the unmet West Side demand with the unused East Side capacity - primarily at Anoka Co.-Blaine and Airlake Airports. This approach is also notconsidered plausible since it rests on the assumption that all elements of maximum development capacities are probably overstated in that future aircraft operations are expected to remain relatively low, thus criteria established for obtaining an FAA control tower may not be met. This results in a reduction in an airports capacity, since parallel runways require a tower. Without additional runways, building areas cannot be built since it would create an imbalance between an airports landside and airside capacity. This would appear to be especially true at Lake Elmo Airport where most of the East Side "unused" capacity occurs. This problem also applies to the Anoka and Airlake Airports.