06/19/85 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I etc. In the case of Gateway, a figure of ~35/day ~as used for a conservative n~ber of transient passengers expected for the year 1989 (which would be traffic year because of the ongoing airport construction), and a direct economic benefit of approximately $11,000 is forecasted. Onoe construction is complete, transient activity will increase significantly and the eoonomic benefit in the following year wou~d rise to $115,000 with forecast activity. M~. Otto stated that airport development will not act as a magnet to bring business into a community but when businesses are analyzing sites they consider what a co~nunity has to offer in the way of labor pool, schools, transportation facilit/es, utility systems. If a o0~nunity has another servioe to offer, like an airport, that oo~munity has a leg ~p on competition. In many instances, even if a business is not using aircraft, the ~wners and/or e~plc~yees do use aircraft. Mr. Otto stated that after the public hearing process, the final Airport Master Plan study is sukmitted to the approving agencies; what is needed from the City is a decision or signal to those approving agencies that the City is serious about developing an airport. I I I I I I I I i It is then the co~mu~ty's obligation to develop an airport zoning plan to protect that area around the airport from further development which oould restrict utilization of the airport. Mr. Otto stated that the zoning ordinance would address height limitations; already to be considered are two radio tc~ers and the hill at the landfill. Mr. Otto stated that the elevation of the landfill hill is proposed at 1020', which is the same elevation as the horizontal surface in the height zoning; it would be in the city's best interest to fight any proposed expansion of that landfill which would exceed that elevation and even attempt to get it reduced. Beight limitations are normally not a major issue; there is more controversy connected with land use safety zoning. Prior to obtaining any Federal or State participation, the City would have to begin working on zoning for an airport. In Gateway's case, Clear Zone A extends 2200' from runway end and is an area where r~ develoi~ent should occur; currently, this zone would encompass 14 h~mes and 2 c(mm~ercial structures. All of these structures could be allowed since they are beyond the 1000' mark but they are non-compatible uses and should be acquired anyway. Zon~ B restricts type and density of development; development would be restricted to sites 3 acres and larger and uses not normally attracting large crowds. Everything currently in the north end of Zone B would be non- conforming uses as the parcel sizes are one acre or less. ~hose homes developed prior to 1978 may be exempted from Zone B regulations and cannot be considered non-conforming uses; they could be brought into conformance by enlarging the parcel sizes or merging the parcels together; this action would result in 9 developable lots being contained in that portion of Zone B. Mr. Otto stated that FAA is very determined that if the airport is developed in Ramsey that the landfill not be allowed to expand. Mr. Darryl Fults referred to Clear Zone B a~d inquired as to when moratori~ or zoning should begin. I Mr. Otto replied that if a city is o0~nitted to lxoceeding with an airport, or even continuing with the study, it is important to send a signal indicating so May 15, 1985 I Page 5 of 11