Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />this option now available. <br /> <br />Merland Otto gave the following syno~~3is CODlfaring Alternate D (utilizing <br />Prestressed property and rotating runway layout 10 degrees and 30 minutes) and <br />Al ternate E (utilizing Prestressed property and rotating runway layout 13 <br />degrees and 30 minutes) to Alternate C (present air(X>rt runway layout): <br /> <br />Alternates D and E would eliminate from Alternate C (present layout plan) the <br />need to acquire 13 residential hames, 2 businesses and 46 acres of undeveloped <br />land at cost of $1,294,000.00. <br /> <br />Alternate D involoves acquisition of Prestressed property, trailer fark, <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 fark, 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 oost of <br />$1,370,000.00. <br /> <br />Wind coverage rEmains 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 pro(X>sed plan. <br /> <br />C-BRP- '2: Discussion Re9ardinCj1 Settina Of Priori ties For Further StlJQy On <br />PrQ;p-cb <br /> <br />Chairman Ippel stated that this Oommission should agressively pursue inclusion <br />in the NPIAS (National Plan of Integrated Air(X>rts 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 ~ Oommissioner Stauffer and seconded ~ Commissioner Seibert to <br />recommend that City Council authorize an expenditure to pursue inclusion of <br />Gateway North Industrial Air(X>rt in the NPIAS. <br /> <br />Amendnent ~ Commissioner Sieber and seconded ~ Commissioner Erickson to <br />include in the motion that the Air(X>rt Oommission is not reconunending that <br />Gateway North Industrial Air(X>rt be developed as a municipal air(X>rt; the <br />Oommission is only reoo.mmending pursuing inclusion in the NPIAS which is <br />necessary in the event there is air(X>rt developnent 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 s(X>nsor the air(X>rt; there is no obligation <br />to have an air(X>rt if inclusion in NPIAS is obtained. Commissioner Seibert <br />stated that the amendnent clutters the motion; through fast 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 air(X>rt. 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 />