HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.f. Airport Planning Process - Decision Documentr
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETIN DATE: September 15th, 1992
AGENDA ITEM: Airp
rt Dual Track Planning
AGENDA SECTION:
Process
- Decision Document
Old Business
PREPARED BY: Step
an Jilk
AGENDITEM # OF
ATTACHMENTS: Dra..,t
Document
AP Y:
The Decision Document drafted by the Metropolitan Council will be the
document used to guide the final decision making proces for the relocation
of the current airport or the maintainance of the current location and the
expansion thereof. The Metopolitan Council will be holding hearings to
take puclic comment on this document.
I would recommend that the City provide comment to this hearing process`.
Prior to making any suggestions on a position on the document I am
recommending that w' take into consideration the comments to be provided by
SOAR.
SOAR will be meeting on Saturday to develop these comments. Following the
outcome of that meeting city staff will work up comments for your
consideration Tuesday ,evening.
RECOMMENDED ACTIO
:Motion to approve comments on the DRAFT DECISION
DOCUMENT and direct that these comments be sent on
to the Metropolitan Council for their consideration
COUNCIL ACTION:
Metro
NOTICE OF
titan Council/Metropolitan Airports Commission
PUBLIC HEARINGS
to receive comments on the draft report,
Twin Cities Aviation Strategy
An Outline of a Decision Document
for the
Dual -Track Major Airport Strategy
Port si
Ath yo
-over-
PUBLIC
When/Where:
When/Where:
How to
Copies:
Questions:
INFORMATION
Tuesday, Sept. 22, 7 pm
Rosemount High School Student Center
3335 142nd St. W.
Rosemount
Wednesday, Sept. 23, 7 pm
Richfield High School Auditorium
7001 Harriet Av. S.
Richfield
1. You may attend one or both of the hearings and offer comments. To
register in advance to speak, please call Jean Unruh at the
Metropolitan Airports Commission at 726-8189.
2. You may send a letter with comments, which must be received no
later than 5 p.m., Oct. 7, 1992, to:
Nigel Finney, deputy executive director - planning and environment
Metropolitan Airports Commission
6040 - 28th Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55450
or
John Kari, senior planner
Metropolitan Council
230 E. 5th St.
St. Paul, MN 55101
Free copies of the public hearing draft may be obtained from the
Metropolitan Council's Data Center by calling 291-8140 or from the
Metropolitan Airports Commission by calling Jenn Unruh at 726-8189.
Call Jenn Unruh at the Metropolitan Airports Commission (726-8189) or
Donna Mattson at the Metropolitan Council (291-6493).
METROPOLITAN
6040 - 28th Av
Minneapolis, 1�
MEMOPOLTTAN
Mears Park Ce:
St. Paul, MN 5:
612 291-6359
Metropolitan
July 1992
JRPORTS COMMISSION
we South
455450
.tre, 230 E Fifth St.
101
Publication No. 559-92-044
Preface .........
I. DUAL -
U.
w
CONTENTS
............................... ......................ii
AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS ................................ 1
CHOOSING At AVIATION STRATEGY FOR THE TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA ... 3
DECISION ]
Outline of
Decision F
.....6
CUMENT....................................
6
cision Document ...:......................................
7
c ors & Data and Analysis ......................................
7
is'on Factor: Investment Assessment ..............................
i ion Factor: Air Service Quality ..... • . • • • • • • •
• • . • • . • • ' ` ' ' ' .
8
:iqs ion Factor: Regional Economic Impacts ................
• • . • • • • • • . 9
.' ion Factor: Regional and Community Impacts .....................
10
,ision Factor: Environmental Effects ..............................
11
12
ionFactor: Financial Issues ...............................
.
13
;i nal Strategic Concerns .......................................
This public hearing
development report
Airports Commissio
process in 1995 or l
The DECISION
Development I
MII l t
A M?
NEW
THE
REC(
MAK
IMPR
METE
CHAT
OF T
Preface
draft document suggests the outline for a joint final airport planning and
"DECISION DOCUMENT") of Metropolitan Council (Council) and Metropolitan
(MAC) to the Minnesota Legislature on the "dual -track" major airport planning
UMENT report is required by state law (MS473.618 Airport Planning and
IN 180 DAYS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE ACTIONS REQUIRED BY SECTION 473.616,
IISION 3, THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL AND THE AIRPORTS COMMISSION SHALL
.T TO THE LEGISLATURE ON THE LONG-RANGE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT OF
. AIRPORT FACILITIES IN THE METROPOLITAN AREA. THE REPORT MUST INCLUDE THE
IMENDATIONS OF THE AGENCIES ON MAJOR AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT IN THE
)POLITAN AREA FOR A PROSPECTIVE 30 -YEAR PERIOD AND ON ACQUIRING A SITE FOR
JR NEW AIRPORT. THE REPORT MUST INCLUDE AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECT OF A
IRPORT ON PRESENT AND PROPOSED FACILITIES AT THE EXISTING AIRPORT AND ON
OCAL, REGIONAL, AND STATE ECONOMIES. THE REPORT MUST CONTAIN THE
IMENDATIONS OF THE AGENCIES ON FINANCIAL PLANNING AND FINANCING FOR A
. NEW AIRPORT, INCLUDING: COST, COST ALLOCATION; AMORTIZATION OF MAJOR
VEMENTS AT THE EXISTING AIRPORT BEFORE A TRANSFER OF OPERATIONS; FINANCING
)DS AND SOURCES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS; LEASE AGREEMENTS AND USER
iES AT A NEW AIRPORT, AND A METHOD OF CAPTURING FOR PUBLIC USES A PORTION
REVENUE FROM DEVELOPMENT AROUND A NEW AIRPORT."
The DECISION DOCUMENT will recommend a long-term aviation strategy for the Twin Cities, and
lay out the key data, and analysis and reasons for the recommendations.
This public hearing draft document fulfills two purposes for the Council and MAC:
• The Irst is to identify the questions and key issues that will need to be addressed in
the Decision Document so the research and studies undertaken during the next phase
of the dual -track planning process yield information helpful in making the key
recommendations in the DECISION DOCUMENT.
• The econd purpose is to make sure that all the key factors in recommending a
strategy are, in fact, addressed and all relevant information is summarized and
extracted in one document for public review and debate. This outline identifies and
describes seven important factors. People are encouraged to review them and suggest
H
DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
Under the Metropolitan Airport Planning Act of 1989 (MS 473.155 and 473.616-619), the
Metropolitan Council (Council) and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) are required to
make recommendations to the legislature about how to meet the long-term aviation needs of the
Twin Cities Area. A six-year time frame was established to complete the dual -track airport planning
effort. The tracks are on a parallel timeline.
Under one track, the MAC was to prepare a plan for the possible expansion of Minneapolis -St. Paul
(MSP) International Airport. A concept plan, MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan, was adopted
by the MAC in November 1991.
Under the second track, the Council was to designate a "search area" for a possible replacement
airport. A search area in east -central Dakota County was selected by the Council in December 1991.
The next steps in the planning involves environmental, economic, community impact and other studies
for both tracks (see Figure 1). An update of the MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan is expected
to be completed in 1S94. In 1994 the MAC will have selected a site within the much larger search
area for a new airport and will have a development plan for a new airport. The MAC will lead the
new airport planning effort, though the Council will conduct some of the land use and economic
impact studies. In addition, by the end of 1992 the Council must prepare a plan for how MSP can
be re -used if a replac ment airport is constructed.
The overall purpose of the dual -track approach is to conduct studies that will give the region -- and
the Minnesota Legislature -- information to compare the option of expanding the current airport with
the option of building a new airport in a new location. The major planning activities for 1992 to
1995/1996 period are shown in Figure 1.
In addition, the Coui
monitoring trends in
and changes in the ai
to the dual -track ap
current information
the MAC and a 15 -member Contingency Planning Committee are annually
growth in airport passengers and freight travel, the economy of the region,
ie industry, among others, to see if the trends mean changes should be made
)ach. The annual monitoring will also give the region the best and most
which to base the decisions which will be made in 1995 or 1996.
FIGURE I
DUAL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
SUMMARY
I
I NEW AIRPORT DEVELOPMENT
I
I srrutnrouT
r
IOENOfY SCREEN. Scof9 DRAfT
FINAL 90
OPTIMIZE
C07AP. PlA7T5 COFP."s
FIINIAID.
2_1EtAY01
REPORT
POfE7mAl SIITSf NRl1C PllBl�
STTTSM1ATOUiS LAYOUTS
SELECT
ATTMTOUT
UYOUf/
COMP. PINS SCORNG RPi, S00 OPARAID
SELECT NEW
NRI'OR17ikb
MTGS µAC'
BANS ftIPIIC
MIGS
N[0.1CMTGS FVC ROUGIRUA:.
COMP. f`UN
APM, 1999
M'
APPJL 1907
FM
MAC, 141 1471
EtSSCOPING
Isl PHASE,
NRUC FrtGS
AML 1992
MSP DEVELOPMENT
LIPOATE
A1SP
Ur`O SCOFING
MSP DR1Pf
fwAl AEO.
2070
II.
CONCfPf REPORT,
ALD,
Sb0 NRUC
SELILT FSP
2(170 COMP.
IORECASTS
BANS ftIPIIC
MIGS
ANC NRNG
PLAN
APM, 1999
MNt
FM
fM
o
UGt MME
ANC. JAN 1991
AED • ARerratk Emirormertal Docunent
SD.ScooinpOaclment
DSOO. DrartScoping Decision Doa7mmt
SOO. Scoping DecistonDocwwA
MAC. Mdr000lilanAiipons Commission
MC. Metropol ilan Courcil
FM. Federal Aviation AdminislrAion
EIS
EVAL1uff f5SC01'1nGT STATE
00101 SD 6 05D0. 500 N UC AL
FIN
KTEASH
A S NOUG M1GS kw NR1G OS
MACH, 1*4 JN.Ims
NRNRf
SELECT
FIDERAL
IIDER4
OEC130N
PRUp
fINA1
RECORD Cf
OOCUMEM
NWVRT
EIS
DEC1S1Ein
FAC. MC
MNt
FM
fM
MMICIL 1915
UGt MME
:OOSING AN AVIATION STRATEGY FOR THE TWIN
CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA
By 1996, the Minnesota State Legislature will select a long-term aviation strategy for the Twin Cities
Area and for the state. The MAC and Council are following an accelerated planning schedule which
will result in a final report for legislative consideration in 1995. This ambitious schedule represents
a goal of the agencies to address concerns raised because of the uncertainty that exists for persons
potentially impacted by the development of MSP or a new airport.
Overall, the legislatua and the citizens of the Twin Cities and the state, need to be in a position to
respond to two ques ions:
• First, will the region need to make significant investmerrt for additional runway(s) and
terminal capacity (concourses, gates) during the next 25-30 years (2020) or can the
regiori meet expected demand for air service with only modest investments and
improvements to facilities at MSP?
• Second, if significant investment and additional capacity is needed, where should the
region make those investments -- at MSP or at a new commercial airport in Dakota
Cou tv?
The MAC and Council 1989 forecasts show that demand will probably outpace existing capacity by
early in the next century requiring significant investment for capacity improvements. The long term
forecasts for 2020 will be updated in 1993 and used to determine facility requirements. These facility
requirements will be the basis for comparable master plans for both MSP and potential new airport.
The decisions on where and how best to meet future air transportation demand in the region will
take into account how each option will provide air service in terms of physical facilities, operational
efficiency and flexibility, and safety. In addition, the comparison of the options will need to include
cost, economic, community, regional development and environmental impacts.
The DECISION DOCUMENT should extract the information and analysis of the dual -track studies in
a manner so that the; differences, similarities and contrasts between the potential public policy options
can be more readily seen and highlighted. To date seven factors have been identified in the 1991
annual contingency planning assessment report as important for making choices among the options -
- expand MSP, bui a new airport, and do nothing. These factors are as follows:
• Investment Assessment
• Air Service Quality
• Regional Economic Impacts
3
• Regi nal and Community Impacts
• Envir nmental Effects
•
Fina ncialIssues
•
Regional Strategic Concerns
The information in t e DECISION DOCUMENT will be organized like a scorecard (Figure 2). Each
option will be evalua ed and graded for a series of analysis topics for each of the factors. There will
be a concise write-up for each topic and an overall summary for each topic by policy option. At this
time the focus should be on whether or not more factors should be added or if some should be
eliminated and comb ned with others. A similar critique should also be done concerning the analysis
topics. It should be expected, however, that as the dual -track studies are completed additional
analysis topics may be added and existing ones dropped. The focus should be on making an
evaluation of the policy options and highlighting those topics and factors that will help move the
public debate to a decision. Are any important areas missing?
An open question at this time is how the comparison will be made. Should an overall average be
the yardstick? Should some factors be weighted more highly than others?
4
FIGURE 2
DRAFT SCORI CARD FOR EVALUATING DUAL -TRACK POLICY OPTIONS
The scorecard a
most suitable a`
data needed fol
cost/benefit ane
and/or consider
analysis.
THE SCORECARD
bove summarizes the kind of information needed to evaluate the aviation options and to select the
iation strategy. This scorecard, or one like it, serves two purposes. It helps explicitly identify the
an informed decision. Much of this data can be distilled into one summary statistic in the social
lysis. However, the scorecard can also help evaluate single factors that are especially important
factors that may be impossible to put a dollar figure on for inclusion in the summary cost/benefit
5
DECISION FACTORS
INVESTMENT ASSESSMENT
Net Capacity
Cost Effectiveness
Costs/Benefits
Risk of Low Re urn
Social Cost/Benefit
AIR SERVICE
Level of Service
Fares
Hubbing
International
System Integration
ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Short Tette
Long Term
Improved Econ mic Structure
REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS
Airport Environs
Infrastructure Implications
Accessibility
ENVIRONMENTAL
Natural
Noise/Overflight
Indirect (air quality, etc.)
Ability to Mitigate
FINANCIAL ISSUES
Feasibility
Effect on Regi nal Finance
Effect on Airlines
Effect on Region
STRATEGIC CONCERNS
Technical Flex bility
Economic Flexibility
Vision of the Region
Technology
Political/Instit tional
The scorecard a
most suitable a`
data needed fol
cost/benefit ane
and/or consider
analysis.
THE SCORECARD
bove summarizes the kind of information needed to evaluate the aviation options and to select the
iation strategy. This scorecard, or one like it, serves two purposes. It helps explicitly identify the
an informed decision. Much of this data can be distilled into one summary statistic in the social
lysis. However, the scorecard can also help evaluate single factors that are especially important
factors that may be impossible to put a dollar figure on for inclusion in the summary cost/benefit
5
A proposed outlin
will highlight the i
The second sectioi
to 1995/1996. The
of aviation activity
of this section will
be organized unde
and analysis is di:
recommendations.
Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Part VI
DECISION DOCUMENT
for the Decision Document is shown in the Figure 3. The executive summary
ajor findings, conclusions and recommendations of the Council and the MAC.
will summarize the dual -track metropolitan airport planning process from 1989
hird and largest section will summarize data and analysis. The long-term forecasts
.nd the major underlying assumptions will begin this section. The remaining part
ummarize the data and analysis of the dual track studies. This information will
the seven decision factors. An initial set of questions to be addressed by the data
ussed below. The final three sections will include findings, conclusions and
DUAL•TRACK DECISION DOCUMENT
• Major Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations
AL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING PROCESS
AL -TRACK AIRPORT PLANNING -- SUMMARY OF DATA & ANALYSIS
A Long -Range Forecasts of Aviation Activity
B. Decision Factors & Data and Analysis
• Investment Assessment
• Air Service Quality
• Regional Economic Impacts
• Regional and Community Impacts
• Environmental Effects
• Financial Issues
• Regional Strategic Concerns
C. Decision Scorecard
INGS
IONS
TIONS TO THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATURE
Z
The primary policy c
existence of a full ra.
of the Metropolitan
have Iong lead time
situation requires la
airport investment e
capacity objectives,
investments too soo
Analysis Topic:
• How much
the option.
• What are
capacity?
Analysis Topic:
DECISION FACTOR: INVESTMENT ASSESSMENT
ncern is to have adequate capacity to meet the air transportation needs. The
;e of aviation services is central to the long-term economic and social well-being
sea. In the planning and development of airport facilities, it is not unusual to
between project identification and project construction and operation. This
:.ing out long-term and recognizing the potential risks. The key issues for major
cisions involve how effective and flexible an option is in meeting the future
e relationship between costs and benefits and what the relative risks of making
or too late.
Net Capacity
acity and flexibility for expansion in relationship to the forecasted demand does
ide?
assumptions regarding technology for each option and their impact on net
Cost Effectiveness
• Does the option provide capacity at a reasonable cost per passenger or per flight --that is, is it
cost-effective..
• What it the c st per operation of each option at different levels of activity/demand? What is the
cost in future years if demand and airport use increase?
Analysis Topic: I CostsBenerits
• Do the benefits of the option justify the costs of the project?
Analysis Topic: I Risk of Low Return
• What is the r�sk of low return for each option? Is this acceptable or not?
• _ What is, the r sk of being wrong, of having too much or too little capacity?
• What will it cost if the region guesses high or low -- what are the financial and economic
penalties if there is not enough activity to cover operating costs and debt service and what if
there is not enough capacity that leads to unacceptable delays, perhaps even a limit on air
traffic?
Analysis Topic.
• What are
• Do the sc
Social Cost/Benefits
costs of aircraft noise and traffic on the well being of nearby residents?
I benefits and costs of the option justify the costs of the project?
7
DECISION FACTOR: AIR SERVICE QUALITY
How good should th quality of air service be for the Twin Cities Region and the State of Minnesota
as provided by the major commercial airport? Aviation goals call for the major airport to provide
a high level air service for the residents and businesses in the Twin Cities Area, the state and the
upper midwest region it serves. The airport facilities and services should enhance and maintain the
Twin Cities as a ma'or hub airport in the national system, maintain and increase the frequency of
service and nonstop access to major national and regional markets, promote and facilitate the
expansion of direct international service, promote air cargo goods movement to regional, national and
international marks s.
Analysis Topic: I Level of Service
• What is the �ange of choices available to passengers under each option -- scheduling and cities
served by nonstop and direct flights.
• How will cao demand be affected by the airport option's capacity, distance from regional
business cera ers or by passenger services?
• What impacts will technological advances and substitutions for air travel have?
Analysis Topic: Fares
• What is the range of choices available to passengers under each option -- fare levels?
Analysis Topic: Hubbing
• How well wi�l the options maintain and enhance the Twin Cities area as an airline hub?
Analysis Topic: International
• What is th range of choices available to passengers under each option -- breadth of
internationa service?
Analysis Topic: System Integration
• What facilities and improvements are committed and/or planned at competitive airports (such
as Detroit; Chicago, St. Louis, Denver)?
• What are th potential changes in the airline industry and what are their likely impacts on the
Twin Cities.
0 What is the
role and what future role could the regional reliever airports play?
N.
E
ON FACTOR: REGIONAL ECONOMIC IMPACTS
Air service plays ani portant role in fostering regional economic prosperity. The aviation industry
provides the region with accessibility to and from other parts of the United States and the world. It
is a major force in the regional economy. The key economic questions involve what airport
investments will do in the short term, over the long-term and how will they affect regional economic
growth and develop ent patterns.
Analysis Topic: Short Term
• How do the options differ in their short-term relocation and employment effects? Do they differ
in their long-term impact on regional growth and stability?
Analysis Topica,, Long Term
• What kind of changes are likely in the level and character of economic activity fostered by each
option for region and state.
• Where within the region will new businesses be likely to locate under each option.?
Analysis Topic: Improved Economic Structure
• What kinds o businesses will be attracted and how will they affect local employment, residential
patterns, income, character and quality of life?
• Who benefits and who is burdened by each option?
• Overall, how well do these economic changes support the long-term goals of the Twin Cities
region and th state?
D
DECISION FACTOR: REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY IMPACTS
How will the airport options impact people, communities and regional land use and development
patterns? Although it may be difficult to attach dollar values to these types of impacts, the influence
that airport operati ns (on-site employment, aircraft operations, passengers, freight, etc.) and related
infrastructure (highways, public utilities, etc.) have investment they must be considered in evaluating
the options.
Analysis Topic: Airport Environs
• What changes would be set in motion by each option and how would the options affect the
surrounding community and the region as a whole in terms if land use and development
patterns?
• What are t e,_land-use implications of these effects on various parts of the region? What
happens to business activity if only modest changes are made at MSP?
• How will the provision of air cargo affect future land use patterns, the mix of cargo and
passenger demand and, ultimately, air service quality?
• What is the current and anticipated use of land adjacent to the airport --agricultural, residentia4
commercia industrial?
• How will th
Analysis Topic:
• What is the
• Will more
stimulated
Analysis Topic:
• What are th
in the Twin
land area needed for expansion be acquired and who would be affected?
Infrastructure Implications
adequacy of the infrastructure for projected land uses.
nent in local transportation infrastructure be needed to satisfy aviation -
Accessibility
travel distances and travel times for the options from various major activity centers
Cities Metropolitan Area and cities in Greater Minnesota?
10
N FACTOR: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
Airport development and operation, whether at the existing airport or at a new site, will involve have
environmental impact, which will need to be addressed. These impacts will be both on- and off-site
and will effect the nE tural and man-made environments. What are the type and magnitude of
environmental impac and can identified adverse impacts be mitigated?
Analysis Topic: Natural
• What, and how critica4 are the environmental implications of each option?
What is the &n act on the natural environment --wildlife, wetlands, river and groundwater quality.
How does the'community evaluate these effects?
Analysis Topic: Noise/Overflight
s What are the oise and overflight effects. How do residents feel about these annoyances?
Analysis Topic:
s Will airs
Analysis Topic:
• Is mitigation 1
Indirect (air quality, etc.)
ed and induced ground transportation significantly affect air quality?
Ability to Mitigate
,ssible? How much will it cost?
11
DECISION FACTOR: FINANCIAL ISSUES
Is financing likely o be a constraint in the ability to generate sufficient funds to implement the
desired aviation strategy? The key financial issues need to address basic project feasibility and the
ability of the public and the airlines/airport users to cover annual debt and operating costs. Major
airport improvements will be staged over time and supported by a combination sources (federal
grants, user fees and charges, revenue bonds and general obligation revenue bonds).
Analysis Topic: Feasibility
• What is the nancial feasibility of the options?
• What are th costs and cost allocation requirements of the options?
• What are th potential financing methods and sources of public and private funds?
Analysis Topic: Effect on Regional Finance
• What will th� financial impact be on the region?
• What revenue sources are available to fund each option?
• What will th effect of airport financing on regional or community bond ratings?
• How do the options compare in their impacts on regional/local government finances?
• What method for capturing revenue from development around a new airport could be used for
public purposes? What role should fiscal disparities play?
Analysis Topic: I Effect on Airlines
• What will the financial effect be on airlines with each option (lease agreements, user charges and
fees) ?
Analysis Topic: Effect on the Region
• What will
business?
the financial impact on the typical resident of the Twin Cities and the typical
12
No matter how well it
if it is implemented ir
predict the future wit
introduced, aviation ai
socio-political forces i
against uncertainty.
The viability of the a
unforeseen events. Fi
At the same time, the
project fits in well wit
those objectives, it is i
are potential impleme
affects different pope
differently.
Analysis Topic:
DECISION FACTOR: STRATEGIC CONCERNS
ppears to satisfy currently estimated needs, the aviation plan will succeed only
a form that satisfies future needs. No one evaluating the options now can
i precision. Circumstances are bound to change. New technology may be
d economic development in general may take a slightly different path, or new
iay emerge. The flexibility of each option may provide an important hedge
iation strategy may critically depend on its ability to adapt to change and
ancial flexibility fosters greater efficiency and helps keeps costs to a minimum.
:hosen option must be able to fit in with regional plans and objectives. If the
public objectives -- the vision of the region -- or is easily adapted to support
ore likely to garner the support needed for successful implementation. There
tation roadblocks facing each option and they may differ because each option
ations, interests groups and economic interests, or affects a given interests
Technical Flexibility
• Can engineeg design be altered during the construction phase to fit changed circumstances?
Is it possibletstage development differently or shift development schedules?
• Can the finished airport be adapted to respond to shifts in the composition of aviation demand
(for example, shift from regional to cargo air service)? --
Analysis Topic: Economic Flexibility
• Can financial arrangements can be adapted to changes in financial markets, local debt
situations, or cash outflow.
Analysis Topic: Vision of the Region
• How well doey each option fit into the overall development strategy for the region as articulated
in the Council's policy plans?
Analysis Topic. Technology
• What technological improvements and changes are expected?
• How might they impact the need for air transportation or improve the capability of existing air
transportation investments?
Analysis Topic: Political/Institutional
• What are
political and institutional issues faced by each option?
13