Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9.b. Airport Discussion287') 145114 11,111 W oj, '' Rf)SFM(>UMt.MINP1E�,lrlh!',f(ift vost.1"V11, 1 ` � U') - 612 - 423 4 .11 t I -7;�-AEAJ L719 April 1, 1988 TO: Mayor Hoke Councilmembers Napper Oxborough Walsh Wippermann FROM: Stephan Jilk, Administrator/Clerk RE: Airport Discussion - City position I and Community Development Director Dean Johnson have put together the attached discussion paper for your consideration in setting a position on the issue of the airport, the media coverage on it and citizen concerns about the process occurring presently dealing with this issue. This discussion paper is not intended as a position for your adoption without changes but rather an attempt at addressing the process, the problem and a possible position to take on them. It is hoped to be used as a source of direction for your discussion on this issue and an assist in setting a "city" position to take at this time. smj Attachment 0 AIRPORT POSI`T'ION PAPER Stephan Jilk, Administrator/Clerk March 31, 1988 The Metropolitan Council is responsible for the planning of all transportation systems in the seven county metropolitan area of the State of Minnesota. Part of this responsibility entails the complete decision making process for the adequacy of and future planning for the operation, expansion and the replacement, if necessary, of the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. The Metropolitan Council has commissioned,by direction of the Governor,a subcommittee designated as the Airport Adequacy Task Force with representatives from the Metropolitan Council, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Air National Guard, the airline industry and several cities representing some of the metropolitan districts The sole purpose of this task force is to determine the adequacy of the existing airport to handle the projected demand on it for use by private, public and military users until the year 2018. If that adequacy cannot be met through projected changes in technology in the airline industry or by physical expansion of the facilities at the existing airport, should a new airport be constructed? In determining whether a new airport should be built,if the present facility cannot handle the projected demands, the task force looks at the effects on the regional economy of placing constraints on the expansion of the airport. This task force has called upon leading experts in the areas of: (a) airport planning; (b) airport marketing; (c) government regulating agencies in air traffic; (d) mathematical consultants to place an analytical determination on the projected demands and capacity of the existing airport. The results of this study will be concluded in December of 1988, and a report is to be given to the Minnesota State Legislature in January of 1989. Coinciding with this process a study which will determine answers to similar questions is being conducted by the Metropolitan Airports Commission, Their study is part of their twenty year master plan update, the purpose of which is to plan for operation, maintenance and expansion of the existing facility. The results of this study will also be completed about the same time as the Metropolitan Council's study in the last months of 1988. If the determination of both of these studies is that the existing facility will not be adequate to handle what is determined to be the demand on the existing facility, a recommendation to construct a new airport will become a reality. At that juncture a lengthy process to select possible sites and determine the adequacy of those sites based upon environmental, social and economic factors will commence. Ongoing studies, media coverage of the process and other proponents' recommendations for moving the airport have led to the general public's perception that Rosemount is being considered and in fact already chosen for the new airport. The public is beginning to believe the entire adequacy/need determination and the site selection process has been shortened to a series of "behind the scene" decisions by "those really in control". It is important that this public perception be cleared away by the Metropolitan Council, the Metropolitan Airport Commission and the Governor's Office which has commissioned the study. This clarification is essential for two reasons: (1) the general public must perceive that the formal process is working and will continue to work, and it is essential to maintain integrity in that process; and (2) the general public must believe that no decision has been made with regards to any particular site at this time; or for that matter, whether or not a new airport will be built. This clarification can come through press releases, television news releases/statements, or other means; but must come from top levels of the organizations involved. As the process of adequacy determination is completed, or if it is recommended that a new airport is needed; the governing bodies of impacted counties and their municipalities must be brought formally into the siting process. Until that step in the process occurs, the City of Rosemount through staff initiative will continue to monitor information and decision making as it occurs. SIMPLY STATED (1) Studies to determine adequacy of existing airport are continuing. (2) Studies will be completed in 1988. (3) Outcome-- Is current facility adequate? If not, should new facility be built? (4) If new airport is needed --siting process will start. 2 (5) Other nonconfirmed, unofficial proposals are being perceived as possible "official" positions concerning a new airport in Rosemount. These must be clarified by agencies designated to complete airport decisions. (6) Rosemount and other units of government must be brought into the process if it gets to a siting level. (7) Until that point, we will monitor the process to stay educated and "involved".