Agenda Packets - 1997/04/28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Thomas A. Anderson ° November 25, 1996 • Page 2 • • 1. Pursuant to the Order, MAC must "develop the Airport pursuant to the Airport Master Plan formally adopted by the Metropolitan Airports Commission on August 15, 1983 and approved by the Metropolitan Council on November 22, 1983 (the "1983 Master Plan"):... ... / The 1983 Master Plan was adopted on the basis that "since development of Anoka County/Blaine Airport is limited by law to minor scams, it will be assumed that its fica will consist entirely of types D and E aircraft (see page 50 of 1983 Master Plano 3. Proposed development and capital improvements at the Airport includtff in the Plan designed to accommodate aircraft larger than types D and E aircraft (now referred to as types A and B aircraft - 12,500 lbs gross takeoff weight or less) are in conflict with the Order and the 1983 Master Plan and would therefor not be allowed. 4. The City's community and land use planning since entry of the Order in July 1986 has been based on the provisions of the Order incorporating the terms of the 1983 Master Plan as a guide for future development of the Airport. Airport developments or capital improvements in conflict with the 1983 Master Plan and Order would cause significant dealt' harm to the City and its residents by seriously disrupting existing development • and requiring the loss of the use of property that is permissible pursuant to the terms of the Order and the 1983 Master Plan. Based on the foregoing legal guidelines and provisions of the 1983 Master Plan and Order, the City's formal written objections to the Plan are as follows: • 1. The Airport history section of the Plan srattiag 011 . T1:3 inakcdsno"left ce* . whatsoever to the Order governing future development at the Airport. The Plan should be amended to include a full desciption of the history regarding the Order, the specific provisions of the Order that govern the future development of the Airport,and incorporate by reference a copy of the Order as a new exhibit 2. The Plan, on its face, fails to comply with the requirements of the Order in that the Plan does not include the Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens adjacent to the Airport as required by the Order. The Plan should be amended to include a specific section or chapter devoted to the Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy required by the Order. In response to your letter of October 25, 1996, the City's official position is that MAC is currently in violation of the Order for failing to have adopted a Comprehensive Noise Abatement Strategy as required by the Order. s • 3. The Plan improperly uses an Airport Reference Code (ARC), Approach Category B, Design Croup II standard (ARC B-II) for design standards for capital improvements, including all runways, taxiways and setbacks for the Airport Using an ARC B-II design Rc i.334o MU125-31