Res 2001-006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

this alternative proposes the construction of an ATCT north of the eastern portion of Runway 8-26. This location would provide adequate controller view of all movement areas. The ARFF station proposed in this alternative is southeast of airport property in Reedville. This location could be shared with Reedville, Caldwell County, and the airport. The exhibit depicts the construction of an access roadway so that ARFF equipment can access the airport. This location may not lend to adequate ARFF response times and could require the ARFF unit to be placed on stand-by at the airport during each charter operation. AIRPORT ALTERNATIVE 3 The next airport alternative considers maintaining Runway 8-26 as the airport's primary runway. As depicted on Exhibit 4D, Runway 8-26 could be extended 400 feet west and 300 feet east while maintaining adequate RSA and OFA on existing airport property. Consideration was given to fully extending 700 feet east, however, concern with prior landfill use of this area could be costly. The eastern RPZ would be fully on airport property, however, approximately 69 acres west of State Highway 21 would need to be acquired (at least in easement) for the RPZ. The RPZ west of the runway considers a precision approach. If a lessor approach is implemented, a smaller RPZ would be required, and thus, less property acquisition. As depicted on the exhibit, maintaining Runway 8-26 as the primary runway, including the implementation of a 4-18 precision approach, will place the BRL atop Berry Aviation's main hangar. It is very likely that a precision approach would not be approved for Runway 8-26 (either end) unless Berry Aviation's facilities are removed, as they could be a flight hazard. Alternative 3 considers maintaining Runway 12-30 as the airport's secondary runway and the closure of both Runway 4-22 and 17-35. The southernmost portion of Runway 17-35 could be utilized as a taxiway. This alternative proposes new parallel taxiways on the north sides of both Runway 8-26 and 12-30. This alternative considers the development of aviation facilities on the north side of the runways, between the western intersection of the runways, and west of the existing terminal area. Developing aviation facilities west of the existing terminal area as depicted would require the construction of a new airport entrance road. Exhibit 4D depicts the construction of a new road which meet the existing road south of the terminal building. These areas will be more than adequate for aviation facility development to meet projected demand. N on-aviation related development potential is greater in Alternative 3 than both previous alternatives. As depicted, closing both Runway 4-22 and 17 -35 leaves a large parcel of land available for non-aviation purposes. The construction of a new entrance road to the south would segregate aviation and non-aviation uses. This area could be developed for the Foreign Trade Zone.