Hello Terrell:
Airport activist agree with you about the need for a new airport. We lost that fight at the legislature several years ago. A long term solution would involve transit development with a new airport. St. Cloud would be the perfect location for a new airport when the Republicans decide to finally approve funding for the North Star Corridor. The 94 corridor between the western suburbs and St. Cloud will have some of the largest population growth in the state over the next several decades.
Ken Bradley Corcoran
Terrell Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: ken bradley
We would have a 30% decrease in air freight traffic using those numbers. I
think most Minneapolis residents would be happy with 30% reduction. Air
freight traffic will increase significantly either in Minneapolis or St.
Cloud/Rochester. The city needs to be proactive to help create a longterm
solution to this problem.
[Terrell] Probably not. The only traffic that would be diverted is that
which is solely freight. In theory all of it could go away. As a
percentage of total traffic at MSP its likely a single digit number.
MOST Minneapolis residents don't care. No one north of Lake Street and in
some areas north of Crosstown is affected by airport noise. Many of those
not affected think that the problems of those who are affected have been
solved by the remodeling MAC has paid for as part of their noise mitigation
program. They see the tens of thousands of dollars per house and $100
million plus spent as a solution.
Those that do care are very vocal. The Mayor began his political career in
Minneapolis as one of these noise activists and spoke of it often during his
campaign. Remember when he was telling us that he was going to appoint
himself as the Minneapolis representative on the Metropolitan Airports
Commission? Apparently that's still on his "to-do" list.
He has also surrounded himself in his office with a bunch of other noise
activists who seem blinded when looking at the entire picture.
2 or 3 years ago, I finally figured out that we need a new airport. It
doesn't make sense to keep dumping money into the current airport when we
know it will reach capacity and not have any plans for its replacement.
What you can't do is make a convincing argument for a new airport solely on
the basis of noise. It is a very long term project. If we were to decide
to build a new airport today, it would be at least 2010 before the place was
ready and open for business.
Terrell Brown
Loring Park
terrell at terrellbrown dot org
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign-up for Video Highlights of 2002 FIFA World Cup
