New Search
. ~. ,,, <br />~ ` Sweet Field, development of a new parallel runway. This alternative <br />_ could also investigate closing or limitmg the use of Runway 3/21 in <br />conjunction with the development , of a new parallel. This approach <br />is broad enough to permit full consideration of various alternatives <br />that can maximize the capability of the existing Airport facilities by <br />introducing new, complementary facilities. <br />Once reasonable development alternatives have been identified, their <br />merits and deficiencies will be compared. An evaluation matrix will <br />be prepared to display the composite rankings of each alternative. <br />Factors to be considered in the evaluation include: <br />Operational Factors - Each alternative will be evaluated to <br />determine its ability to accommodate future demand for <br />aircraft, ~assengers, and vehicles. This evaluation will identify <br />~ deficiencies in such areas as aircraft delay, airfield circulation, <br />and passenger convenience. Each alternative will also be <br />reviewed for its airspace compatibility and impacts on surface <br />transportation: <br />Economic Factors - Estimates of the development costs required <br />under each alternative will be prepared on the basis of <br />planning cost estimates. These capital cost estimates will <br />provide a general indication of development costs and will also <br />provide a basis for comparing cost-effectiveness among the <br />various alternatives. <br />Environmental Factors - Environmental analysis will focus on <br />key factors ,such as noise, air quality; land use impacts, and <br />social impacts. The evaluation ~rocess will identify <br />develo~ment options which can mirumize environmental <br />disruption. The effect on transportation, if it is necessary to <br />close or relocate local roads, will also be analyzed. <br />After the alternatives have been evaluated, a decision matrix will be <br />developed to depict significant consequences of the various <br />alternatives. The alternatives will be quantitatively and qualitatively <br />ranked according to their performance against the operational, <br />economic, and environmental criteria. A preferred development <br />alternative will then be selected. <br />1. Terminal Alternatives <br />Alternatives for the expansion of terminal facilities and landside <br />access/parking system will be developed to meet the recommended <br />facility program. . <br />The terminal alternatives will be developed along with the overall <br />terminal area (landside) plan,, and in coordination with Mahlon Sweet <br />Field's ongoing terminal expansion progTam. The overall plan will <br />include analysis and recommendations. for cargo, . general <br />aviation/corporate, and other users. The preferred alternative will <br />-15- <br />