HomeMy WebLinkAbout02102020 City Council Laydown - Jaffa 3 ooa2/O 04.11/4)
In opposition to Resolution 2020-013 and 014 3o 6
pp f
I recommend you reject Resolutions 2020-013 & 2020-014 without
delay. It is important to Seward's future to maintain a 4200 ft. runway.
We do need to act quickly on the issue but do not need to rush.
During the development of this Airport project, the Earth has literally
changed its magnetic alignment and the runways have both been
renamed. Both resolutions are based a flawed DOT process that has
dragged on so long, that it questions DOT's mantra that Medevac Safety
requires quick acceptance of their plan.
These resolutions are both based on accepting an approach which
will forever cede useful land to the Resurrection River, provide future
negative impact to our harbor, destroy existing wet land, reduce rather
than grow pilot and commercial aircraft use and ignore and disparage the
people who have volunteered their time to this issue.
AK DOT has made numerous attempts to address and blunt
Seward's vocal support for maintaining the existing long runway. The
community has offered enthusiastic support of plans similar to Alternate
1.1 and has strongly opposed Alternate 2.2. Further the community is like
minded in seeing the control of the Resurrection River as a part of this
project. AK DOT has refused to consider that need as a part of this
project.
I agree with only one issue in the resolutions. The community should
vote on the issue before any economic burden is assumed.
Clearly I support maintaining the long existing runway but I am not
alone. Ten years ago the 2008 Dowl Master Plan supported Alt. 1.1. The
primary disadvantage was cost.
The primary advantage of this alternative is that it maintains the current runway length and
capacity. This alternative also provides an additional margin of safety when winter winds are
aligned with Runway 12-30 and both runways are covered with ice. Another advantage is
that retaining the existing airfield layout will minimize the environmental impacts of
upgrading the airfield. This alternative will prevent future floodwaters from passing through
the Airport and endangering existing airport facilities. Keeping the Resurrection River
channel east of the Airport also minimizes sediment deposition near the ARRC dock
southeast of the Airport.
CONTROL THE RIVER
• In a summary 11/19/2014 Assistant Manager Ron Long stated his
surprise that DOT removed river control as a part of the solution.
• Ron Long expressed that he was disappointed to hear that not "everything is on the table",
as was presented earlier. He noted strongly that for the City,dredging is an effective and
desirable solution. He noted that the "lack of maintenance funds"is not an effective
reason, because everything has an O&M cost. He also noted that not pursuing dredging for
"legal reasons" is a very comfortable position for DOT&PF.
• On May 13th 2016 City Manager Jim Hunt was quoted in the Seward
City News supporting Alt 1.1. Following a DOT open house meeting,
Hunt stated "the number one issue is the river, maintaining,
dredging and moving the river. Nothing can be done until the river is
addressed"
• At a General Public Meeting 4/20/2016 Christy Terry and Ron Long
both proposed dredging the river. DOT states they cannot do that.
Ms.Terry(City of Seward) commented that she is a proponent of dredging. She asked if this idea was
given a through second look as suggested at the last SWG meeting. Ms. Conlon and Ms. Beaton
explained DOT&PF's position on dredging—that it is not a viable option given liability and operations
and maintenance costs. Mr. Long and Ms.Terry noted that the public will want to hear a strong
message, one with data and background, to explain why other agencies can dredge(ARRC and the
City,for example)while DOT&PF will not. Ms.Terry also expressed the need for more study of
potential conflicts between Alaska Railroad operations(cranes, barges,etc.)and aircraft operations
(penetrations to airspace)in the area of the jetty.
Bruce Jaffa
Feb. 19th 2020