07/16/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

J Councilman Bradley asked why the change from all metal construction was being re9ommended, was there a need demonstrated for covered hangars, what tradeoff was being made. Assistant Manager answered that the cost of con- . struction would be about 25% less, staff didn't see wllere there was any "tradeoff", the public safety was being maintained, and the pole type construction met building code requirements. The change was an attempt to meet the needs of those people with heavy investments in aircraft who wanted covered storage facilities. Mr. Shelby added that there was a need for hangar space, that attempts to get new hangar construction were not successful because those wanting to build hangars did not want to meet the prefab metal requirement. He said neither the fire marshal nor the build- ing department had any reservations about the proposed type of construction. Arnold Dunagan, Master Construction, said they had a group of ten people now wanting to construct a wood frame, metal clad building and needed only the change in specifications to go ahead. M. P. Hays, Summit Elec- tric, said covered parking for aircraft was appreciated when one considered an aircraft worth $15,000 to $25,000 sitting year-round in weather that would be detrimental to radio and instruments. Councilman Williams thought the only justification for requiring all metal buildings would be to prevent collapse in the event of fire. When talking of a single-level structure, he said, if the roof collapsed the airplane would already be gone.. The matter of a fire's spreading would be a question of fire department response. He thought the requirement for all metal con- struction was beyond reason and should be rescinded. Councilman Haws said it appeared in a sense Mr. Bradford was asking for preservation of a monopoly. He said he understood the cost problems but he didn't think the current situation was of benefit to most of those at the e airport. Councilman Bradley couldn't see justification for the change o~ the basis of economics only. He felt it would be lowering standards of construction. Assistant Manager noted a change in circumstances, one being that the city no longer controls building codes and minimum safety hazards. That now comes under state law. There has also been a change in experience with types of' construction, he said, noting that metal sustains high damage from exces- sive heat. The State building code, he said, says both types are accept- able and staff has no reason to say the standards in this instance should be different. Murray-Williams to approve the requested change in hangar speci- Comm fications, endorse the proposed fees and land rental rates, and 6/25/75 instruct .staff to prepare the appropriate resolutions for adop- Approve tion. Motion carried unanimously. D. 30th-Hilyard-Amazon Widening - Copies of final environmental impact state- ment and staff comments were previously distributed to Council members. The proposed project would widen approaches to the 30th-Hilyard-Amazon intersection to provide four through lanes in each direction and left-turn lanes at a cost of about $500,000 (78% Federal funding, 11% State, and 11% city). Five options were presented: (1) Authorize submittal of final environmental impact statement to Federal and State agencies; (2) hold additional public hearings; (3) postpone, pending results of ESATS update (probably six months); (4) postpone indefinitely; or (5) take - other action. Presentation of the impact statement was made at the June 23, 1975 joint meeting of the Council and Planning Commission. Assistant Manager explained that all studies in connection with ESATS as well as other information indicated that projections for traffic through this intersection would not change given the development occurring in south 7/16/75 - 6 3&9