Minutes - 19890515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

is compatible. At this point, he reviewed all three categories, (1) Compatibility with Existing Land Use (2) Compatibility with Future Land Use and (3) Proximity to Go~patible Land Use for Economic Development. COMMISSIONER HARTWELL stated that because of his engineering training, he is used to setting his goals based on other considerations. He indicated that he decides what he wants to do based on his values. Then he brings to that his engineering expertise in order to accomplish those goals. He is not used to setting his goals based on engineering considerations. He would, however, let the engineering considerations influence his goals. For instance, if he could see that a task was impossible, that would influence his choice. He stated that he believed the decision as to what to do should be based without considering the engineering column at all. Then, after a decision has been reached an what to do, the best engineers should be hired to reach the goal. MS. EIDENIER asked if there were comparable figures for the Horace Williams Airport, and Mr. McDowell replied that they did not compile those figures. COMMISSIONER MARSHALL stated that an explanation was given at the last meeting as to why there would not be comparable figures for the Horace Williams Airport. MR. MCDOWELL stated that Horace Williams did not meet some of the beginning criteria in terms of runway length, the surrounding land uses, etc. MR. BEST asked if Horace Williams was or was not the 7th site, as stated at the Public Hearing and Mr. McDowell replied that it was a 7th site in the sense that it was a "do nothing" alternative, rest also addressed Commissioner Hartwell's engineering statement. He stated that he believed there was a basic fallacy with engineering thinking. That fallacy is that we are going to find what we want and we are going to build it and pay the best engineers. He indicated that the County cannot negate the fact that they have to look at how much this airport is going to cost. He felt that the preferred site is going to be picked and money will be paid out to get what is wanted. He suggested thinking less as an engineer and more as someone living on.or around the property. COMMISSIONER HARTWELL stated that was the thrust of his comments. He repeated that he said that goals should be establish based on one's values and only then should the engineering expertise be brought into play. The fact that a site is more easily engineered should not be the basis for a decision. In answer to a question from Chris Best, COMMISSIONER HARTWELL reminded him that the consultant stated that there was only a 10~ difference in cost and he therefore did not think that much weight should be put on that criteria. MR. BEST indicated that 10$ of 8 l/2 million dollars needed to be taken into account. In reference to Site l7, he asked about the compatibility with future land use. He asked how that figure was determined.