eckel1@comcast.net wrote:
> A proposal has been made to the town to make the property a combination
> airport
and playing fields. They have agreed to look into this option so we are
hopeful. What I would like to know is if anyone has ever seen such a
combination
and how successfully they have operated together.
We have such an airport -- with an indoor sports setup (tennis, basketball, etc)
and an outdoor soccer field, all private-sector investment and operation. It
must be losing big time, I think for obvious reasons. Theres no compatibility
problem, but a fence is needed for liability reasons, if thats your question.
Plus, I wouldnt want to be landing there just on the off-chance something could
happen. Id rather crash into the fence than hurt anybody.
Aint Google quick and cool, cause I found that the County will front $1.5
million
for this. But with a fence, and depending upon size, that $1.5 mil may not
stretch far enough. You also didnt say if govt intends to charge the public
fees, to be as self-sustaining as possible. With fees it wont be. Apparently 4
small towns would be involved in this, and voters there usually set the $$
limits.
There could be organized opposition, which should be headed off now, if
feared. In our nice suburb of 75,000, voters once approved an indoor skating
rink, roller and ice. Very popular. City recently proposed another rink.
70/30
to defeat, even as a bond issue; taxes are high enough. Voters are actually
smart. The first rink in a pretty brick building in a pretty City Park was
about property values -- a town to live in. The second rink was just about
skaters, a small % of voters.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=75069#75069
|