Click for next page ( 47

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 46
46 and highway come together. Both Rickenbacker and Norfolk As capital is raised, maintain the discipline to reinvest Southern contributed land to the deal. A $30 million earmark in other revenue-producing activities or assets. assisted in construction of the facility, and CRAA gets addi- Work with the communities in the region to promote an tional fees from the railroad. There is not much crossover understanding of the economic benefits of the airport between rail and air, but the rail activity has spurred peripheral so that direct and indirect benefits are appreciated even development in the area, including a logistics center. if the airport is operating at a loss. It is important that base reuse plans consider whether the base becomes the community's main airport. In the LESSONS LEARNED case of AustinBergstrom International, it ultimately made more sense to redevelop Bergstrom AFB than The LCK reuse is a work-in-progress even after 25 years. to construct a new and expanded green field airport. Many lessons have been learned in the process: However, in this instance, the discussion of whether Rickenbacker should become the main airport was not Reuse of a large property requires a comprehensive part of the formal reuse planning effort. It was, how- plan that includes a land use component, a governance ever, discussed at length by community leadership plan, feasibility analysis, financial plan, a business multiple times during the 1980s and early 1990s. At that strategy, and marketing action plan. time, it was determined that Port Columbus was viable If the base is not used for passenger service, the more with respect to both its capacity and the functional and diversified the portfolio of nonaeronautical activities, economic life cycle of its facilities. As a result, dis- the better the chances of developing alternative rev- carding the substantial investment in Port Columbus' enue streams. facilities and making an additional substantial invest- It is important to make early decisions about what ment to replicate those facilities at Rickenbacker could buildings and functional areas will be kept and what not be justified. will be demolished. Be selective and stay consistent The reuse and redevelopment of LCK took longer than with the comprehensive plan. It is easy to spend money anyone expected to break even and develop a positive in nonproductive areas. return. FIGURE 38 Intermodal terminal adjacent to Rickenbacker.