Airport to Get Bulk of Council’s Attention

The City Council will meet Tuesday to discuss a variety of topics relating to Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport. Included in items to be discussed are: an advertising concession agreement with Clear Channel, Inc.; leasing space agreements with airlines; public transit for the airport; and development of land west of the airport.

Mayor Chuck Reed and councilmembers Nancy Pyle and Rose Herrera suggest in a memo included in the agenda that the land be considered for projects that might go outside the scope of airport use.

“There are a total of 44 acres available for development at this time,” the memo states. “Airport staff is currently considering options for the future of Runway 11-29 which has the potential to more than double the land available for development on the West Side of the airport. Given the potential for a site with more than 100 acres, our lack of land available for business and industrial uses, and no certainty that the entire acreage is needed for aviation use we should be very clear that uses beyond aviation will be considered within FAA standards.”

The council will also hear several reports on bids submitted to conduct work on city facility roofing, sludge management as well as reject bids for filtration work on the Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant. A status report on reducing odor at the plant will be deferred until Sept. 13.

The council will also hear appeals to recent Planning Commission recommendations to not allow the sale of alcohol at a CVS pharmacy located at 4110 N. First St. and a grocery store that will be located a shopping center located on the southwest corner of Almaden Expressway and Branham Lane.

No update will be given on labor negotiations.

Click Here to Read the City Council Agenda for August 16, 2011.

Josh Koehn is a former managing editor for San Jose Inside and Metro Silicon Valley.

8 Comments

  1. Instead of just 44 acres, why not develop the entire 1,000+ acres.  That way Southwest Airlines 737’s wont fly so damn close to the B of A Building.

  2. Close the airport now! I know it’s an enterprise fund, but the reality is it does not bring in the funds to stay afloat. We have to subsidize over one billion a year, this is no way to run a business and a city.
    SFO costs 800 million to run and brings in way more money.

    Norman Kline said it, why do we need 3 airports in the area. Close it down and fix San Jose.

    • FYI to all,
      The northern portion of Terminal A is currently closed “temporarily” for about 4 years; roughly 6 gates that are out of service.  A money loser?  DYH might have a point above.

  3. If this goes through, it will be another short-sighted decision by out esteemed city council. New airport land is not easy to come by, especially at a landlocked airport like SJC. They’ll regret taking airport away from aviation when the economy recovers and there’s nowhere to park the corporate aircraft.

  4. Is the the meeting they formally dump SJPD and Fire, although all the back door decisions have been formally made already.  Just another great council meeting to dump more money into a pile that loses money every day.

    • Good luck with that. Mountain View is dead-set against any increase in aircraft operations at NUQ, as evidenced by a letter they circulated at the recent public meeting on the Regional Airport Study:
      http://www.regionalairportstudy.com/library/Response to Workshop Comments – March 2011.pdf

      “Letter from City of Mountain View: “The City of Mountain View opposes general aviation, commercial aviation and/or air cargo operations at MFA. The City supports maintaining the airfield as a secured Federal/military airfield under NASA Ames’ authority” ‘The City is not opposed to future study of the potential for airfield use related to emergencies such as natural disasters…’”

      Also, good luck convincing all of the no-growthers to go along with building that new bayfront runway.