Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
00929 <br /> 4, <br /> ORA:s. E comm. <br /> BOARD OF ca.24issios- Action _,:u=nda <br /> • <br /> Item No.D-4 <br /> ACTICU i,GENDA ITaij\BSTRACT <br /> DATE 11/20/82 <br /> Subject: Class A Special Use Permit request by Buck Tlountain Development Company <br /> for a General Aviation Airport under Section 8.8.5 of the Zoning Ordinance. <br /> • <br /> Depe-.--;..2Tent: PLANNING 1 Public EMaring: X yes no <br /> Attachment(s) Rough draft minutes of Information. Contact: Jim Polatty <br /> April 6, 1962 Planning Board <br /> Meeting. Phone Mrrber: 732-8181 Ext. 342 <br /> PURPOSE: To receive the Planning Board's recommendation on the request of Buck <br /> Mountain Development Company for a Class A Special Use Permit for a <br /> • General Aviation Airport, by reopening the Public Hearing specifically <br /> for this purpose. <br /> NEED: This item was discussed at the i'arch 8, 1932 Public Hearing, the attachments <br /> are with that agenda. The following is a brief suuntary of the points <br /> brought out at the Planning Board's meeting on April 6, 1982. <br /> 1. The plan as presented does not meet Federal Aviation Administration <br /> design standards. <br /> 2. The proposed site does not offer good access to a major portion <br /> of the County. <br /> 3. There was no letter from the rescue services submitted with <br /> the application. <br /> DIPACT: This property is located in an area designated as Agricultural-Residential <br /> by the Land Use Plan. The zoning is A-R; general aviation airports are <br /> allowed uses, provided a Special Use Permit is granted. The development <br /> will be required to meet all standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance <br /> and any other imposed conditions attached to the Special Use Permit if <br /> it is approved. <br /> FECOMENDATION: The Planning Board recommended the denial of the Special Use Permit <br /> request for the following reasons: <br /> 1. The physical relationship of this property to ground transportation <br /> facilities. <br /> 2. The relationship of this particular property to the remainder <br /> of the County makes it an unacceptable site. <br /> The vote was 5 in favor, two opposed and one abstention. <br /> The Planning Staff recomended approval with the irposed conditions as <br /> listed after the findings of fact, in the Oarch 8 agenda. <br /> /sw <br />