Agenda - 07-08-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

- DRAFT Land use goals/plans of the Bingham Tommthip Advisory Council as found in the February 15, 1979 minutes. These minutes 4itleatthe preservation of agriculture as the #1 goal and maintenance of agriculture and prevention of land use conflicts as primary concerns. Johnson inquired if Midway could accomplish what it proposes, noting Hazzard's reluctance to respond in economic terms. Johnson cited statments 4 and 7 of the proposal for the November 30, 1981 public hearing which state that Ne are requesting the airporyr:irpark ,sinultaneously due to their symidOtic relationship" and these mutually beneficial and dependent for survival' Johnson suggested the project as now proposed maybe economically unviable . Johnson indicated he had researched as a developer the costs of the venture noting that the normal activities of a general aviation airport generally cover only the day to day bills and that Counties generally supplement these revenues. He indicated financing would come from hanger sales ort long term leases. Citing all cost features and comparing these with examples of number of hangared and theiBowns crafts at local airorts, Johnson noted a significant shortjall in expenses vs. revenues and a lack of interest in investment. Johnson felt he was presenting a best estimation of market, cost and profit to show if this was a financially viable option. He continued on the basis of the proposaj actually beaconing operational. He noted that should the facility be viable and lure out Horace William traffic what would happen if Horace Williams is closed and Midway fails. He suggested that pressures would be exerted for 1) public take over of the operation 2) approval of other uses at the facility 3) closure of the facility. Johnson recognizei the choice was difficult but recurnended denial of the proposal on the basis that it does not promote the public health safety and welfare; conflicts with the Land Use Plan for Bingham-5:7,ernshipsand is an econtmictly inviable project which may lead to a County bail out at a later date. Johnson added that if the Board grants approval it should be with stringent conditions including 1) no jets, given that he was advised that jets can land here and not damage the runway if not a routine operation and 2) a sizeable construction bond of cost plus 10% for the life of the project construction phases. Johnson added that it is difficult to get a large turnout for a second public hearing and asked that the oppositioA presence make itself known. Julie Andersen - Chapel Hill Resident, Representative of Citizens for Airport Planning. Andersen indicated that this group was formed in 1970 to seek a solution to the health and safety problems of Horace Williams. She referred to the broad base of support for closure of Horace Williams and emphasized that the existing airport was inexticably tied to the proposal. Sandra Rothwell- Chapel Hill resident, Chapel Hill resident, Hothwell noted the location of schools and number ott citizens in the vicinity of Horace Williams, citing the percentage of crashes occuring during take off. Using as an example the unforseen car accident at University Mall which was decided by the courts to not be a case of negligence, Bothwell emphasiZed that the liklehood of an aircraft crash could be anticipated. Mary Lou Rubins - Chapel Hill resident, elementary shcool teadW. Rubins ex- pressed concern about possible crashes citing the number of deaths in air crashes at Horace Williams and the increasing risk of crashes with more pri- vate pilot activity. She felt it imperative that an alternative to Horace Williams be found.