Orange County NC Website
g <br /> 2 <br /> additional conditions should be imposed in the approval to assure that the <br /> development would protect the public health, safety and general welfare. <br /> One of the conditions was that the applicant shall own or control the <br /> heights of objects in the area at each end of the runway which is known as the <br /> approach-departure zone. The approach-departure zone begins 200 feet from the <br /> end of the runway and rises at a 30:1 slope to a height of 350 feet at a <br /> distance of 5000 feet. The zone is 5000 feet in width at its beginning and <br /> 3000 feet in width at its end. The easement rights negotiated with each <br /> property owner must specify that the developer can control the heights of <br /> objects within the approach-departure zone. All easement agreements and other <br /> evidence of ownership of the approach-departure zone shall be in form and <br /> content approved by the County Attorney. <br /> In addition to not being able to quantify the amount of motor vehicle <br /> traffic associated with the related uses proposed for the airport, the <br /> requirements to remove the limit on flight training could also substantially <br /> increase the amount of traffic on Highway 54. The 50w limit on flight training <br /> was intended to minimize the amount of noise created by airplanes making <br /> practice runs at the airport. <br /> The last condition the developers would like to have deleted concerns the <br /> fire truck access required to the property from Teer Road. The Orange Grove <br /> Fire Department asked that the road be required so that the response time to a <br /> fire alarm might be reduced. <br /> In conclusion, Mr. Cannity noted that the Planning Staff feels that the <br /> conditions as they exist have not changed and therefore Staff does not feel it <br /> is neceasacy to modify, amend or delete any of the conditions imposed on the <br /> approval of the special use permit. <br /> John Kizer, Planning Board Member, asked if the approach-departure zone <br /> should be a 34:1 slope or 20:1 slope7 Be added that aroce Matthews of the <br /> North Carolina Department of Transportation, Divison of Aviation recommends a <br /> 20:1 slope. <br /> Rick Cannity stated the Planning Staff needed to check the FAA Standards <br /> regarding the 34:1 slope mentioned in Harold Robinson's letter dated March 5, <br /> 1982, that the Planning Staff used nationally developed standards in <br /> determining traffic to the airport and also information from Bruce Mattbews, <br /> John Northen, Attorney for the developers, stated that the runway could be <br /> shortened by shifting it. He stated that the affected landowners had been <br /> contacted for discussion of the rights-of-way needed to construct the airport. <br /> He noted that the FAA requirements have been met and the County has the power <br /> to impose height restrictions through the Airport dimtziot, He further stated <br /> they have studied the possibility of fire access road(s) by comparing the <br /> original airport proposal to the current airport proposal. <br /> Alice Gordon, Planning Board Member, asked if easements were required for <br /> approach-departure zones? Could developers "get it" (obtain the easements) and <br /> what efforts have been made to obtain the easements? <br /> John Northen responded, saying letters were sent to each property owner <br /> along with a copy of the diagram of affected property asking the landowners to <br /> contact him to discuss the rights-of-way needed. <br /> Alice Gordon asked if the letters contained a specific amount of money for <br /> the rights-of-way? Did they offer any financial consideration? <br /> John Northen answered, landowners were asked to get in touch, but the <br /> developers had received negative responses. <br /> Alice Gordon asked Mr. Northen what the developers were prepared to pay? <br />