Orange County NC Website
L.., • Tc.(•L.'"-r, . i.,K•Sh.Crarq.: , k• _10 •rar • <br /> ' 4"i" 'W.,- • ';:t•,, ,nt,• 57-*WP •2?X',e,W•• <br /> • *:-:‘,":'•ir.O. • •••• •L 4 •_ _ •". ,• • 44;" •'1•11124;C:.,` <br /> • •• , .f-k?”.,_:-.r.''.'4-'1:,;;';■•;ft • +1r; <br /> • ' <br /> 034 <br /> Mehler noted that no area on the east coast controls the amount of area <br /> requiredlby the County. Gordon responded that generally the additional <br /> area is controlled by zoning in those cases. Irvin noted that RDU area <br /> is zoned', Mehler felt RDU was an entirely different situation. Irvin <br /> responded that the County does not want to control the area through zoning. <br /> Mehler noted that the County had identified and discussed other locations <br /> for a proposed airport and asked if any site could meet the proposed <br /> regulations, adding that he did not think it was possible. Irvin responded <br /> that it was possible. <br /> Pearson noted that the area in question was approximately three miles. <br /> 1 <br /> Walters indicated that his area was once considered for a airport site, <br /> but that he was concerned about the compensation of the landowners for <br /> beingiOluded in an airport hazard zone. <br /> Mehler said that the presence of the airport had not devalued land around <br /> Horace Williams and that there would not be a disruption of the farming <br /> operationS,if an airport was located in an agricultural area. <br /> Fred Hazai-d, developer, indicated he was one of fourteen recognized commercial <br /> investment brokers in North Carolina. He stated that land values in a circle <br /> around any airport are enhanced and exceed values without the airport's presen <br /> He continued that airports:;of this type do not detract from land values and <br /> that it was impossible to control 5000 feet. He added that this type of <br /> operation!would bring in money from development. <br /> Gordon re4onded that Hazard's statement addressed a different land use <br /> than residential when citing a rise in land values. Shanklin and Hazard <br /> respondedIthat the fastest growing developments are the luxury residential <br /> areas associated with private airstrips. <br /> Irvin focused the Board on the issue at hand, stressing the control through <br /> easement required. <br /> MOTION: Shanklin Moved that the approach— departure zone be reduced to 1500 feet as <br /> suggested in the January 28, 1983 letter from Northen. <br /> Irvin stated that the Board ought to require the clear zone as defined in <br /> the letter-1 from Robinson regarding the failure of the private venture and <br /> the availability of federal. funding. He noted that the clear zone is <br /> measured al distance of 200 feet from the end of the runway which would <br /> require a 'distance of 1700 feet-measured 200 feet from the end of the runway. <br /> Shanklin modified his motion to 1700 feet. Irvin noted the total would be <br /> 1900 feet of the 200 foot clear zone was included. Irvin reviewed the <br /> clear zone diagram in the handout. <br /> 1 <br /> L , . _ <br />