Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008
>
Agenda - 12-01-2008 - 4a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/1/2008 4:43:38 PM
Creation date
12/1/2008 4:42:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/1/2008
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
4a
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20081201
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
72
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4 <br />~~~ <br />r <br />1 political subdivision of the State has the power of eminent domain, and can bypass county <br />2 regulations. UNC and UNC Healthcare are granted majority membership in the Authority, <br />3 seating eight out of fifteen members. SB1925 was passed without consulting Orange County <br />4 Commissioners or citizens who would be affected by the creation of an Airport Authority. <br />5 The University recently released a Talbert & Bright economic impact study based on a <br />6 regional airport located in Orange County. Their study projects 40-50 million dollars annual <br />7 revenue from an "unrestricted" general aviation airport in Orange County. If we accept the <br />8 Talbert & Bright economic report, are we to assume that the University is now the un-elected <br />9 planning board for the county? <br />10 We do not believe the 2008 Talbert & Bright study is an accurate assessment of the <br />11 economic benefits. We ask the county to assess the accuracy of Talbert & Bright's May 2008 <br />12 "working paper." We believe the University is using this unverified paper, written by an aviation <br />13 consulting firm, as economic justification for the airport. <br />14 This heavy handed and opaque progression of events that purposely bypassed the <br />15 County Commissioners and county voters is very troubling. We cannot wait for the Airport <br />16 Authority to issue letters of eminent domain which would, as you know, make it impossible for <br />17 landowners to remain on their property. <br />18 Given the University's proximity to RDU, a county airport is not needed to fulfill the <br />19 AHEC's mission. The Burlington-Alamance Regional Airport recently received $5 million in FAA <br />20 funds to lengthen their runway in order to accommodate larger jets. The Burlington Airport <br />21 Authority made a proposal to UNC in 2005 offering to accommodate AHEC MedAir Operations. <br />22 Duke Medical currently flies out of Burlington-Alamance. WE ask the commissioners to include <br />23 Burlington's proposal in discussions you hold with UNC. <br />24 If land is taken by eminent domain for an airport in southwest Orange County, the <br />25 county will lose active farmland that has been passed down from family to family for <br />26 generations. We ask the commissioners for a resolution condemning the use of eminent <br />27 domain for commercial purposes. <br />28 We believe the proposed airport is an environmental disaster. An airport would put our <br />29 well water at risk and endanger the Haw River watershed without regard for the people <br />30 downstream that rely on the watershed for drinking water. Diabase sill dikes run beneath Site H <br />31 properties and prevented a landfill from being built many years ago. <br />32 We believe that creative solutions to concerns raised by AHEC staff and the University <br />33 regarding commute times to RDU have not been explored. UNC is a research facility. Surely, <br />34 for much less than $50 million, the University can devise and implement an environmentally and <br />35 economically sound plan to transport UNC and AHEC staff to and from RDU. We enlist the <br />36 help of the commissioners to be certain that solutions other than a new airport are considered <br />37 by the Airport Authority. <br />38 We believe that both federal and state taxpayer's money, spent on an airport built <br />39 mostly to serve special interest groups, could be spent much more effectively elsewhere in <br />40 Orange County and the state of North Carolina. <br />41 We respectfully request the Commissioners take a public stand on the airport issue and <br />42 censure the legislature for bypassing Orange County voters with SB 1925. <br />43 We request a referendum to allow the people of Orange County to weigh in on the <br />44 airport issue with their votes. <br />45 If the airport site selection process proceeds, we ask that the commissioners commit to <br />46 making certain that county land use, zoning and permits are strictly enforced. <br />47 We request the commissioners to exert loud and clear objections to any special interest <br />48 groups, such as a member of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, being appointed to <br />49 serve on the UNC Airport Authority. The AOPA has demonstrated their dedication to lobbying <br />50 for a regional airport in Orange County many times since 2002. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.