Laserfiche WebLink
r MAR - 2 1493 <br />BOOK 88 F'A.UE 1000 <br />The ordinance is trying to reduce some of the conflicts so that the <br />nuisance uses might not be near each other. <br />Commissioner Adams felt we should not pass legislation to <br />favor an airport operator over a homeowner or property owner.- <br />Deputy <br />wner:Deputy County Attorney Collins advised that the Board has the <br />responsibility to make a judgment on the economic benefits to <br />having the airport operation here as well as its benefit to the <br />community's economic well-being. If it is squeezed by adjoining <br />property in incompatible uses to such an extent that it cannot <br />function, its ability to expand or provide whatever economic <br />benefits that the airport provides are limited. There is a balance <br />that the Board must reach between regulation, property rights, and <br />protection of the economic benefit that the airport provides to the <br />community. <br />ON MOTION by Commissioner Adams, SECONDED by <br />Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously directed <br />staff to eliminate the restrictions related to the <br />overflight zone and to draft a minimum, generic <br />airport zoning ordinance for consideration at the <br />second public hearing on LDRs at 5:01 p.m. on March <br />18, 1993. <br />The Chairman opened the public hearing and asked if anyone <br />wished to be heard regarding the second proposed ordinance. There <br />being none, he closed the public hearing. <br />The Board agreed that there was no controversy regarding the <br />second ordinance and it would be considered at the second public <br />hearing on LDRs at 5:01 p.m. on March 18, 1993. <br />There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at <br />7:10 P. M. <br />ATTEST: <br />J. arton, Clerk Richard N. Bird, Chairman <br />20 <br />BOOK cft, 00 <br />J <br />