Mr. Mayor & Mr. Gettys
I appreciate the fact that you all have looked at the airport issue and weighted both sides. I still think that there are questions that need to be looked into and would request that you seek out answers from staff. I would also appreciate it if you would get back to me on these questions so we are informed as to the answers.
Ms. Garris - I would appreciate if you could distribute this email to Mr. Sutton and Mr. Roddey as I do not have an email address for them.
1. Disclosure:
South Carolina Code of Laws Title 27 Chapter 50 Article I requires that beginning January 1,
2003, an owner of residential real estate (single-family homes and buildings with up to four dwelling
units) shall provide to a purchaser this property condition disclosure statement which must be completed
prior to signing a contract of sale. This disclosure statement must be provided in connection with the
sale, exchange, option and sale under a lease with an option to purchase. This disclosure statement is
not required for some transactions, including the first sale of a dwelling which has never been inhabited.
A complete list of exemptions may be found in Section 27-50-30.
15. Nuisances (noise, odor, smoke, etc.) affecting the property?
17. Violations or variances of building codes or zoning ordinances?
18. Restrictions to property use? (covenants or deed)
So by enacting this law you are putting into place the fact that we will have to disclose this to any potential buyer of our property thus lowering our property value or potential sale ability. I have personally discussed this issue with 5 real-estate agents and all have told me that they would have an obligation to the potential buyer to notify them that they are looking at homes in an Airport Overlay District. Furthermore, I ask you will the City ever enact the actions taken in the email that was given to you at Council meeting citing the Raleigh/Durham airport and notifications that were sent via certified mail to all residents in the airport zones? Does the City have the intention of doing this? What assurances do we have that you will not do this? Again, we are not exempt and the City has made a lot of people feel that they will not be affected by this by the terms used at the meeting that have taken place. The presentation that was given to the Council was not the same that was given to the Planning Commission. The terms used were chosen very carefully as to not use terms like EXEMPT and ASSURANCES. I am not accusing anyone of any misgivings, rather I want the public to be informed correctly so they have the chance to make their opinions heard on this matter and understand what will be required of them. You all have that obligation to the people that elected you.
2. Airspace:
With Charlotte Douglas airspace issue still unresolved. Is it not prudent that we wait to enact the AOD until the airspace issue is resolved? If this is only about land use planning then the mentality behind this overlay is because as this airport grows we do not wish to have encroachment of residential housing into the airport area thus creating more of an issue for the residents because of more traffic and noise. It has been documented that if this airspace change happens, it will greatly affect the operational status of this airport possibly reducing the overall number of events in and out of this airport. It will make it extremely difficult to grow at all. Then you will have enacted a restrictive land use plan and damaged peoples property values for what reason? If it cannot grow, encroachment is no longer a factor.
3. Noise:
With the Charlotte Douglas airspace and flight paths changing once the runway becomes active. Did the noise contour study and average noise levels that they have not established taken into consideration the additional air traffic from Charlotte? These planes are noisy and you can currently hear them and seem them all days and nights. Should this not be taken into consideration when establishing a noise level for nuisance purposes?
4. New Airport Advisory Group:
With the formation of the airport advisory group, how was it formed? Who decided the individuals that will be on this group? I notice that there are some that are listed as airport neighbors, are they living in the zones? I do not recall any open requests for the public to volunteer for this commission, so who chose these people? And if you are truly trying to get a wide variety of individuals to give input, it should not have been chosen until others could volunteer. I am not suggesting someone like myself be on the group, but how about getting more people involved that have a vested interest in the zones and area and not just people that were hand picked to agree with the airport commission on items.
5. Zoning:
It has been stated time and time again that this is being put into place to stop residential housing from being built and encroaching on this airport. I have the Report to Planning Commission dated August 14, 2008 and in this it states:
"In summary, 17% of the parcels (105 of 609) or 26% of the total acreage (300 of 1,135) within the Airport Influence Zones could be considered vacant/buildable. Only about 93 vacant/buildable parcels, or 11 acres, are zoned for residential use."
How do you deem this good land use planning? If the idea is to stop encroachment of residential housing, then do it with zoning! About 1% of the total acreage is currently zoned residential use, that means no one else could come into this zone and build homes without a request to change zoning. You could deny that request! Again your own statistics prove that you are putting this on people that already have build with little left to build, so why? 17% buildable parcels - most will be commercial or industrial in nature. You already have the ability to enforce the field height and hazard issues. You have shown the ability to control usage with avigation agreements over property. So why put in this overlay? It can be controlled with zoning if everyone stays active and alert on this matter, the overlay is not needed and you can change this before it is too late.
6. Adjusting:
It is also stated in the Planning Commission report that:
"The most recent Noise Study represents 2027 noise contours. New noise studies should be conducted concurrently with Airport Master Plan updates (every 10 to 15 years) and the boundaries of the Airport Influence Zones may be adjusted, if necessary."
Does this mean you can change them as needed? Will there have to be public input on this change or will it just be determined as necessary and done to us?
7. Meetings:
As I understand this was not the only meeting on this issue. You will still have two additional readings that have to take place. Will we have the opportunity to address the Council again before this is passed? If so, what are the dates for the follow up meetings?
I thank you for your time in this matter. I know there have been accusations that have gone in both directions that some feel are not accurate or credible. In an effort to change this I am approaching you to find out the answers to these questions for me so that we can get the most accurate information to give to the public.
I thank you again and look forward to your responses.
Sincerely,
Scott Ball