Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hangar Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission staff says hangar at 15500 Wright Brothers Drive on consent agenda after BZA setback approval
Summary
Staff described a development plan for a private hangar with office/lounge space and direct taxiway access that received a setback variance from the Board of Zoning Adjustment and was placed on the consent agenda; staff said airport access requires an access agreement and a certificate of occupancy before use.
Get email alerts on the Hangar Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Leslie, a planning staff member, summarized a development‑plan application for a new private hangar at 15500 Wright Brothers Drive during the Planning and Zoning Commission work session and said the item is on the consent agenda after required setbacks were approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA).
Staff said the hangar parcel is private property but has access to the airport; the airport approved an access agreement and the project must also clear FAA and airport staff review before final access is available. Leslie added the development includes primarily hangar space plus a small front office and lounge area for pilots and visitors.
A commissioner asked whether the town or police perform a separate security review for a private property with airport access; staff replied the process requires an airport access agreement and that various approvals, including FAA and airport staff approvals, are part of the required steps. Leslie said that, pending a certificate of occupancy, the project does not yet have access and cannot obtain operational access until construction and final inspections are complete.
Leslie explained why the applicant sought and received a setback variance: the lot is a corner site with two 25‑foot front yard setbacks, and the lot configuration (with a side dirt access functioning like an alley to the airfield) made the variance necessary and appropriate under the BZA criteria. Staff noted BZA is limited to the code‑defined variance and special‑exception powers and cannot consider land‑use variances, which state law forbids.
Because the item is on the consent agenda and staff reported outstanding conditions (including certificate‑of‑occupancy requirements), the commission was invited to ask questions but no formal deliberation occurred during the work session.
