It sounds as if the Planning commission is strictly ruling on the
principle of whether they want a runway in their community or not,
and
are not ruling on the safety aspects. They are leaving the safety
aspects up to the person designing the runway. Seems perfectly
reasonable.

There is a set of guidlines that I am told the planning and zoning
folks are sworn to live up to. If they fall short of that it is the
commissioner's job to turn it down regardless.

I am trying very hard to understand your comment of leaving safety to
the owner and it seeming perfectly reasonable but what I see

I understand you don't want a runway on your neighbors land, and taking off
my pilots hat I can sort of understand the fright the general public has
with it. It's scary, something lifts almost magically from the earth and
go zooming over head.

But pilots are concerned with safety, and people using airports are
concerned with safety. Why? Because it's them in the seat and it's them
who will get hurt if something goes wrong. So who do you think is more
concerned? You the guy who doesn't know how to fly or the pilot with
training and his butt in the sling? I choose _not_ to fly into a coulpe
local public airports, and most private strips because I don't believe
their safe with my plane. If I had a J-3 cub, then it would be a different
story.

Now people take risks you don't agree with, but living is about risks. I
may die of a heart attack, or have a head on collision with a car driving
home from work today. I still drive though. Maybe a horse and buggy like
the local amish would be safer? Do they view me and taking unneeded risks
with my soul and the afterlife?

My 2 cents,

-Andrew

--
Andrew Stanley-Jones | "It's kind of fun to do the impossible."
EE, LongEz N87KJ | -- Walt Disney