Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
~~ <br />' judgment call on the part of Planning Staff, <br />Planning Board and the Board of Commissioners, <br />but it would be a street classified as <br />arterial or collector. Joyner continued <br />asking the criteria for access location of the <br />driveway. Rirk responded that the possibility <br />of common driveways would be considered, <br />marginal access street parallel to the <br />arterial or collector street or reverse <br />frontage. Each subdivision would be reviewed <br />for driveway .access on an individual basis., <br />Josephine Barbour expressed her opposition to <br />shared driveways. <br />Vic Knight expressed concern with the <br />additional cost to individual buyers when <br />shared driveways present problems with <br />closings on properties. Jacobs responded that <br />shared driveways was simply an option for <br />developers. <br />Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, <br />seconded by Chair Marshall, to refer this item to <br />the Planning Board for recommendation to the <br />-~-~ Commissioners on April 4. <br />Vote: Unanimous. <br />b. Private Road Standards <br />(1) Sectian IV-B-3-d - Private Roads <br />The Staff presentation was made by Eddie Kirk. <br />This agenda item is to receive citizen comment <br />on proposed amendments to Section IV-B-3-d <br />(Private Roads) of the Subdivision <br />Regulations. <br />Recent events involving the interpretation of <br />the private road standards contained in <br />Section IV-B--3-d of the Subdivision <br />Regulations have indicated a need to insure <br />consistency of application. <br />On December 9, 1987, the Transportation <br />Advisory Subcommittee met with the Ordinance <br />Review Committee of the Planning Board for the <br />purpose of discussing the private road <br />standards. Based on the discussion, a draft <br />