Orange County NC Website
lNl ;r~ <br />An attempt was made to remove some of the certificates from <br />the face of the plat and record them separately except for <br />those required to be an the plat by State law. Work is <br />continuing on developing a format for a document containing <br />the information just described to simplify and streamline the <br />plat approval and recordation process. <br />2) An attempt was made to eliminate any ambiguities in the <br />requirement that certain natural and man-made features be <br />shown on the final plat. <br />3) Proposed is a redefination of minor subdivision as the <br />creation of 5 or more lots, including any remainder during a <br />two year period. <br />Mare and more small subdivisions are being processed as major <br />subdivisions. Currently, minor subdivision process applies <br />only when 4 or fewer lots are being created from a lot in <br />existence at the time the subdivision regulations went into <br />effect. This portion of the amendment represents a <br />significant savings in time and money to the developer as well <br />as to the County. This change was originally proposed as a <br />separate amendment. It has been incorporated into this more <br />comprehensive amendment. The Ordinance Review Committee <br />recommended that the minor subdivision be defined as 3 lots <br />plus remainder rather than ~+ lots plus remainder. We are <br />recommending the latter to be consistent with the practice of <br />Carrboro and Chapel Hill. <br />4) A fourth change involves the recordation process as indicated <br />in III-C-A and III-D-c-3. It is proposed that the Planning <br />Department rather than the applicant record the plat and <br />associated documents for minor and major subdivisions. By <br />doing this it will be assured that plats get recorded with <br />all auxiliary documentation, and would provide the Planning <br />Department with a copy of the recorded plat. Additional fees <br />.would be needed to cover costs. <br />5) Changes were made regarding time limits for phasing. This <br />offers flexibility in time limits between Final Plats for <br />projects which are phased. A six-month period would be <br />'permitted between final plat submitals unless a longer period <br />was specified in a phasing plan submitted with the <br />preliminary plat. <br />Handouts were sent from the Planning Director listing some other <br />clarifications and changes not included in the revised draft. <br />(1) The second paragraph in III A-General Provisions previously <br />stated that the Clerk of Superior Court may not order changes <br />to a plat which would be in conflict with the ordinance. <br />That was deleted because of a question of authority to make <br />that statement. However, it was found that that wording is <br />