Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
33 <br />Developer Concerns At Churton Grove <br />30. Incomplete Walicina and Sildna Paths <br />a) Regarding the following greenway/path easements: <br />Phase I (Final Plat Book 85 Page 12• also re recorded in Book 88 Paae 801 <br />i) Path easement originating at intersection of Churton Grove Blvd and Lot 22 heading roughly north east <br />toward Lot 25 <br />ii) Path easement originating at intersection of Churton Grove Blvd and Lot 21 heading roughly south west <br />towazd Carolina Avenue <br />Phase II (Final Plat Book 88 Paae 80) <br />iii) Path easement originating at East Bromfield Drive between Lot,l33 and Lot 1.34 _ <br />iv) Path easement originating at intersection of Churton Grove Blvd and Lot 137 heading roughly west then <br />south to terminate at Starmont. Drive • <br />v) Path easement originating at intersection of Alanbrook Court and Lot 114 heading roughly east terminating <br />at Lot 118 (formerly "Open Space C") <br />vi) Path easement originating at intersection of Alanbrook Count and Lot 113 heading roughly north west <br />terminating at the intersection of Scotswood Blvd and Lot 106 <br />Phase III A (Final Plat Book 98 Paae 13 & 14) <br />vii) Path easement originating at East Chapman Court between Lot 9 and Lot 10 heading roughly south to <br />terminate at the boundary of Lot 2 <br />viii)Path easement originating at Churton Grove Blvd between Lot 69 and Lot 70 heading roughly north east <br />terminating at the boundary of designated Churton Grove Open Space <br />Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that the lack of any constructed walking or biking path on all of these <br />path easements is consistent with Developer(s) responsibilities as defined within Condition 27b of the Special <br />Use Permit? <br />b) Regazding the aforementioned path easements, did the county have an expectation that Developer(s) would <br />construct paths when the county approved these easements? <br />c) When developer abandoned Phase 2, "Open Space C" and established in its place residential Lot 118 (per Book <br />91, Page 22) did county require or did developer provide an impact analysis on the pedestrian path system <br />which has an easement terminating at this location? <br />d) Will Orange County allow Developer(s).to proceed with activities in other Phases (e.g. Phase IIB and Phase IV) <br />despite Developer(s) failure to construct promised paths along path easements in Phases I, II, and III? <br />e) What is the date by which Orange County expects Developer(s) to construct promised paths along path <br />easements in Phases I, II, and III? <br />f) What is the date by which Orange County expects Developer(s) to construct linkages between promised paths <br />along path easements and promised paths within Pedestrian Open Space Areas and/or Passive and Active <br />Recreation Areas? <br />31. Trash Rece tacles Not Provided At Recreation Facilities <br />a) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that trash receptacles have been provided at each of the recreation <br />facilities (i.e. swimming pool, tennis court, basketball court, tot lot) as required in Orange County Ordinance <br />46-79(b)4 which specifies that anchored "trash receptacles shall be provided for all recreational areas regardless <br />of the number and type of other improvements located thereon?" <br />b) What remedy does Orange County propose if, in fact, it is the case that the Developer constructed .this <br />community facility in violation of the standards set forth in Orange County Ordinance 46-79b(4)? <br />c) Is it the legal opinion of Orange County that Phase IV Development can continue per Condition 37 of the <br />Special Use Permit in light of the fact that this Phase II amenity has not yet been completed? <br />