Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
0'71 <br /> O R A N G E C 0 U N T Y <br /> BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br /> ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT <br /> Meeting Date: August 22, 1994 <br /> Action Agenda <br /> Item #C 4 b <br /> SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATION TEXT AMENDMENT <br /> Section IV-B-5-e Lot Layout (land hooks) <br /> DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING X Yes No <br /> ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: <br /> Mary Willis Extension 2583 <br /> Proposed amendment <br /> TELEPHONE NUMBERS: <br /> Hillsborough-732-8181 <br /> Durham -688-7331 <br /> Mebane -227-2031 <br /> Chapel Hill -967-9251 <br /> PURPOSE: To receive citizen comment on a proposed amendment which <br /> would allow, in some circumstances, a new lot to contain <br /> land area on both sides of a private road easement. <br /> BACKGROUND The Subdivision Regulations require that all land area <br /> within new lots be contiguous, and not separated by a road <br /> right-of-way or by another lot. The application of this <br /> restriction to public roads avoids the creation by Land <br /> Records of parcels with separate Parcel Identification <br /> Numbers (PINs) when the subdivision is recorded. A parcel <br /> split by a public road cannot be included in a contiguous <br /> metes and bounds description because the ownership extends <br /> only to the edge of the right-of-way. This situation <br /> causes confusion in issuing and tracking permit approvals. <br /> The restriction applies to private roads as well as public <br /> roads. Although it is preferable to have all of the lot <br /> area on one side of a road to maximize its usability, lots <br /> split by private roads do not result in the creation of <br /> two separate PIN numbers because, unlike a dedicated <br /> public road, a private road easement is under the same <br /> ownership as the remainder of the lot. <br /> Occasionally, applying this requirement to private roads <br /> results in an awkward easement configuration and road <br /> location, particularly where the use of an existing <br /> driveway or road is proposed. (Examples attached. ) <br /> Planning Staff recollects three instances in the past year <br /> when this issue was raised. One of those cases involved <br /> an inquiry prior to submittal of a subdivision <br /> application. The amendment is being proposed at this time <br /> in conjunction with two other amendments which relate to <br />