Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
25 <br />DRAFT <br />103 <br />104 Renee Price: Could you explain one acre versus the open space that the applicant is proposing. <br />105 <br />106 Jennifer Leaf: (Pointing to map) Here is the power line easement and ERCD and RPAC were suggesting this <br />107 triangular portion. The power line area is already clear and they determined that this would be a good boundary. The <br />108 stream forms the boundary that the applicant is proposing. The open space will be owned by the HOA. <br />109 <br />110 Jay Bryan: It already has open space. On the stub-outs is there a county policy regulations to have a sign indicating <br />111 a possible extension? <br />112 <br />113 Jennifer Leaf: It's not a currently a requirement but it was suggested. One thing we are requiring that the plat does <br />114 show that will be a possibility of becoming a piece of roadway and ask that each homeowner as they purchase a lot <br />115 that they be provided with that information. We can add a condition that there would need to be a sign placed. <br />116 <br />117 Jay Bryan: In some of these recommendations there's an "or" are we approving both? <br />118 <br />119 Jennifer Leaf: Yes, approving both because they do have an option. <br />,120 <br />121 Jay Bryan: one other quick question for Ren Ivins about the memo, clearing a 50 ft right-of-way. Is it necessary to <br />122 clear that area? Are you saying this is proposed? <br />123 <br />124 Ren Ivins: Yes it is. What I originally saw for the public road has to be cleared. <br />125 <br />126 Jay Bryan: Is this because of the state? <br />127 <br />128 Ren Ivies: Yes, all public right-of-ways must be cleared. <br />129 <br />130 Steve Yuhasz: I am a land surveyor and I represent John Hart. I would like to comment on the request from the <br />131 Recreations of Parks and Advisory Council for that piece of property. The guidelines for dedication of property to the <br />132 county generally call for 1/26 to 1/11 of an acre in the flood plain for each lot. In this case, that would be 5111 of an <br />133 acre. There is no justification for additional property. It is being used for a greenway connection. I think they used <br />134 an acre because there was an easy line they could point to. I can create an easily identifiable line 100 feet off the <br />135 creek that would define that piece of property. The second issue deals with stub out. Our original proposal was to <br />136 have the road to the adjoining property. In meetings with the property owner, they asked that we not do that. They <br />137. have no plan to develop it. If there was a road to their property there would be more pressure to develop it. I would <br />138 prefer to see a reservation versus an actual dedication and keep the 50 foot strip as part of the Homeowners <br />139 Association. <br />140 <br />141 Robert Davis: We would prefer the dedication not the reservation because if someone did do a subdivision you <br />142 would battle with the HOA over this issue. <br />143 <br />144 Jay Bryan: Steve, you disagree with that? <br />145 <br />146 Steve Yuhasz: I do because there is not a good procedure for closing a road that has not been opened. <br />147 <br />148 Jay Bryan: One answer would be to develop a policy to address that. <br />149 <br />150 Renee Price: What is parcel C? <br />151 <br />152 Steve Yuhasz: Open space. <br />153 <br />3 <br />