Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-18-94 - VIII-E
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1994
>
Agenda - 10-18-94 Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 10-18-94 - VIII-E
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2016 9:17:24 AM
Creation date
10/7/2016 9:16:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/18/1994
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
VIII-E
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 <br /> ORANGE COUNTY <br /> BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS <br /> ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT <br /> Meeting Date: October 18, 1994 <br /> Action Agenda <br /> Item # VIII - E <br /> SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATION TEXT AMENDMENT <br /> Section IV-B-5-e Lot Layout (land hooks) <br /> DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _X_No <br /> ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: <br /> Mary Willis Extension 2583 <br /> Proposed amendment <br /> 8/22/94 Public Hearing Minutes TELEPHONE NUMBERS: <br /> 9/19/94 Planning Board Minutes (draft) Hillsborough-732-8181 <br /> Durham -688-7331 <br /> Mebane -227-2031 <br /> Chapel Hill -967-9251 <br /> PURPOSE: To consider a proposed amendment which would allow, in <br /> some circumstances, a new lot to contain land area on both <br /> 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 /> result's 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 />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.