Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-03-1993 - III-C
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1993
>
Agenda - 05-03-1993
>
Agenda - 05-03-1993 - III-C
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/23/2017 9:36:00 AM
Creation date
1/17/2017 3:48:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/3/1993
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
III-C
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
7 <br /> exaxples of sinor subdivisions which illustrate some <br /> of the situations encountered in implementing the existing <br /> -etulations . <br /> Prr,n^sed Chances <br /> The proposed amendment would eliminate the outright prohibition <br /> acainst further subdivision, but would require that buyers be put <br /> on notice that further subdivisich may require upgrading of the <br /> road at their expense. Each new subdivision in which private <br /> roads were proposed would be evaluated for conformance with the <br /> justification criteria . <br /> Also proposed are two additional criteria which could be used to <br /> justify a private road. <br /> The first relates to the length of the road. It is proposed that <br /> any road less than 250 ' in length, may be private, provide that <br /> the average lot size is at least 40 , 000 square feet and the grade <br /> does not exceed % . As an example, this would allow a maximum <br /> of four lots with a minimum frontage of 150' in the AR zoning <br /> district, and possibly three lots to access the bulb at the end <br /> of the cul-de-sac, as shown in the sketch below. A road of this <br /> length would serve only the development, and would not attract <br /> outside traffic. The criteria would not apply in the case of a <br /> 'short cul-de-sac within a larger development which otherwise <br /> requires public roads. <br /> • • <br /> • ; <br /> The second criteria relates to the degree to which the tract <br /> being subdivided is already developed. It is proposed that <br /> private roads be allowed where the Property is already developed <br /> • to at least 90% of its capacity, and the subdivision would lessen <br /> or correct a non-conforming aspect of the existing use, <br /> particularly multiple residences on a single lot. In such <br /> sases : buildout of the subdivision would result in little or no <br /> to the existing use of the property, and little or no • <br /> change in traffic or other impacts of development. <br /> For example, the area included in the White Cross Subdivision, at <br /> NC 54 and White Cross Road; contained 7 existing residences . The <br /> only reason a subdivision was being requested was to allow the <br /> individual residences, constructed prior to zoning regulations, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.