1/7/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Fr JAN 07 19-92 BOOK 1� ) P,; E.��,�� One easement is 60' wide (60' is the minimum local road right-of- way width) and could be converted into a 60' road right-of-way via a road plat. However, a second 20' wide easement could only be used if it were expanded to a width of 60' and converted to a road right-of-way via the filing of a road plat. In other words, although the existing 60' and 20' easements could be included in the road plat area, the road plat itself would need to be at least 60' wide running from the ±4 acre parcel to 45th Street. Such a road plat would obviously cover more area than what is covered by the 20' wide easement and would require consent and approval from owners of affected properties. All road platting options available to Mr. Ketchum would involve the consent and approval of surrounding property owners. Mr. Ketchum is now requesting a variance from the requirements•of section 913.06(1)(c) of the subdivision ordinance. If Mr. Ketchum obtains the variance from the Board, the subject parcel could be considered buildable as a separate, "legally created" parcel. ANALYSIS AND ALTERNATIVES: !Frontage Requirement The dedicated road right-of-way frontage requirement contained in section 913.06(1)(c) of the county's land development regulations has essentially been in effect in the County since 1974. The requirement has been consistently enforced on a parcel by parcel basis since the adoption of the "revamped" subdivision ordinance in 1983. The staff has consistently applied the frontage requirement to hundreds of situations over the past eight years. Furthermore, the Board of County Commissioners has affirmed the fundamental importance of strictly applying the right-of-way frontage requirement. In its last subdivision variance action (March 29, 1988), the Board voted 5-0 to deny a request by the First Baptist Church of Mt. Pleasant (agent: Michael O'Haire) for a variance from the right-of-way frontage requirement. In its 1988 action, the Board re -affirmed the fundamental reasons for the dedicated road right-of-way requirement, which are as follows: 1. Dedicated (platted) road right-of-way ensures that all newly created lots, whether part of a subdivision plat or created via a metes and bounds "cut-out", have direct access to a legally established and properly maintained roadway. 2. Dedicated (platted) road right-of-way is established only after staff and county approval which ensures proper alignment and layout of the roadway in relation to existing and planned roadway, drainage, and utilities improvements. 3. Dedicated (platted) road right-of-way provides future residents with an approved street layout and designation that is fully integrated into and coordinated with the chapter 951 road/addressing system and the 911 emergency response system. 4. Dedicated (platted) road right-of-way alleviates many potential problems arising from past, haphazard metes and bounds "cut-outs" accessed only via private easements. Such areas routinely experience access road alignment and maintenance problems and drainage problems. Once such a property' ownership pattern is created, it is extremely difficult to solve the problems, since there is insufficient right-of-way and no single road maintenance/ownership entity with which to negotiate. Lastly, such areas are usually omitted from utilities expansion projects due to the lack of a functional right-of-way layout. Thus, the reasons for applying the dedicated road right-of-way requirement to newly created lots have not changed since the Board last considered a variance -from the requirement. Requiring right- of-way frontage alleviates potential access, drainage, .and 36 � � r