4/19/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Staff Recommends: Approval of an amendment with no allowance for visits of clients and non- resident employees. PSAC Recommends: Approval of an amendment that allows visits of clients and non-resident employees so long as no more than 2 non-resident vehicles are on site at any given time. PZC Recommends: Approval of an amendment with no allowances for client visits but allowing for up to 2 non-resident employees to visit, park, and meet on site. NOTE: On pages 12 - 14 of the proposed ordinance, staff has noted in bold letters the differences in recommendations. 12. Private Access Road Frontage In 1994, the Board of County Commissioners approved changes to the county's subdivision ordinance. Those changes allowed certain private roadways that were in existence prior to December 8, 1973 to constitute road frontage for lot (parcel) splits. Thus, under certain circumstances, the changes allow a property owner to create one additional parcel that fronts upon an older, unplatted, private roadway. Under these provisions, several private roadways have been approved for lot split frontage purposes, and several lots have been created. On January 19, 1999, the Board of County Commissioners heard a request for clarification of the LDRs relating to private, grandfathered -in roadways used as frontage for lot splits. The clarification was needed to settle a disputed lot split road frontage administrative approval application from Michael O'Haire. The Board was asked to determine if grandfathered -in private roadways could be shifted from their 1973 alignment and remain grandfathered -in (qualifying as road frontage). The Board's determination was necessary because the current lot split road frontage regulations are silent on the issue and the Board's 1994 LDR change discussion did not address the issue. At its January 10 meeting, the Board reviewed a specific lot split road frontage application and determined that a grandfathered -in private road could be shifted from its 1973 alignment and maintain its grandfathered -in status (see attachment #5). The Board based its decision on the following findings: It is reasonable to assume that the alignment of unpaved roadways, such as those that can be grandfathered -in, shift over the years. Some roadway shifting can be beneficial for reasons of traffic safety or circulation, or preservation of trees or environmentally sensitive lands. If a road remains in the same general location and has the same beginning and ending points as its 1973 alignment, then the shifted roadway still complies with the intent of the lot split road frontage provisions of the subdivision ordinance. At the January 19th meeting, the Board directed staff to make LDR changes to codify the clarification to allow shifting of grandfathered -in private roadways that qualify for lot split road frontage. The proposed amendment implements the Board's directive. In addition, the proposed amendment clarifies other "clean-up" issues that staff has encountered during its review of private road frontage lot split applications. Those issues include specifying the "passable width" of the grandfathered -in physical roadway, and recording in the public records the entity responsible for maintaining the grandfathered -in private roadways. The proposed amendment would change a portion of the subdivision ordinance (Chapter 913), and a parallel section of the single-family development ordinance (Chapter 912). April 19,1999 13 BOOK 109 GAGS 0