Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 10-05-94 - VIII-G 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: October 5, 1994 Action Agenda Item # 1/111-G- SUBJECT: PROPOSED SUBDIVISION REGULATION TEXT AMENDMENTS Private Road Standards (curve radius) DEPARTMENT: PLANNING PUBLIC HEARING Yes _X_No ATTACHMENT(S) : INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Willis Proposed amendments Extension 2583 Letter from Emergency Management 8/22/94 Public Hearing Minutes TELEPHONE NUMBERS: 9/19/94 Planning Board Minutes (draft) Hillsborough-732-8181 Durham -688-7331 Mebane -227-2031 Chapel Hill -967-9251 PURPOSE: To consider a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations to allow for modification of the 125-foot curve radius for subdivisions served by existing private roads which have a lesser radius. BACKGROUND: The Orange County Private Road Standards include requirements pertaining to construction materials, and design standards pertaining to road and right-of-way width, grade, curve radius, vertical clearance, drainage, signage, turn-arounds, vegetation and maintenance. Application of these standards assures that the road will provide safe access, in terms of traffic circulation and emergency access, appropriate for the number of lots it serves. There is flexibility in some of the dimensional standards to address various site-specific circumstances and constraints. For example, the Board of Commissioners may approve a partial-width right-of-way if the full right-of- way width cannot be attained, and the Erosion Control Officer may approve a grade steeper than the 12% generally required if "exceptional circumstances" are involved. There is also some variability allowed in the pitch of the travelway and construction standards for ditches. There is currently no flexibility in the requirement for a 125-foot curve radius. New roads which are created when property is subdivided are located and designed in such a way that this requirement can be met. Problems occasionally arise, however, in the subdivision of lots which are accessed by an existing road which does not meet 2 the curve radius. In some cases, the road and/or right- of-way can be reconfigured so that the curve radius can be met. In other cases, the road cannot be redesigned to comply with the radius standards due to the inability to change the location of the right-of-way, the extent of earthwork that may be required if there are significant slopes or embankments, and/or the location of the right- of-way in relation to property lines. (The subdivision regulations do not allow a new lot to be split by a road right-of-way) . In these cases, no additional lots may be created on the road, even if the change is minor, and the existing road would provide an acceptable level of safety for general traffic and emergency vehicles. During the past year, two minor subdivisions have been reviewed in which this issue was encountered. One subdivision was submitted and conditionally approved, but the requirement for certification that the existing road meets the curve radius requirement cannot be met, and the subdivision cannot be released for recordation. The second case involved a subdivision which was informally reviewed, but not submitted due to the curve radius of the existing road. The proposed amendment would allow approval of a subdivision with lots served by a road with a curve radius of less than 125 feet if all of the following conditions are met: 1) The road existed prior to the adoption of subdivision regulations or was approved as part of an earlier subdivision; 2 ) Reconstruction of the existing road to meet a 125 ' curve radius is not feasible due to the extent of earthwork which would be required and/or the inability to reconfigure the existing right-of-way location due to ownership or the location of existing structures, wells or septic systems; 3) Standards pertaining to road width and grade will be met; 4 ) The subdivision can be approved with a Class C or Class B private road; 5) Documentation is received from the Erosion Control Division that the proposed curve radius would provide for adequate vehicular access and circulation; 6) Documentation is received from the Department of Emergency Services stating that the proposed curve radius will provide adequate access for the largest emergency vehicle which would use the road. The Planning Staff met with Mike Tapp, Orange County Fire Marshall in preparing the proposed amendment to assure that concerns related to emergency access were addressed. 3 A letter from Orange County Emergency Management in support of the proposed amendment is attached. The proposed amendment was presented for public hearing on August 22, 1994. No comments were received. The Planning Board considered the proposed amendment on September 19, 1994 and recommended approval. The vote was unanimous. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends approval of the proposed amendment per the Planning Board recommendation. 4 PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS REFERENCE: Private Road Standards ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _X_ Staff Planning Board BOCC Public Other: STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle x Low Comment: PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 22, 1994 PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: To allow for modification of the 125-foot curve radius for subdivisions served by existing private roads which have a lesser radius. IMPACTS/ISSUES: The Orange County Private Road Standards include requirements pertaining to construction materials, and design standards pertaining to road and right-of-way width, grade, curve radius, vertical clearance, drainage, signage, turn-arounds, vegetation and maintenance. Application of these standards assures that the road will provide safe access, in terms of traffic circulation and emergency access, appropriate for the number of lots it serves. There is flexibility in some of the dimensional standards to address various its specific circumstances and constraints. For example, the Board of Commissioners may approve a partial-width right-of-way if the full right-of-way width cannot be attained, and the Erosion Control Officer may approve a grade steeper than the 12% generally required if "exceptional circumstances" are involved. There is also some variability allowed in the pitch of the travelway and construction standards for ditches. There is currently no flexibility in the requirement for a 125- foot curve radius. New roads which are created when property is subdivided are located and designed in such a way that this requirement can be met. Problems occasionally arise, however, in the subdivision of lots which are accessed by an existing road which does not meet the curve radius. In some cases, the road and/or right-of-way can be reconfigured so that the curve radius can be met. In other cases, the road cannot be redesigned to comply with the radius standards due to the inability to change the location of the right-of-way, the extent of earthwork than may be required if there are significant slopes or embankments, and/or the location of the right-of-way in relation to property 5 lines. (The subdivision regulations do not allow a new lot to be split by a road right-of-way) . In these cases, no additional lots may be created on the road, even if the change is minor, and would provide an acceptable level of safety for general traffic and emergency vehicles. The proposed amendment would allow approval of a subdivision with lots are served by a road with a curve radius of less than 125 feet if all of the following conditions are met: 1) The road existed prior to the adoption of subdivision regulations or was approved as part of an earlier subdivision; 2 ) Reconstruction of the existing road to meet a 125 ' curve radius is not feasible due to the extent of earthwork which would be required and/or the inability to reconfigure the existing right-of-way location due to ownership or the location of existing structures, wells or septic systems; 3) Standards pertaining to road width and grade will be met; 4 ) The subdivision can be approved with a Class C or Class B private road; 5) Documentation is received from the Erosion Control Division that the proposed curve radius would provide for adequate vehicular access and circulation; 6 ) Documentation is received from the Department of Emergency Services stating that the proposed curve radius would provide access for the largest emergency vehicle which would use the road. The Planning Staff consulted with Mike Tapp, Orange County Fire Marshall in preparing the proposed amendment to assure that concerns related to emergency access were addressed. The Department of Emergency Management has indicated support for the proposed amendment. EXISTING ORDINANCE PROVISIONS AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT: Private Road Standards - Minimum Curve Radius New curves shall be constructed with a minimum centerline radius of 125 ' . The right-of-way must be designed with bends that will provide sufficient width to construct the road to this minimum radius. For example, a 90 ' bend in a 50 ' right-of-way will not provide enough are to construct a road 18 ' wide. The right-of- way must include sufficient width for the travelway and the necessary shoulders, ditches and slopes. A curve radius of less than 125 feet may be approved if all of the following conditions are met: 6 1) The road existed prior to the adoption of subdivision regulations or was approved as part of an earlier subdivision; a Reconstruction of the existing road to meet a 125 ' curve radius is not feasible due to the extent of earthwork which would be required and/or the inability to reconfigure the existing right-of-way location due to ownership or the location of existing structures, wells or septic systems; a Standards pertaining to road width and grade will be met; AI The subdivision can be approved with a Class C or Class B private road; 51 • Documentation is received from the Erosion Control Division that the proposed curve radius would provide for adequate vehicular access and circulation; 6) Documentation is received from the Department of Emergency Services stating that the proposed curve radius would provide access for the largest emergency vehicle which would use the road. ********************************** ORDINANCE REVIEW SUBCOMMITTEE: July 11, 1994 PLANNING BOARD REVIEW: BOCC REVIEW: ORANGE COUNTY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT P.O. BOX 8181 HILLSBOROUGH 7 NORTH CAROLINA 27278 9-14 Communications Emergency Medical Services 24 Hour Warning Point Fire Marshal 732-8161 • 933-2600 Hazardous Materials Fax Machine 644-3030 • 968-2050 967-9026 MEMORANDUM TO: MARY WILLIS FROM: MIRE TAPP0( RE: CURVE RADIUS MODIFICATIONS DATE: AUGUST 22, 1994 Nick Waters and I have reviewed the proposed amendment to allow for modification of the 125 foot curve radius for subdivisions served by existing private roads. _ We support your proposal and the contents of the amendment. Please contact me if you need additional information or assistance. Located at 1914 New Hope Church Road • Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516 SEP-09-1994 09:46 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO PLANNING P.06/07 8 1 Commissioner Willhoit requested that staff consider this request in terms of 2 the principals for sustainable communities.unities. Construction rubble being buried, 3 rather than reused, is worrisome. EPA promotes the reuse of construction 4 materials. 5 6 Clint Burklin requested information contrasting Orange County's and the 7 Federal Government's erosion control programs. Ms. Willis indicated that she was 8 not familiar with the differences, but the staff person in charge of Orange 9 County's erosion control program could cane to a Planning Board meeting and report 10 on this program. 11 12 Commissioner Gordon asked how the reclamation could be enforced if this was 1.3 a use by right? 14 15 Ms. Willis indicated that if the borrow pit was not reclaimed, it would no 16 longer be a use by right and. would require a Special Use Permit. 17 18 John Link stated that the County has no authority where D.O.T. pursues the 19 borrow pit process through their own right of way. This proposal would allow 20 D.O.T. to save the tax dollars necessary to purchase the right-of-way if they 21 agree to reclaim the land. If they do not follow through with the reclamation, 22 the county could delete this provision. D.O.T. would then be required to purchase 23 the property. 24 25 A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner 26 Halkioti.s, to refer this item to the Planning Board for a-recommendation to be 27 returned to the Board of Commissioners no sooner than October 5, 1994. 28 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 29 30 4. Other subdivisiaa Ordinance Text Am et inents 31 a. Lot 'Boundaries (Public Rights-of-Way) 32 This it was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of 33 receiving citizen comment an a proposed ame cinent to the Subdivision Regulations 34 which would require that property lines for individual lots extend only to the 35 edge of a public road right-of-way and that the area within private road easements 36 be included within lot bones. 37 b. Lot Layout (Land Hooks) 38 This item was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of 39 receiving citizen cement on a proposed amendment which would allow, in same 40 circrmet ces, a new lot to contain land area an both sides of a private road 41 easement 42 . Private Road Standards Curve Radius 43 This item was presented by Mary Willis for the purpose of 44 receiving itizen comment on a proposed amenarrent to the Subdivision Regulations 45 to allow for modification of the 125-foot curve radius for subdivisions served by 46 existing private roads which have a lesser radius. 47 48 QUESTIONS AND/OR cmonyrs PROK BOARD OF CO MISSIONS AND PLANNING BOARD 49 50 Ms. Willis indicated that the proposed amendment to allow a new lot to 51 contain land area 'on both sides of a private road easement is necessary to deal 52 with the occasional unusually shaped property. Currently adjustments to the 53 location of the road or property line are required in order to meet the technical 54 requirements. The technical requires do not always appear appropriate or correct SEP-0971994 09:47 FROM ORANGE CTY COMMISSIONERS TO PLANNING P.07/07 9 1 for the land. 2 3 QUESTIONS AND/OR COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS 4 None. 5 6 A motion was made by Cemmissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Insko, 7 to refer these items to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to 8 the Board of Commissioners no sooner than October 5, 1994. 9 10 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. The next 11 regular meeting of the Board of Commissioners will be held on September 6, 1994 at 12 7:30 p.m. in the Northern Rumen Services Center, Cedar Grove, North Carolina. 13 14 Hoses Carey, Jr. , Chair 15 16 Kathy Baker, Deputy Clerk TOTAL P.07 10 VOTE: 8 in favor. 1 opposed (Rosemond - does not like the concept of splitting property on either side of the road) . (3) Private Road Standards (Curve Radius) Presentation by Mary Willis. This item is to consider a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulations to allow for modification of the 125-foot curve radius for subdivisions served by existing private roads which have a lesser radius. The Orange County Private Road Standards include requirements pertaining to construction materials, and design standards pertaining to road and right-of-way width, grade, curve radius, vertical clearance, drainage, signage, turn- arounds, vegetation and maintenance. Application of these standards assures that the road will provide safe access, in terms of traffic circulation and emergency access, appropriate for the number of lots it serves. There is flexibility in some of the dimensional standards to address various site-specific circumstances and constraints. For example, the Board of Commissioners may approve a partial- width right-of-way if the full right-of-way width cannot be attained, and the Erosion Control Officer may approve a grade steeper than the 12% generally required if "exceptional circumstances" are involved. There is also some variability allowed in the pitch of the travelway and construction standards for ditches. There is currently no flexibility in the requirement for a 125-foot curve radius. New roads which are created when property is subdivided are located and designed in such a way that this requirement can be met. Problems occasionally arise, however, in the subdivision of lots which are accessed by an existing road which does not meet the curve radius. In some cases, the road and/or right-of-way can be reconfigured so that the curve radius can be met. In other cases, the road cannot be redesigned to comply with the radius standards due to the ,inability to change the location of the right-of- way, the extent of earthwork that may be required if there are significant slopes or embankments, and/or the location of the right-of-way in 11 relation to property lines. The Subdivision Regulations do not allow a new lot to be split by a road right-of-way. In these cases, no additional lots may be created on the road, even if the change is minor, and the existing road would provide an acceptable level of safety for general traffic and emergency vehicles. During the past year, two minor subdivisions have been reviewed in which this issue was encountered. One subdivision was submitted and conditionally approved, but the requirement for certification that the existing road meets the curve radius requirement cannot be met, and the subdivision cannot be released for recordation. The second case involved a subdivision, which was informally reviewed, but not submitted due to the curve radius of the existing road. The proposed amendment would allow approval of a subdivision with lots served by a road with a curve radius of less than 125 feet if all of the conditions are met: 1. The road existed prior to the adoption of subdivision regulations, or was approved as part of an earlier subdivision; 2. Reconstruction of the existing road to meet a 125' curve radius is not feasible due to the extent of earthwork which would be required and/or the inability to reconfigure the existing right-of-way location due to ownership or the location of existing structures, wells or septic systems; 3. Standards pertaining to road width and grade will be met; 4. The subdivision can be approved with a Class C or Class B private road; 5. Documentation is received from the Erosion Control Division that the proposed curve radius would provide for adequate vehicular access and circulation; 6. Documentation is received from the Department of Emergency Services stating that the proposed curve radius will provide adequate access for the largest emergency vehicle which would use the road. The Planning Staff met with Mike Tapp, Orange County Fire Marshall in preparing the proposed amendment to assure that concerns related to emergency access were addressed. A letter from Orange County Emergency Management in support of the proposed amendment is an attachment to these 12 minutes on page The proposed amendment was presented for public hearing on August 22, 1994 . No comments were received. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment. Burklin asked what radius is allowed for Class B or C roads. Willis responded 125' . Rosemond asked if the 125 ' was to address the safety issue. Willis responded that was the reason for the meeting with the Orange County Fire Marshall and EMS. The radius for State Roads is 150 ' . For private roads, which would have lower speeds, the minimum radius is 125 ' . Some roads make a ninety degree turn and that can be safely made. The specific criteria address safety concerns. Rosemond asked if there was a number below which Staff would not consider safe. Willis responded there is not a specific number proposed; it is a matter of EMS reviewing for safety concerns. At some point, additional lots would require upgrading to a public road. EMS review and support would be required before proposing any reduction in the curve radius. Waddell noted that the greatest problem for fire trucks is narrow driveways with trees very close to them. Willis stated that it is also possible that a reduction in curve radius would be needed in a relatively flat area, if property ownership constrains changing the location of the easement. MOTION: Barrows moved approval of Planning Staff 's recommendation. Seconded by Burklin. VOTE: Unanimous. AGENDA ITEM #10: MATTERS HEARD AT PUBLIC HEARING (5/5/94, 5/23/94, 6/30/94) This item was not considered due to the number of development applications and public hearing items on the agenda. The item will be considered at the Planning Board's October 11, 1994 Long-Range Meeting.