Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garrett County planning commission tables contested subdivision plat after family objects to right-of-way filing
Summary
Family members told the commission a plat was submitted without their knowledge and that a 2007 deed improperly claimed a 30-foot right-of-way; the commission agreed to table the subdivision review until April to allow parties and counsel to reconcile an arbitration agreement and the recorded documents.
Chad, the county subdivision administrator, outlined the background of a proposed subdivision off Sang Run Road and a contested access labeled Cates/Case Mountain Road. He said an earlier plat on county record (dated 07/27/1995) showed a 30-foot right-of-way, while a later plat submitted after arbitration proposed a different alignment and a narrower, 16-foot right-of-way.
Katie Smith, who identified herself as an heir and nearby property owner, told the commission the estate and surveyor submitted the current plat without family knowledge and said a 2007 deed presented by other parties ‘‘made it look like they had a 30 foot right of way that they did not have’’ and that the filing was ‘‘done not authorized, not on behalf of Christine.’’ She asked the commission to postpone consideration so the family and counsel could review the plat for consistency with a prior mediation agreement.
Chad said the subdivision ordinance typically treats new lots as requiring safe, permanent access, generally a roughly 12-foot cartway within a 30-foot right-of-way to permit snowplowing, utilities and maintenance. He said an 11- or 16-foot width raises concerns at sharp bends and where abutting neighbors could place obstructions, and that his role is to review the submission for ordinance compliance rather than resolve family disputes.
After deliberation about notice to all parties, arbitration results, and practical safety concerns for emergency vehicles, the commission’s chair moved to table the item until the April meeting to allow the parties and attorneys time to review and to ensure the final plat presented to the county matches any mediation agreements. The motion was seconded and approved on a voice vote.
The commission did not vote on the plat’s merits; staff said the item will return once interested parties confirm the recorded documents and any arbitration outcomes and the subdivision administrator has the final plat for review.
