Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners debate raising road-width minimums and tightening subdivision approvals to manage safety and growth
Summary
The commission debated changing minimum roadway widths for major subdivisions (18 vs 20 feet and alternatives for specific locations) and proposed limiting simple administrative subdivisions to 3 lots in a 12'24 month period. Road superintendent Mark Clanton and staff stressed safety and legal practicalities; staff will prepare a resolution for the next meeting.
Commissioners spent the latter portion of the meeting on old-business discussions about subdivision regulations and roadway widths.
A draft recommendation in the staff packet suggested an 18-foot minimum roadway width for many rural roads, a figure based on the prevalence of existing 18-foot roads. Road superintendent Mark Clanton and several commissioners urged moving the standard to 20 feet for safety reasons. "If your top priority is to slow down development and maintain the rural status that we all like to see, then 20 is the number you need to go with," Mark said, citing school-bus access, emergency response and tractor/trailer movements as reasons.
Staff also proposed narrowing the administrative "simple subdivision" threshold to prevent serial carving-off of lots. Under the draft, a simple subdivision would be limited to three lots within a 12-month period (some commissioners advocated extending the period to 24 months). Chris said the change would push larger, aggregated lot divisions into the major-subdivision process that requires stormwater and drainage engineering. The commission directed staff to bring a draft resolution back next month reflecting the commission's consensus direction.
