Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Comp Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board backs small‑scale comp‑plan amendment despite neighbor easement dispute
Summary
The board recommended a small‑scale comp‑plan amendment to change 16.3 acres from silviculture to Residential A to allow a single home; neighbors raised a dispute over recorded ingress/egress easements and possible access from County Road 13 and County Road 208, but the county attorney advised access disputes are civil matters and the board proceeded with the land‑use recommendation.
Richard and Elizabeth Mosley asked the board to approve a small‑scale comp‑plan amendment converting 16.3 acres from silviculture to Residential A to allow development of a single home. The property owners explained the parcel’s history and stated they have a recorded ingress/egress easement through a front tract sold in a prior deed process.
Neighbors — including an adjacent owner who said he owns a 4.73‑acre parcel on County Road 13 — contested the validity and location of access easements and said the recorded access path conflicted with neighboring property lines. County counsel advised that disputes over the validity and legality of easements are matters for civil court and that the board’s decision should focus on land use; staff indicated the state’s easement and access rules generally prevent creation of permanently landlocked parcels.
After hearing public comment and legal clarification the board recommended approval; the item will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners for final action. The board emphasized that questions about easement legality or prescriptive use may require separate civil action to resolve rights and precise access locations.
