Laserfiche WebLink
board to make it a roadway. There was a notation on the <br /> plan that easement was reserved for future roadway and since <br /> it was connected to adjoining property it is reasonable to <br /> assume the intention of the developer was to use it as a <br /> future roadway. <br /> Mr. Ford also stated that the Statue requires open space to <br /> be dedicated as open space- a document must be filed with <br /> re istr of deeds to restrict land use. When this document <br /> is reviewed, it shows this land was reserved as future <br /> >° roadway. <br /> Tony asked if the easement is delineated as part of lot 55? <br /> Mike Ford responded that is was. <br /> .rY-t <br /> Tony asked if it is part of lo-t G5, which is designated as <br /> open space, why would that make it a roadway easement by <br /> k_ definition? <br /> =k Mike Ford suggested that the designation on the plan of open <br /> gg g <br /> space is not the determining factor, the recording of open <br /> space restriction with the town is the operative document. <br /> Y He presented a copy of the document to the Board. <br /> 'Y <br /> Tony stated that the deed is one which Paderborn developed <br /> for the property but town was not party to developing the <br /> deed. <br /> Tony stated that the real issue becomes discussing it with <br /> yV <br /> Town Council and getting his opinion. It is the Board' s <br /> G <br /> opinion that if the easement is part of open space then <br /> developing a roadway would violate zoning by laws . If <br /> the applicant would like to summarize his statement/opinion <br /> .' and attach supporting information, the Board will present it <br /> "A to Town Council. The Board does not have the background to <br /> make this decision. <br /> 4"ti rC: <br /> :gift <br /> r Mr. Ford asked what kind of time this would involve? <br /> .1H Tony stated that the Board was waiting to see the <br /> information Merganser presented on April 19th and it will go <br /> .W R <br /> to Town Council after April 19th. <br /> Mike Ford stated that due to other commitments they cannot <br /> } agree to this , due to time constraints. <br /> c Charlie Rowley commented that he has not yet seen the <br /> changes on the plan and needs time to review them, <br /> ,;, <br /> Louise stated that the issue of maintenance of the roadway has <br /> l to be addressed. A limited number of people are responsible <br /> for a roadway which an unlimite&Oaumber of people with no <br /> responsibility will traverse. She stated that this is a very <br /> serious objection to the subdivision plan. <br /> ?s Mike Ford (after discussing with another representative from <br /> Greenbrier) said that unfortunately, because of other time <br /> constraints , they are not at liberty to extend the time the <br /> Board has to act. <br /> -- 3 <br />