Legislation Details

File #: 15-1860    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Public Hearing Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 11/2/2015 In control: City Council Business Meeting
On agenda: 11/23/2015 Final action: 11/23/2015
Title: Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Oak Street
Attachments: 1. City Council Map Oak Street, 2. Resolution to Close a portion of Oak Street
Title
Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Oak Street

Action
Action:
A. Conduct a public hearing to close a portion of Oak Street, and

B. Adopt a resolution to close a portion of Oak Street.

Body
Staff Resource(s):
Jeff Boenisch, Transportation

Explanation
* North Carolina General Statute 160A-299 outlines the procedures for permanently closing streets and alleys.
* The Charlotte Department of Transportation received a petition to abandon public right-of-way and requests this City Council action in accordance with the statute.
* The action removes land from public right-of-way status and attaches it to the adjacent property.
* The attached resolution refers to exhibits and metes and bounds descriptions that are available in the City Clerk's Office.
* The portion of Oak Street is located in Council District 2.

Petitioners
Mr. John Maxwell

Right-of-Way to be Abandoned
A portion of Oak Street located off of Fred D. Alexander Boulevard.

Reason
The reason is to close a portion of Oak Street and incorporate it into land owned by both the petitioner and Mr. Bud Mustin, an adjacent owner.

Notification
As part of the City's notification process, and in compliance with North Carolina General Statute 160A-299, the Charlotte Department of Transportation submitted this abandonment petition for review by the public and City Departments.

Adjoining property owner(s) - John Maxwell and Bud Mustin


Neighborhood/Business Association(s)
Druid Hills Neighborhood Association - Notified/No response
Edison Street Block Association - Notified/No response

Private Utility Companies - No objections

City Departments
Review by City departments identified no apparent reason this closing would:
* Be contrary to the public interest
* Deprive any individual(s) owning property in the vicinity of reasonable means of ingress and egress to his property as outlined in the statutes
* Be contrary to the adopted policy t...

Click here for full text