City of Charlotte Banner
File #: 15-9833    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Public Hearing Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 12/5/2018 In control: City Council Business Meeting
On agenda: 1/14/2019 Final action: 1/14/2019
Title: Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Sam Neely Road
Attachments: 1. Council Map Sam Neely Road, 2. Resolution to Close a portion of Sam Neely Road
Title
Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Sam Neely Road

Action
Action:
A. Conduct a public hearing to close a portion of Sam Neely Road, and

B. Adopt a resolution to close a portion of Sam Neely Road.

Body
Staff Resource(s):
Liz Babson, Transportation
Esteban Valverde, 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 Sam Neely Road is located in Council District 3.

Petitioners
Westinghouse Real Estate Development, LLC - Marshall B. Gilchrist

Right-of-Way to be Abandoned
The portion of Sam Neely Road is located east of Steele Creek Road.

Reason
The abandonment of a portion of Sam Neely Road will enable the petitioner to reassemble the property in order to create a more viable tract of land for future development.
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): None

Neighborhood/Business Association(s): None

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, and
? Be contrary to the adopted policy to preserve existing rights-of-way for connectivity....

Click here for full text