City of Charlotte Banner
File #: 15-15816    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Public Hearing Item Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 5/24/2021 In control: City Council Business Meeting
On agenda: 6/14/2021 Final action: 6/14/2021
Title: Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Gloryland Avenue
Attachments: 1. 2020-35A Portion of Gloryland Ave Abandonment Map
Title
Public Hearing on a Resolution to Close a Portion of Gloryland Avenue

Action
Action:
Conduct a public hearing to close a portion of Gloryland Avenue.

Body
Staff Resource(s):
Liz Babson, Transportation
David Smith, Transportation

Explanation
* North Carolina General Statute 160A-299 outlines the procedures for permanently closing streets and alleys.
* The Charlotte Department of Transportation (CDOT) received a petition to abandon public right-of-way and requests this City Council action in accordance with the statute.
* The proposed action removes land from public right-of-way and attaches it to the adjacent property.
* The road to be closed is located in Council District 4.
* In compliance with North Carolina General Statute 166A-19.24 Remote meetings during certain declarations of emergency, written comments on the public hearing topic will be accepted by the City Clerk's Office through June 15, 2021, at 11:59 p.m. Any additional comments received will be provided to Council.

Petitioner
J Forrest Development, LLC

Right-of-Way to be Abandoned
A Portion of Gloryland Avenue

Reason
Per the petition submitted by J Forrest Development, LLC: the abandonment will assist in construction of a multi-family development. The city has no objections.

Notification
As part of the city's notification process, and in compliance with North Carolina General Statute 160A-299, CDOT submitted this abandonment petition for review by the public and city departments.

Adjoining property owner(s)
Trustees of the Gloryland Baptist Church - No objections
Panos Properties - 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 their property as outlined in the statutes; and
* Be contrary to the adopted policy to preserve existing rights-of-way for connectivity.

Attach...

Click here for full text