Agenda - Planning Commission - 11/02/2006

Home

(/.. .r ,\ ,(!". i .... Z.B. October 10, 2006 -Page 5 planning board as "approval not required" (ANR). The executor also had a plan to divide the bog parcel, but his petition was blocked by Morgan. Morgan sued, seeking to have the land transferred to her in return for her payment of $273,900. However, Jozus wanted the property, now considered buildable lots worth $500,000, to be sold at auction to the highest bidder. The court appointed a commissioner to partition the properties, sell the land as buildable lots, and, if Morgan was not the winning bidder, to divide the sales proceeds between Jozus and Morgan. Morgan appealed the court's decision, arguing that the lots should not be assessed as buildable lots. DECISION: Affinned. The lower court's finding that the lots were buildable was not clearly in error, so the decision was affIrmed. The cottage parcel's second lot had been assessed as a buildable lot since the ANR endorsement, and it was common practice to allow these lots to be built upon. Jozus conceded that the development of the bog parcel would have some impediments, requiring conservation commission approval due to the perva- sive wetlands, a building permit, approval by the board of health for a septic system in proximity to wetlands, and, potentially, a special permit, all of which contributed to narrow the gap between speculative use and admissible realistic potential uses. The court had discretion in deciding whether a use was unduly speculative or conjectural. Moreover, unlike an eminent:domain taking where the fact-finder had to determine the fair market value of the property as the measure of assess- ing damages to the property owner, here the court, having determined that partition by' sale was appropriate, had the additional safeguard of the actual sale of the property. If there was no market for the properties as buildable lots, the commissioner was instructed to return to the court for further instructions. Ultimately, the court did not err by essentially ordering the commissioner to test the market for an actual sale of the parcels as buildable lots. Mobile Homes - Town rules structure is a 'manufactured home' Owner claims it also fits the less restrictive definition of modular home Citation: Taylor v. Town of River Bend, Court of Appeals of North Carolina, No. COA05-841 (2006) NORTH CAROLINA (08/01/06) - Taylor applied for a zoning permit to place a residential building in the Norberry Estates subdivision in the town of River Bend. After getting the necessary permits, he purchased what he believed to be a modular home. Modular homes were allowed in Norberry Estates. However, when the home was delivered, neighbors complained that a mo- @ 2006 Quinlan Publishing Group. Any reproduction is prohibited. For more information please call (617) 542-0048. 43