Real Estate and Business

Ocracoke Real Estate: Does the community
understand the results of a decision on lot size calculations?

By B.J. OELSCHLEGEL

In August of 2007, as this community was preparing to make a major alteration to the Ocracoke Building Ordinance, I wrote an article questioning whether this change was actually the will of the community.

The question at hand was whether to allow the land, privately owned, underneath the public right of way, to be considered in the calculation of the square footage of a building lot. When applying for a building permit, a landowner needs to show that all of the set-back requirements, septic requirements, and impervious area restrictions can be achieved within the lot boundaries. If the land continues under the road, the edge of the right of way would act as the boundary and could potentially end the deal.

The heat in this question stemmed from the fact that the county was taxing this land as though it were developable. As land becomes scarce on the island, therefore more valuable, every inch counts. For lots measuring fewer than 10,000 square feet, other than that under the road, the consequence of allowing the use of the land under the road, would yield the ability to subdivide.

Our minimum lot size is 5,000 square feet. For some, a new ruling would allow the opportunity to build a structure.

In the past, this decision has been left up to the county attorney. We have had attorneys who allowed the inclusion of this land in the lot calculation. Our current county lawyer does not interpret the prior ordinance language, with regards to lot calculations, to be inclusionary. That interpretation prompted the request to change the building ordinance to clearly favor allowing the land underneath the right of way to be used in the calculations of a building lot.

As a member of the Ocracoke Advisory Board, which produces the changes to the Ocracoke development ordinance, I felt strongly that this action would increase our density. I was reinforced by the opinion of our county attorney and two other board members, who agreed that a minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet already created a density problem, let alone allowing the inclusion of the land under the right of way.

Density exacerbates existing problems in this community. Parking is always a volatile issue. The proximity of adjacent buildings, during a fire, is a real concern. Less green space, to absorb stormwater runoff, creates the lakes we have to drive through after a downpour. As we mound up the drain field of our septic system, it forces rain water to pool in the streets and in our neighbors’ yards. If the land under the road is used in the calculation of a subdivision, we could end up with actual building lots that are less than 5,000 square feet. Imagine 4,000 square feet on which to build with 1,000 sq ft under the road.

Architecturally, what are the consequences of having to squeeze a building, septic, and driveway on a substandard lot? Density over burdens the already taxed fire protection, medical, police, and water services. More septic affects the water table and high water pollution during a hurricane. The land should never have been taxed as though it were developable. There should have been greater balance between the issue of property rights and the outcome of increasing density.

After much discussion on the advisory board, the vote was taken and the “nays” were outnumbered. The issue went before the county commissioners for their acceptance and in the fall of last year, the commissioners passed the measure.

I was disappointed, but felt that I had done my best to try to bring the subject into the light for the community. The Advisory Board continues to meet every third Wednesday of the month, at 8 p.m. at The Community Center.

We have been tackling the Hyde County Land Use Plan, an incredibly thick document of concerns throughout the county for future development. Our county manager has been joining us each month and is a wealth of information and resources.

Imagine my astonishment when he named a topic that he felt required our attention -- the consequence of the growing number of septic systems, on the island water table! When I quizzed him on the ludicrous position of this request in light of the commissioner’s recent vote, I was told that government is often inconsistent. I am still stunned.

I am aware of two building projects and at least one lot subdivision that are a direct result of this change to the Ocracoke building ordinance. I pick up various reactions to this development and wonder if the community is aware of the connection. When I hear “How did that happen?” I question whether the relationship between that building permit and the change in the ordinance is realized.

I am amazed at how little time it took for the effect to kick in. I think that it is difficult to fully comprehend the implications of a decision until you get to see the results. But by then, one landowner has gained and maybe the community has lost.

(B.J. Oelschlegel has lived on Ocracoke Island for 30 years and has worked in the real estate business for 26 years. She is a broker with Ocracoke’s Lightship Realty and a real estate columnist for The Ocracoke Observer. You can reach her ny e-mail at bj@ocracokelightshiprealty.com)