Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-06-2011 - 2
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 10-06-2011
>
Agenda - 10-06-2011 - 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/28/2011 1:59:45 PM
Creation date
11/28/2011 1:59:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/6/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
2
Document Relationships
Minutes 10-06-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Several years ago Orange County entered into a sidewalk maintenance agreement for a portion <br />of Homestead Road adjacent to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The sidewalk is in the <br />County's jurisdiction at this time but inevitably would be annexed since it is part of adjacent <br />ETJs. The agreement is multi-party including NCDOT which allowed an encroachment <br />agreement in its right-of-way. The Town maintains the sidewalk. <br />Decisions to be Made <br />In order to proceed with the design guidelines -for the Efland core area, staff needs direction <br />from the BOCC on the sidewalk issue. Design guidelines for areas with a pedestrian network <br />are quite different from areas without sidewalks. Additionally, preliminary research shows there <br />could be particular challenges in the Efland area because public (NCDOT) right-of-way is much <br />narrower in some areas than the current standard of 60-feet (or more, depending on roadway <br />type), and in some cases parcels actually extend to the centerlines of streets and the public <br />road is located-within an easement. <br />Questions staff has include: <br />1. Does the BOCC want to proceed with the County "getting into the sidewalk business" at <br />this time? <br />2. If so, is staff authorized to begin development of a sidewalk program for certain areas of <br />the County (i.e., the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane corridor to start). Does the BOCC have <br />direction on any of the funding and maintenance issues discussed above, particularly the <br />issue of providing sidewalks in an area that is already partially developed (the Efland <br />core area)? (Note: a sidewalk program is likely to result in amendments to development <br />regulations). <br />Options for providing sidewalks include: <br />a. Orange County or developer (for new construction) pays for and builds the sidewalks <br />and either Orange County contracts with a city for maintenance or a Property Owners <br />Association (setting up a POA would be a requirement for new construction) is <br />responsible for maintaining the sidewalk. County general funds would be used under <br />this option. Note that NCDOT would require a maintenance agreement with the <br />County and NCDOT is willing to enter into third party agreements with the County as <br />a "back-up" signatory for maintenance. <br />b. Orange County creates a special assessment district for sidewalk. Property owners <br />within the district would be required to pay into the special district and a fund would <br />be created for sidewalk construction and maintenance. Orange County would be <br />responsible for maintenance, likely through contracting with another city for <br />maintenance tasks. <br />c. Other options as the BOCC decides. <br />3. If not, should staff proceed- with the Efland core area design requirements/guidelines? <br />The requirements/guidelines will be more minimal than what the Small Area Plan <br />recommended because of the differences in urban form a sidewalk network brings to an <br />area. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.