Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
be downloaded into the GIS system that would give that kind of information. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs mentioned some grammatical mistakes in the text amendments. He <br /> would like to be very careful about having super blocks through watersheds and water quality critical areas. <br /> He is in favor of road connectivity, but he would like the County to be very careful in environmentally <br /> sensitive areas. He asked why traffic impact studies were not proposed for some of the minor local roads. <br /> Planner Karen Lincoln said that some major subdivisions may access a major local road and not <br /> a minor local road. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs would like the staff to look at doing traffic impact studies for minor local <br /> roads. He suggested taking out"major"and just saying'local"roads. <br /> Commissioner Gordon said that this amendment is a big improvement from the 1981 plan. <br /> Lynn Holtcamp said that she appreciates the comments made about the minor local roads <br /> needing to have traffic impact statements. She questioned the statement about Cheeks Township being <br /> attracted by economic development. <br /> Craig Benedict said that instead of talking about a particular township we could talk about the <br /> EDDs in general. <br /> Lynn Holtcamp asked about miles and if it is road miles or radial miles (straight line miles)and <br /> Craig Benedict said that it would be the centerline road miles. <br /> Bob Strayhom said that on some roads there are no new subdivisions, however, the traffic has <br /> increased from areas further away. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the staff would be getting additional information from DOT and models <br /> that will hopefully indicate the background traffic that is not directly related to the subdivisions. <br /> Lynn Holtcamp asked about historic roads and if this would be a designation. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the historic roads would be part of an overlay of the comprehensive <br /> plan. <br /> Commissioner Jacobs said that the state of North Carolina has a presumption that every <br /> unpaved, rural road in the state will be paved to a width that DOT will accept. There is also a branch of DOT <br /> that reviews road impacts on historic properties. It has, from time to time, ruled that the widening of the road <br /> to DOT standards would destroy a historic characteristic, and therefore it should not be widened. He said <br /> that we should be careful when a certain minimum right-of-way is presumed. <br /> Craig Benedict said that the historic issue is a descriptive part that would be handled by <br /> overlays, but he does not see any problem with adding the issue of historic right-of-ways and not having the <br /> need to widen to the DOT standard. <br /> 2.Section IV—Required Minimum Design Standards <br /> (a) Section IV-13-3 Roads <br /> Craig Benedict said that he had covered everything in his presentation. <br /> MOTION <br /> A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Gordon to refer the proposed <br /> amendments to the Planning Board for a recommendation to be returned to the Board of Commissioners no <br /> sooner than May 3, 2000. <br /> VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br /> D. ADJOURNMENT <br /> With no further items to discuss,the meeting was adjourned. The next meeting will be held on <br /> February 29 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southern Human Services Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina. <br /> Moses Carey, Jr., Chair <br /> Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk <br />