Orange County NC Website
Approved 12/18/13 <br />Abigaile Pittman responded that the dash lines on the map represent frontage roads and then further into areas <br />future development would also use access roads. Basically future road networks would be off US 70. Entering US <br />70 would occur at identified safe access points. <br />Paul Guthrie raised a question about the proposed transit stop which was just a place where one could possibly be in <br />the area. He added that the long range plan for the NC Railroad for potential commuter rail between Goldsboro and <br />Greensboro is a long term strategy. There is the likelihood that the junction of the Chapel Hill /Carrboro spur of the <br />railroad will be in our area where there might be a switching station for passengers from a long term future <br />north /south Orange County transit system. While working on the Hillsborough rail station committee one thing <br />discussed was that they could only locate Amtrak stations so often and if they put a station where they have here, <br />and then they have the Durham station, they will have a problem of either in the future putting a stop at the junction <br />or they would not interested in having Hillsborough as a stop because of the overabundance of stations. It would be <br />relatively easy to have a station at the Chapel Hill /Carrboro spur junction with the necessary parking. One thing most <br />people don't understand, including some of the people who building along the railroad, is that it's a 360 -foot right -of- <br />way. It is a large right -of -way and it's owned by the NC Railroad Company which was created by the state of North <br />Carolina. Even in downtown Durham, that 360 -foot right- of -way is not always honored so that's an issue. He <br />continued that in the foreseeable future, within 10 years, the railroad track will be double tracked from where it ends <br />its double track in the first third of the eastern part of the map and all those tussles that are now too low will have to <br />be expanded which means they would be rebuilt. The third issue is that is now a residential neighborhood and to put <br />a railroad commuter station in the middle of a neighborhood like that is not very good far sighted planning. A <br />broader issue which is not on our agenda is that some of that residential housing in the middle of this area is all <br />single family units that are not going to disappear in ten years, so the question is how you deal with that area in terms <br />of transportation access. Most of the other transportation suggestions are very well done and thought out. Paul <br />informed the Board that in the area of NC 10 there are only two discernible business enterprises; it is basically <br />modest homes. <br />Sam Lasris noted that the question is what it will be in 2030 or 2070. <br />Paul Guthrie answered that it depends on how the transportation planning takes place and what kind of structure you <br />put on Old NC 10. <br />Sam Lasris added that he thinks most of the action is really centering on US 70 and 1 -85 and not Old NC 10 and he <br />thinks that in 2070 it will be like 15 -501 between Durham and Chapel Hill and basically NC 10 and the areas beyond <br />that will remain pretty much unscathed because it's not where the action really is. <br />Paul Guthrie added that how the County handles the development of Old NC 10 may determine that outcome. <br />Abigaile Pittman noted that the Plan contains criteria that there be no access by non - residential development through <br />the 10 year transition area until it commences a transition with urban densities/ intensities. <br />Sam Lasris moved that the OUTBoard approve the recommendation. Paul Guthrie asked that a member amend the <br />motion to include a request that the Planning Board keep the OUTBoard informed of progress on this issue. Alex <br />Castro made that motion and Sam Lasris seconded it. <br />Amy Cole noted that she thinks there are a lot of people that unfortunately are too late in having their voices heard. <br />Abigaile Pittman responded that the staff proposes to review protections measures for Old NC 10. <br />Amy Cole continued that she acknowledges the protection considerations but there are a lot of low income homes. <br />Abigaile Pittman responded that they are not in a position to undo the land use plan and zoning approvals that the <br />BOCC has already done. She added that they are in a position moving forward to offer options for protection. <br />