Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved May 21, 2008 <br />52 <br />53 <br />54 <br />55 <br />56 <br />57 <br />58 <br />59 <br />61 <br />62 <br />63 <br />64 <br />65 <br />66 <br />67 <br />68 <br />69 <br />70 <br />72 <br />73 <br />75 <br />76 <br />77 <br />80 <br />82 <br />83 <br />85 <br />86 <br />87 <br />89 <br />93 <br />95 <br />96 <br />97 <br />98 <br />99 <br />100 <br />101 <br />102 <br />National Endangered Species list, including a field meeting with qualified ecologists. A new environmental analysis <br />and wider, longer bridge redesign will delay the project for several years. The BOCC endorsed the resolution April 1. <br /> <br />Paul Guthrie asked for clarification that the committee has asked for changes that will result in more earth moving, <br />construction, disruption of the territory and possible more environmental damage than the original design. <br /> <br />The board asked that Karen keep the board updated. <br /> <br />IV. Presentation of Recommendations of the Efland/Mebane Small Area Plan 60 <br /> <br />Perdita Holtz presented a condensed version of the Efland/Mebane Small Area Plan (SAP) that was developed by a <br />12-citizen task force appointed by the BOCC. The SAP was adopted in June 2006. The presentation gave an <br />overview of the existing land use and transportation infrastructure, the existing land use plan and the SAP’s <br />recommended changes to the land use plan, and recommendations regarding transportation issues and needs. The <br />Efland/Mebane Plan covers approximately 7500 acres from Lebanon Road south to West Ten Road and bounded by <br />the Mebane’s planning jurisdiction boundary on the west and the Eno critical watershed boundary on the east. The <br />Buckhorn Road Economic Development District is included in the study boundary. <br /> <br />The SAP transportation recommendations: <br />1. Road volumes and capacities on Brookhollow, Richmond, and Efland-Cedar Grove Roads should be further 71 <br />studied before significant additional development in that area to facilitate obtaining necessary road <br />improvements needed to accommodate growing traffic volumes. <br />2. The Efland-Cedar Grove/Forrest Avenue/Mt. Willing road corridor should be realigned with provision of a railroad 74 <br />underpass for the extension of Efland-Cedar Grove Road. Traffic circles should be used at the realigned road <br />intersection to effectively move peak hour traffic through this area. The at-grade railroad crossing on Mt. Willing <br />should be closed. <br />3. A connection from eastbound US Highway 70 to the Interstate Connector should be identified and constructed. 78 <br />4. A park and ride lot should be located in the planning area at a location near the Interstate that is walkable from/to 79 <br />the Efland village core. <br />5. Bicycle lanes should be provided along all major roadways (Brookhollow Road, Efland-Cedar Grove Road, 81 <br />Richmond Road, Frazier Road, Buckhorn Road, Lebanon Road, Forrest Avenue, Mt. Willing Road, West Ten <br />Road, Bowman Road and Ben Wilson Road). <br />6. Sidewalks should be requires in new developments and a sidewalk plan should be completed to retrofit 84 <br />sidewalks in developed areas. Construction of a sidewalk along Highway 70 from Tinnen Road to Lloyd Dairy <br />Road should be a priority. A sidewalk or trail easement should be secured when the sewer right-of-way is <br />acquired. <br />7. The ability to have commuter rail station in the future should be preserved within the vicinity of the Efland village 88 <br />core near Mt. Willing Road or Efland-Cedar Grove Road Extension. <br />8. The County should work with Triangle Transit to provide bus service in the area. 90 <br />9. Mace Road should be extended to connect to Lebanon Road. 91 <br />10. An Interstate pedestrian overpass should be planned in the future to connect areas north of Interstate I-40/I-85 92 <br />with Gravelly Hill Middle School and West Ten Soccer Park. <br />11. A Buckhorn Road Access Management Plan should be explored. 94 <br /> <br />Sam Lasris: Is there a Buckhorn Road Access Management Plan and when was this started? The SMA <br />recommends that there be an access management plan to try to minimize the number of driveways along Buckhorn <br />Road for better flow of traffic and access management plans can do several different things. The access <br />management plan development has not been approved as a project even though some preliminary work has been <br />done at staff level. Studies, including public involvement, would still need to be done. The proposed Buckhorn <br />Village development plans indicate some improvements to manage access for that development. <br /> <br /> Page 7 of 6