OCPB agenda 110718 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Hunter Spitzer asked that a corridor be identified where staff would intend the potential traffic to go for the non-153 motorized users and access to the corridor from Mebane and from Efland. 154 155 Nishith Trivedi said that they will include the proposed changes suggested by Hunter Spitzer in the revisions to the 156 updates. 157 158 Paul Guthrie explained that he does not find the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan helpful in 159 explaining what triggers the possible outcomes of the plan. He doesn’t believe that the plan details enough, what kind 160 of changes could happen to the area just that change may happen and that there needs to be more clarification 161 about what the plan is. 162 163 Nishith Trivedi stated that staff will work on providing more clarification during future presentations of the plan. 164 165 Lydia Wegman suggested adding an introduction that provides in greater detail, what the plan is and how it interacts 166 with future planning and development activities. 167 168 Julie Laws had questions about the possibility of a road being able to go through property on Center St. 169 170 Nishith Trivedi explained that the property in question is zoned local commercial and that if a future owner of the 171 property wants to make changes and go through the development review process, the UDO and Efland-Buckhorn-172 Mebane Access Management Plan would come into place. 173 174 Lydia Wegman explained she would like to go over what changes the Planning Board has suggested for the motion 175 on the item. 176 177 Nishith Trivedi restated that a suggestion by Hunter Spitzer is to reference NCDOT standards and guidebook to show 178 how this plan is going to meet economic development objectives 2.2 and 2.3. 179 180 Lydia Wegman also restated Paul Guthrie’s suggestion to add more clarity and background to the introduction in the 181 plan. 182 183 Paul Guthrie further explained that there is a total misunderstanding among some of the public of what this plan is 184 and to avoid having the same meeting over and over again, more background needs to be provided. He thinks long 185 term planning is important, but this plan doesn’t explain what the community will look like in the future. Paul believes 186 a prologue needs to be provided in order to address those concerns. 187 188 Doug Efland asked if a property owner could adjust or abandon their dedicated right-of-way if a different plan was to 189 come into effect. 190 191 Nishith Trivedi explained that the lines on the plan are subject to change and that right-of-ways can be abandoned if 192 determined unnecessary in the future. 193 194 MOTION by Randy Marshall to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access 195 Management Plan be approved with: 196 • the Planning Director’s recommendation of revisions as mentioned earlier 197 • the addition of a prologue as recommended by Paul Guthrie and 198 • Hunter Spitzer’s recommendation to include NCDOT standards and guidebook to show how this plan is 199 going to meet economic development objectives 2.2 and 2.3. 200 Seconded by Adam Beeman 201 VOTE: 8-2 202 Paul Guthrie and Hunter Spitzer voted against. 203 8