Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 10-06-2011 - 2
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AGTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date; October 6, 2011 Action Agenda Item No. o~ SUBJECT: Provision and Maintenance of Sidewalks in the County's Jurisdiction DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. Excerpts from Efland-1Vlebane Smal!-Area Plan Perdita Holtz, Planner III, 245-2578 2. Sidewalk Materials Received From the Craig Benedict, Planning Director, 245-2592 North Carolina Department of Transportation PURPOSE: To receive information about providing sidewalks in certain areas of the County and to direct staff on how to proceed. BACKGROUND: One of the economic development related items Planning staff is working on is the implementation of recommendations contained in the Efland-Mebane Small Area- Plan (EMSAP). The Land Use Map currently designates the Efland "core" area as Commercial- Industrial Node. The EMSAP recommends the area be designated as "Mixed Use" (a category that would need to be created) but also recommends that design requirements/guidelines for the "core area" be developed in conjunction with the change in designation. Additionally, the EMSAP recommends the provision. of sidewalks in the planning area and particularly in the "core area". Attachment 1 contains scanned excerpts from the EMSAP relevant to these statements. The County's 2030 Comprehensive Plan also supports the provision of pedestrian facilities (see sections 1.3.3 and 1.3.7, and Objectives LU-1.1, LU-3.2, LU-3.7, ED-2.3, AE-8, T-1.1, T-2.1, T- 2.6). Issue As much as a county may desire to provide pedestrian facilities in -its jurisdiction, there are challenges in actually being able to do so. In North Carolina, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) does not build nor maintain sidewalks (see materials in Attachment 2 - pages 14 and 15 [bottom of page] in particular). Although the materials in Attachment 2 are geared towards municipal governments, they are also largely applicable to any county government that chooses to provide sidewalks within its jurisdiction. NCDOT will work with the local government to provide sidewalks within road right-of-way if the local government agrees to 2 pay for construction costs (or portions thereof, in certain cases) and assume maintenance and liability for the sidewalk. Orange County (as well as most, if not all, counties in North Carolina) does not maintain local streets within its jurisdiction; public roadways are part of the State Maintained System. In municipalities, streets are generally maintained by a municipal public works staff and the municipality has the staff and equipment to do so. Municipalities receive some funding from the State through the Powell -Bill to perform this task. Any necessary sidewalk maintenance (if sidewalks are provided within the municipality) is achieved by either the public works staff or, more recently, by a Homeowners Association (HOA) or Property Owners Association (POA) if the HOA or POA is a party to the required maintenance agreement between the local government and NCDOT. Existing Development vs. New Development Providing sidewalks in areas that are already devebped is a particular challenge. A local government may require, through its zoning or subdivision regulations, that new development provide a sidewalk (either within the road right-of-way or on private property via an easement). A local govemment may- also require that the property owner(s) maintain the sidewalk, although this becomes more difficult to achieve in the absence of an HOA or POA. The issue of liability needs to be addressed but very few, if any, property owners seem willing to take on liability of a sidewalk for public use, even if located within an easement on their property. The local government would likely have to accept any liability for the sidewalk. In the case of existing development, especially if there is not an existing HOA or POA, construction and maintenance of sidewalks is more difficult. Funding for construction of a sidewalk must come from the local government, with the potential for some cost sharing with NCDOT (see materials in Attachment 2 for potential cost sharing information [pages 10 through 15 -bottom of page - in particular]). The local government may use funds from its General Fund, designated bond funds, Powell Bill Funds (if the local government receives funding from this source), or by a special assessment district of property owners within the benefit area. Additionally, limited grant funding may be available from various sources, depending on the situation_ UNC Chapel Hill. School of Government has a useful publication that is part of its County and Municipal Government in North Carolina series. The article is "Article 40 -Transportation, Street Parking, Public Transportation, and Airports" and it is viewable free of charge (but not printable) at: http://sogpubs.unc.edu/cmg/cmg40.pdf. Pages 7 through 10 of the publication are particularly helpful in understanding sidewalk issues. North Carolina Counties Planning staff queried a Planning ListServ for information about sidewalks outside of municipal areas in North Carolina. The responses show that a handful of North Carolina counties have one or two sidewalks within their jurisdiction that are not part of a residential subdivision. In many cases, the sidewalks were constructed to provide access to a school and were paid for using local, NCDOT, and/or grant funds (some. local match was required for almost all of the projects). The sidewalks are maintained by agreement with an adjacent or nearby municipality or a county public works staff (Chatham County). Additionally, some counties have sidewalks in residential subdivisions that were constructed by the developer and are maintained by the HOA. Several years ago Orange County entered into a sidewalk maintenance agreement for a portion of Homestead Road adjacent to the Towns of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. The sidewalk is in the County's jurisdiction at this time but inevitably would be annexed since it is part of adjacent ETJs. The agreement is multi-party including NCDOT which allowed an encroachment agreement in its right-of-way. The Town maintains the sidewalk. Decisions to be Made In order to proceed with the design guidelines -for the Efland core area, staff needs direction from the BOCC on the sidewalk issue. Design guidelines for areas with a pedestrian network are quite different from areas without sidewalks. Additionally, preliminary research shows there could be particular challenges in the Efland area because public (NCDOT) right-of-way is much narrower in some areas than the current standard of 60-feet (or more, depending on roadway type), and in some cases parcels actually extend to the centerlines of streets and the public road is located-within an easement. Questions staff has include: 1. Does the BOCC want to proceed with the County "getting into the sidewalk business" at this time? 2. If so, is staff authorized to begin development of a sidewalk program for certain areas of the County (i.e., the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane corridor to start). Does the BOCC have direction on any of the funding and maintenance issues discussed above, particularly the issue of providing sidewalks in an area that is already partially developed (the Efland core area)? (Note: a sidewalk program is likely to result in amendments to development regulations). Options for providing sidewalks include: a. Orange County or developer (for new construction) pays for and builds the sidewalks and either Orange County contracts with a city for maintenance or a Property Owners Association (setting up a POA would be a requirement for new construction) is responsible for maintaining the sidewalk. County general funds would be used under this option. Note that NCDOT would require a maintenance agreement with the County and NCDOT is willing to enter into third party agreements with the County as a "back-up" signatory for maintenance. b. Orange County creates a special assessment district for sidewalk. Property owners within the district would be required to pay into the special district and a fund would be created for sidewalk construction and maintenance. Orange County would be responsible for maintenance, likely through contracting with another city for maintenance tasks. c. Other options as the BOCC decides. 3. If not, should staff proceed- with the Efland core area design requirements/guidelines? The requirements/guidelines will be more minimal than what the Small Area Plan recommended because of the differences in urban form a sidewalk network brings to an area. 4 FINANCIAL IMPACT: Depending on the option chosen, financial impact for the County ranges from zero if the County decides not to provide or maintain sidewalk to an undetermined amount if the County decides to provide and maintain sidewalks. The cost of designing and constructing sidewalks can vary considerably depending on factors such as grading issues, land acquisition costs, land clearing, utility relocations, etc. A study has not been done specific to Orange County; but staff research found that the Town of Mooresville, NC spent $119 - $200 per linear foot ($629,000 - $1,056,000 per mile) for recent sidewalk projects. This figure includes all necessary costs design & administration, curb & gutter, various retrofitting costs, etc. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Soard: 1. Receive tie information regarding provision of sidewalks; 2. Discuss the issue as needed; and 3. Direct staff on how to proceed. Attachment 1 5 Excerpt of P-elevant Pages - Efland-Mebane Small Area Plan Mrxer~' Else. Land located in areas. served or ~ be served by public water and .sewer ~vhere a-mix of residential, commercial, and light industral uses are appropriate. Residential uses within Mixed Use areas should be have a minimum density of si<c (6) units per acre. The following are recommendations pertaining to land use. The planning area bas.. been divided into general geographic areas £or land use recommendations. Map 26 depicts the location of the geographic areas discussed below. Please note that the boundaries on Map 26 are ,general n- nature for user orientation purposes and are nt~t-intended'to ~e absolute boundaries. Land Use recommendations - general Areas. Map ~~ ~~ .. iv a. .a• SmaEiAreaPlaneoundary SoufheastArea asM"o ~ixw~~~+~w~,az.»e +~ Highway T4 CaRidor NottrzemArea ~,~,,,. ~mG,a~,.a.~~~ ma.~c k u;.u~errm,sas Rural Neighborhood Node SauihwestArea. 6 Cedar Grove Road. CommuniTy scale uses would be appropriate at these intersections. Southeast Portion of Planning Area The southeast portion of the planning area contains large trac#s of land currently in agricultural use_ Residents have long viewed the area as a "gateway" into the care of Efland. The character of the gateway is an important factor in theperception of Efland as a rural village. The southeast portion of the planning area also enjoys- easy access to major transportation facilities including Interstate 40/85 and the US 70 Connector. Because of this, development potential for the area is high. There is a desire among residents of the area for managed, orderly growth in conjunction with the desire to preserve the character of the area. Both desires .can be accomplished if development is done in a context sensitive manner. The following recommendations are made regarding the southeast portion of the planning area: 1. 'The southeast portion of the planning area should be considered for "Mixed Use" designation to be developed only when public water_ and sewer systems are available in the area. -~ 2. Guidelines for site and architectural design should be developed and adopted prior to development proposals being accepted for the area. The guidelines should include, at a minimum, policies on the following issues: • Far~ade materials • Architectural details • Impervious surface limits • Landscaping and buffering • Preservation of open space • Access Management • Signage • Site orientation 3. Non-residential uses should be allowed on Southern Drive between Mt. Willing Road and Gaines Chapel Road. 4. The status of the Seven Mile Creek Reservoir should be decided and if a reservoir will not be created along Seven Mile Creek in the future, the Critical Area line should be reevaluated. The Critical Watershed status of the lands adjacent to the southeast portion of the planning azea affects their potential for development. The following recommendations are made if the Critical Watershed line is revised: a} Growth served by public water and sewer should be allowed north of the Tiiterstate in the vicinity of the Mt. Willing Road/Interstate 40-85 interchange. (A revision to the WSMPBA Map would be required to implement this recommendation). b9 7 planning area that not currently in Orange County's Primary Service Area should be designated as Primary Service Area. 4. New residential subdivisions choosing to develop under existing density regulations (1 unit per acre unless density bonuses related to affordable housing are awarded] should be cluster. subdivisions served by public or private water and sewer systems Cluster subdivisions allow for preservation of open space and environmentally sensitive features while permitting a reasonable amount of development on the overall parcel of land. Higher density development can also be achieved through rezoning which would consider development proposals on a case-by-casebasis. Density maybe slightly increased if Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) credits are implemented. Existing Rural Neighborhood Node The current Future Land Use-Map-contains-a Rural Neighborhood Node at the intersection of Lebanon Road and Efland-Cedar Grove Road. Rural Neighborhood Nodes are intended for small-scale commercial uses characteristic of "Mom and Pop" convenience-stores and gas stations. The Rural Neighborhood Node is outside of=Orange County's water and sewer Primary Service Area as per the WSMPBA. Given the pro-ximity of this Node {less than 2 miles) from the core Efland area where services intended to be offered in a rural neighborhood node are available, it is recommended that the Rural Neighborhood Node at this location be removed from the Future Land Use map. C. Transportation Objective: Provision of an efficient, multi-modal transportation system. The vehicular transportation system in the planning area generally functions well, but there are some concerns, especially regarding motorized vehicle flows doting peak traffic hours. However,_ some peak hour congestion is also to be expected in an urban or suburban area. The key is managing the transportation system such that it can function as safely and efficiently as possible. Additional concerns regarding the transportation system include pedestrian and bicyclist safety and the general deficiency in the walkability/bikeability ofthe planning area, connectivity to the Interstate for tractor-trailer traffic, and the idea that the current transportation system encourages single-occupancy vehicle use while discouraging bicycling and walking. Of particular concern in Efland is the volume of traffic occurring on Efland-Cedar Grove Road/Forrest AvenuelMount Willing Road during peak hours as people make their way to and from Interstate- 40/85. The fact that there is an at-grade train crossing on this route creates an even larger concern as trains passing through the area create a backup of 50 to 100 cars during "rush hours." This also creates a safety concern as emergency vehicles cannot navigate this essential route when trains pass through. Additionally, two roughly 90-degree turns are part of this high-volume route. 71 -~ Sidewalks do not exist anywhere in the planning area and it was only very recently that Highway 70 was widened enough to accommodate-bicycles along the route. Broadening transportation alternatives beyond the passenger car is important. "Alternative" transportation modes such as pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit are part of an intermodai transportation system. The following are recommendations pertaining to transportation: ~. Road volumes and capacities on Brookhollow, Richmond, and Efland-Cedar Grove Roads need to be further studied before significant additional development that will utilize these roads is allowed. Improvements to these roads may be necessary to efficiently accommodate growing traffic volumes. 2. The Efland-Cedar GrovelForrest Avertue/Mt. Willing road corridor should be realigned. Avehicular underpass under the railroad should be considered_and the at-grade crossing should be eluninated if an alternative_is-implemented. (See Map 28 for possible alignment). Additionally, an alternative -to a traffic signal should be considered to efficiently manage traffic; specifically, traffic circles should be considered to mare effectively move peak hour traffic thmugh this-area. Route-re-alignment should also endeavor to maintain community connectivity between areas south of the railroad track and the core area of Efland. If an underpass proves not to be feasible, then the county should work with NCDOT for a solution to more effectively route traffic through this area. 3. A connection from Highway 70 east to the Interstate connector should be identified and constructed (i.e., eastbound Highway 70 to southbound connector to Interstate which could reduce traffic volumes on Mt. Willing Road and Forrest Avenue). Mitigation measures to address any identified adverse impacts due to constructing the connection would also need to be implemenrted. 4. A park-n-ride Lot should be located in the planning area. The exact Location should be determined in conjunction with transportation planning professionals and an advisory committee but a location near the Interstate and walkable to the Efland village core should be considered. (See Map 28 for the general location of the Efland. village core). ~. Bicycle lanes- should be provided along all major roadways. Major roadways in the planning area include Brookhollow Road, Efland-Cedar Grove Road, Richmond Road, Frazier Road, Buckhorn Road, Lebanon Road, Forrest Avenue, Mt. Willing Road, West Ten Road, Bowman Road, and Ben Wilson Road. ._.~7 6. Sidewalks are necessary for safe pedestrian travel. Sidewalks should be required in new developments and a sidewalk plan to retrofit developed areas so that sidewalks can serve as connectors between residential, commercial, and civic uses should be completed and implemented along with mechanism for handling Iiability and maintenance of the sidewalks. Constructing a sidewalk along Highway 70 from Tinnen Road to-Lloyd Dairy Road should be a priority. Additionally, sidewalk and/or trail privileges should be 72 9 secured when sewerright-of--way is acquired so that an additional acquisition is not necessary in the future. • 7. A streetscape plan should also be developed in conjunction with the sidewalks program. Trees are needed for shade along sidewalks and landscaping for aesthetic purposes should also be incorporated into the streetscape. 8. The ability to have a commuter train station in the future should be preserved, preferably within the vicinity of the Efland village core near Mt. Willing Road or Efland-Cedar Grove Road Extension. A station could serve the existing Amtrak service or a station could be incorporatedinto the proposed Triangle commuter rail system. 9. The county should work cooperatively with Triangle"Transit Authority (TTA) to provide bus-service in the area. 10. Mace Road-should be planned to connect through to Lebanon Raad. 11. An Interstate pedestrian overpass should be planned in the future to connect areas north of Interstate 44/85 with Gravelly Bill Middle School and West Ten Soccer Park. 12. A Buckhom Road Access Management Plan should be explored. Housing Otijecti Prevision of a mi~c of housing choices-that includes decent, affordable housing for "the wo orce." Housing affordabili a significant issue throughout the nation, including within the Triangle region and Orange Coun Housing prices in Orange County are notably higher than within other areas of the Triangle. ~ orically, Cheeks Township -has enjoyed somewhat lower prices than much of the county, but pric f the homes in the newer subdivisions within the planning area are still higher than many people rking in Orange County can afford to pay. Working towards ensuring the provision of housing ortunities affordable to a broad spectrum of citizens should be a priority for Orange Count .The fallowing are recommendations pertaining to housing issues: Residential development that is consistent with the acter, size, scale, and price range of existing surrounding homes should be encouraged. ce home prices are directly tied to the square footage of the home, Orange County should co 'der offering-incentives such as expedited review or density bonuses for developments offer smaller sized homes. 2. Orange County should consider adopting a policy requiring that a certain per tags of new homes within a subdivision be affordable and under the control of an organi 'on 73 Ef~and Gore Area _~ ~ ~ a Preserve the ability to locate a passenger traip station along the rail corridor ~levelc-p a streetscape plan for US 70 Sidewalks are a priority: "t~- _. 1 ~, ~' 9 i Area most appropriate- far Mixed Use Development QCt 1 • Allow commercial along Southern Dr. -Appropriate design important -Minimi2e number of curb cuts iV pr4nQa County Plnnni~g antl Inepeclbna OapartmeM S31S MiPP Prepared by MIRam Cobrtun March 14, 2008 Protection: NoRh Carolina State Plane (leap Dan,nr. North Arn~bad 16~s3 potential trdfflC CITCIe f ._}^ _----~~ Possr!ble realignment ~ I of Efland-Cedar Grove Rd. .-f under railroad tracks Rossihla connections to US 7D 1185-40 Gonnectar Consider allowing ~ Mixed Use development ~`/ m this area.:. -13evelop design Reevaluate ass ; guidelines critical watershed Legend i~A Small Area Pian Boundary Sidewalk priority ~. Passenger Train Btatian Gammercial t~evelopment p Cohsider Mixed Use Streetcape Mixed Use Development Re-evaluate Critical Watershed Boundary 'h aa~ ® Realignment of Efland-Cedar Grave Rd tJ GO 11 Map 29 Proposed Changes to ,Aidopted F~rture {Land Use Element. of the C)ran ~-atld USe ~~ ~e County Comprehensive Plan} ere~ks roln~sn~~, . x;_ , r...- ((, l; ~ ~.. ... ,~ ~... ^ e. Leg end: -~--~~~~.~... , a 10 year trahslflPR Aetiy~y Nodes ~` 20-Year trat~tloR L 1 Rural Caminuntly Node Rura! ReeldoRtia) ~-~ Rural Ne!&hbarhood Nod Rural Buffer e ~~Anrlcultura! Regk$~al Ruraf lnduebia! Node ®Reaource ProteedonAreas ~ommerclaf Node [_J MunlcipalJuriadldiona Commercialflndustdal Node Publte tRterest Areas ~ Economk 1]evetopmer~ //WaterSupptyWaiersheds N~C1Ct1/CAJOfrrtP~rsrlryJArea Watershed Critical Areas ~®° gSmall Area Plan dS nnne....~..va.....,~_ _ . S ortw~de~u,~cr. s8N hm"a.am~y, sssaa 82 r a e,; ,, _ rflrrr _ .~1iri~iw ~rwws e> rlrrrw' ~ '~~1irs. ~rr>vs. 1~r.. ;'~-; Possible Future Land Use - Efland. Small Area P'tan Planning Area 00 W W N _. _. _ .. ..~m- -,.~ ~._~___..~.~. ~_.__ __. ~ _.. , ._. .::. ~ -:-~: ...~:x ..: _...~..~.. ...u~::.:~ ~ ~SmallAreaPlanBourxiay ; EttantlTransitionAreaResarve(enly-dWSMPBAIsarnended) Putillctnte;asfAr~ias MixedUsa EcormrrdcDeveinpmentArea +~-WalerSuppft+Area w:'w~°"'~„r;4~ Al _.~ Mixetl Use (any it WSMPBA is arrtantletl) ~ -~; Rural Industrial hloda ~' Water SupplyCri4kal Area Orange County Planning and Inapectlons oep~aramnt { ~ GIS Map Propare0 by Mrriam Coleman AprO ?.7c 2f)d6 EpandTransgtionAr~ ~" AgriculturalResEdeMlal FeaourcePmt9otionAr2as projection: No:thCarolinaStaoePlanae(teat) I es. Reserve ~ Rural Residar>bal Municipal Jutt$diction Tawnf.ttnita I>atum• North American 1983 i _, , ,~ M uniaipal. Juriadic'JOri Extra-Territorial Jurlsdiciton (k~f'J) Attachment 2 13 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL CHAPTER TWENTY-EIGHT SIDEWALKS PEDESTRIAN POLICY GUIDELINES SIDEWALK L{.?CATIONS ROADWAY POLICY-ONE SIDEWALKS 28/1 POLICY STATEMENT: "It is the policy of the Department of Transportation to replace existing sidewalks disturbed as a result of a highway improvement. In addition, the Department of Transportation is authorized to construct new sidewalks adjacent to State highway improvement projectsat the-request of the municipality provided the municipality agrees to reimburse the Department of Transportation for the actual -construction cost of the sidewalks. Maintenance of sidewalks will be the responsibility of the municipality."- BACKGROUND: General Update, 3!19/99. Pedestrian Policy Guidelines, dated October 1, 2000. General update, 4/ 16!01 PURPOSE: To provide statewide uniformity in .the construction of sidewallcs on roadway projects. RESPONSIBILITY AND PROCEDURES: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY These guidelines provide an updated procedure for implementing the Pedestrian Policy adopted by the Board of Transportation in August 1993 and the Board of Transportation Resolution September 8,.2000. The resolution reaffirms the Department's commitment to improving conditions for bicycling and walking, and recognizes non-motorized modes of transportation as critical elements of the local, regional, and national transportation system. The resolution encourages North Carolina cities and towns to make bicycling and pedestrian improvements an integral part of their transportation planning and programming. EFF. DATE 12/1176 REV. DATE 4/16/01 14 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 The Pedestrian Policy addresses TIP projects and makes an important distinction between "considering the needs of pedestrians to avoid creating hazards to pedestrian movements" and the concept of "facilitating pedestrian movements for other reasons." HAZARDS A hazard in this context is defined as a situation when pedestrian movements are physically blocked in a manner which forces pedestrians to use another mode . of transportation or walk in an automobile traffic lane (parallel with the automobile -traffic) to pass a barrier. The concept of "not creating a hazard" is intendedrto all~ww municipalities to have the flexibility to add pedestrian facilities as a part of the project, ar in the future after the TIP project is complete. Our current standard cross sections generally do not create barriers for-pedestrian movements. PREVENTING HAZARDS If there is evidence that a TIP project would create a hazard to existing pedestrian- movements; the DOT will take the initiative to not create the hazard. However, if there is not evidence that a TIP project would create a hazard to existing pedestrian movements, the municipality will need to prove there will be pedestrian movements which will be affected within five years by the hazard created by the TIP project. QUALIFYING THE NEED FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Planning studies should evaluate the need for pedestrian facilities based on the degree to which the following criteria are met. L Local Pedestrian Policy 2. Local Government Commitment 3. Continuity and Integration 4. Location 5. Generators 6. Safety 7. Existing or Projected Pedestrian Traffic REQUIREMENTS FOR DOT FUNDING: REPLACING EXISTING SIDEWALKS The DOT will pay 100% of the cost to replace an existing sidewalk which is removed to facilitate the widening of a road. EFF. DATE 12f 1 /76 2 REV. DATE 4/16/01 15 POLICY AND PROCEDURE iVIANUAL TIP INCIDENTAL PROJECTS SIDEWALKS 28/1 DEFINED: Incidental pedestrian projects are defined as- TIP projects where pedestrian facilities are included as part of the roadway project. REQUIREMENTS: The municipality and/or county notifies the Department in writing of its desire fo:~ the Department to incorporate pedestrian facilities into project planning and design: Notification states the_party's commitment to participate in the cost of the facility as well as being responsible for all m-aintenance and liability. Responsibilities are defined by agreement. Execution is required prior to contract let. The municipality is responsible for evaluating the need for the facility (ie: generators, safety, continuity, integration, existing -or projected traffic) and public involvement. Written-notification must .be received by the Project Final-Field Inspection (l~fil) date. Notification should be gent to the Deputy Highway Administrator-Pr-ecanstruction with a copy to the Project Engineer and the Agreements Section of the Program Development Branch. Requests received after the project FFI date will be incorporated into the TIP project, if feasible, and only if the requesting party commits by agreement to pay 100% of the cost of the facility. Due to the technical difficult, of describing justification for pedestrian facilities, the committee chose a cost sharing approach to provide cost containment .for the pedestrian facilities. The DOT may share the incremental cost -of constructing the pedestrian facilities if the "intent of the criteria" are met. Only improvements that have a sidewalk adjacent to it will be included in the total project construction cost. Additionally, the cost of bridges will be funded entirely by the DOT. This total project construction cost does not include the construction cost of any incidental pedestrian facilities. A cost sharing approach is used to demonstrate the Depart:-nent's and the municipaIity's/county's commitrnent to pedestrian transportation (sidewalks, multi-use trails and greenways). The matching share is a sliding scale based on population as follows: EFF. DATE 12/1/76 3 REV. DATE 4!16!01 16 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 MUNICIPAL POPULATION PARTICIPATION DOT LOCAL > 100,000 _ 50% 50% SO,ODO to 100,000 60% 40°l 10,000 to 50,000 70% 30% a,aoo 80% 20°ia Note: The cost of bridges will not be included in the shared cost of the pedestrian installation if tl-ie Department is funding the installation under provision -6 -pedestrian facilities on bridges. FUNDING CAPS Funding caps are no longer applicable. INDEPENDENT PROJECTS DEFINED: The DOT has a separate category of funds for aI'1 independent pedestrian facility projects in North Carolina where installation is unrelated to a TIP roadway project. An independent pedestrian facility project will be administered in accordance with Enhancement Program Guidelines. RIGHT-OF-WAY The Department will review the feasibility of including the facility in our project and will try to accommodate all requests where the Department has acquired appropriate right of way on curb and gutter sections and the facility can be installed in the current project berm width. The standard project section is a 10-ft. (3.0-meter} that accommodates a 5-ft sidewalk. In accordance with AASHTO standards, the Department will construct 5-ft sidewalks with wheelchair ramps. Betterment cost (ie: decorative pavers) will be a Municipal responsibility. If the facility is not contained within the project berm width, the Municipality is responsible for providing the right of way and/or construction easements as well as utility relocations, at no cost to the Department. This provision is applicable to all pedestrian facilities including multi-use trails and greenways. MAINTENANCE Local governments will be responsible for maintaining all pedestrian facilities. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 4 REV. DATE 4/16/0l 17 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/I INTRODaUCTION These guidelines provide a procedure for implementing the Pedestrian Policy adopted by the Board=of Transportation in August 1993 and the. Board of Transportation Resolution September 8, 2000. The Pedestrian Policy addresses TIP projects and makes an important distinction between "considering the needs- of pedestrians to avoid creating hazards to pedestrian movements" and the concept of "facilitating pedestrian- movements for other reasons." Consequently, these guidelines are divided-into three main sections: 1) Considering the needs of pedestrians to avoid creating hazards. 2) Quantifying the need for pedestrian facilities. 3) Requirements for DOT funding. CONSIDERING THE NEEDS OF PEDESTRIANS TO AVOID CREATING HAZARDS Section "d" ofihe Pedestrian Policy states: "In the planning, design and construction of TIP transportation projects, the DOT shall consider. the needs of pedestrians and will not create hazards to pedestrian movements." This means that during each phase of a project, a DOT employee should consider how the project will affect pedestrian movements. If the project will create a hazard to pedestrian movement, the DOT should use engineering judgment and find a way to remove the hazard. A hazard in this context is defined as a situation when pedestrian movements are physically blocked in a manner which forces pedestrians -to use another mode of transportation, or walk in an automobile traffic lane (parallel with the automobile traffic) to pass as a barrier. This does not mean that the DOT should build pedestrian facilities on all TIP projects. However, it does mean that the DOT should consider how projects will affect pedestrians and how projects can be designed to accommodate vehicular demands without creating barriers to pedestrians. Hazards can be divided into two categories, lateral barriers and perpendicular barriers. Lateral barriers prevent pedestrians from traveling parallel to the roadway. Perpendicular barriers prevent pedestrians from crossing a roadway. The concept of "not creating a hazard" is intended to allow municiparties to have the flexibility to add pedestrian facilities as part of the project or in the future after the TIP project is complete. Because bridges are so expensive and because they often have useful lives over fifty years, bridges should be given special consideration when pedestrian travel is anticipated. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 5 REV. DATE 4/16/01 18 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL BRIDGES SIDEWALKS 28/1 Current standard cross sections generally do not create barriers for pedestrian movements. For bridges on streets with shoulder approaches, a minimum shoulder may be sufficient to "not create a haaard for pedestrian movements" over or under the bridge. For bridges on streets with curb and gutter approaches, the Department will fund and construct sidewalks on both sides of the bridge facility if the bridge is -less than 200 feet in length. If the bridge is greater than 200 feet in length, the Department will fund and construct a sidewalk on one side of the bridge structure. The bridge will also be studied to determine the costs and benef is of constructing sidewalks on -both- sides of the structure. If in-the judgement of the Department, sidewalks Qn both sides are justified, then they will be funded and constructed. For dual bridges less than 200 feet in length with a curb and gutter approach, sidewalks will be constructed on the outside of each bridge structure. If the dual bridges are greater than 200 feet in length, then-a sidewalk on the outside of one. bridge will automatically be funded and constructed. The bridges will also be studied to determine the costs and benefits of constructing sidewalks on the outside of both bridges and if the judgements of the Department, -sidewalks an both bridges are justified, then they will be funded and constructed. SHOULDER CROSS SECTIONS Currently, there is no typical cross section for a rural road with a shoulder, and a pedestrian facility which is outside the ditch: However, when a -rural road with a shoulder section has a pedestrian facility outside- of the ditch, the ditch will not be considered a perpendicular barrier. Similarly, as long as there is some space where pedestrians can walk which is not in an automobile travel lane, the ditch will not be considered a lateral barrier either. WIDENING PROJECTS If a TIP project widens a road from 2 lanes to 5 lanes, the new 5-lane road is not considered a perpendicular barrier. Similarly, as long as there is some space where pedestrian can walk which is not in an automobile travel lane, the new 5-lane road is not considered a lateral barrier either. RELOCATING PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENTS 'This policy is not intended to require a pedestrian bridge or tunnel at interchanges where sidewalks -and crosswalks are not practical. In these cases, the DOT may consider relocating the pedestrian movement to avoid creating unsafe situations or making EFF. DATE 12/1/76 6 REV. DATE 4/16/01 19 POLICY AND PROCEDURE l~%IANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/ 1 unpracticed design modifications. Typically, relocated pedestrian movements should be no more than 800 meters (0.5 miles) away from the original path of the pedestrians. The 800 meter distance is a one way distance, not around-trip distance. CONSTRUCTION PROCESS During the construction phase of a project, there may be times when it is not possible to maintain all pedestrian movements through the entire construction- process. When necessary,. there may be temporary- barriers to pedestrian movements in the- work_zone. EXAMPLE Far example,. the "XYZ" Expressway is a new controlled access freeway through an established urban area. A major thoroughfare, with sidewalks which will have a new interchange with the Expressway, connects a neighborhood on the north side of the Expressway with a hospital on the south side of the Expressway. Because the proposed interchange for the major thor-oughfare is aSingle-Point-Diamond design with free flowing -ramps in all four -quadrants, there is na safe way for a pedestrian to cross the Expressway without conflicting with free=flowing traffic. Although there is a nearby railroad bridge over the Expressway, pedestrians are prohibited from that bridge because it was not designed to accommodate both trains and pedestrians. Consequently, residents who live in a neighborhood a few blocks from the hospital will now need to drive to the hospital or walk through afree-flowing traffic lane. In this example-the design engineer- should make every reasonable effort to design this interchange to accommodate the automobile traffic,, and not create a_ barrier for pedestrian movements. If the interchange design requires free-flow ramps as this Single- Point-Diamond desi-gn does, the engineer should determine if it is possible for pedestrians to cross the free-flow traffic lanes. If the peak hour traffic flow has acceptable gaps to allow pedestrians to cross safely, the ramps will not be considered a barrier. However, if traffic volumes or pedestrian volumes are too great, an alternative pedestrian facility should be considered. If accommodating pedestrians at the interchange will compromise safety or .good engineering judgment, the engineer should consider if shifting the pedestrian movement away from the interchange is a feasible alternative. QUANTIFYING THE NEED FOR PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Section "e" of the Pedestrian Policy states: "The Department recognizes there are certain situations in which pedestrian facilities provide significant benefits in the movement of pedestrian traffic... ". If a municipality would like the DOT to consider a project for "significant benefits," the municipality is responsible for collecting any necessary information and submitting a written request prior to the initiation of a planning study. The EFF. DATE 12/1/'6 7 REV. DATE 4/lb/O1 20 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 DOT will review the request and, if necessary, verify the data from the municipality. If pedestrian facilities are not incorporated into a project during the planning phase, and if there are significant factors which change during the time between -the project planning study and the project design phase, municipalities may resubmit a xequest for pedestrian facilities prior to or at the post hearing meefang for the Design Public Hearing or Combined Hearing (whichever is applicable). The costs of sidewalks added to a-project after the. post healing meeting f-or the Design Public Hearing or Combined Hearing will be the responsibility of the municipality. The Manager of the Programming and TIP-Branch may allow DOT participation and sidewalk construction cost after the post hearing meeting if there is sufficient justification. Planning studies should. evaluate the need for pedestrian facilities based on the degree which allow the following seven criteria to be met. Municipalities should address each of these criteria when submitting requests for pedestrian facilities. Subsequently, the DOT will make the final determination for-pedestrian facility-eligibility. 1. Local Pedestrian ~'olicy. There is evidence that local-policies on urban development are encouraging urban densities .and residential developments to occur in a manner to facilitate pedestrian travel by reducing walking distances, and requiring sidewalk construction in development ordinances. • Is a pedestrian plan included in local thoroughfare plan? • Do subdivision ordinances require pedestrian facility construction? • Do local zoning ordinances facilitate pedestrian travel? (Far example, do the zaning ordinances encourage mixed-use developments which are accessible to pedestrians or do the zoning ordinances encourage highway strip development which is not accessible to pedestrians?) 2. Local Government or Local Sponsor Commitment. There is a local governmentlsponsor plan and commitment to provide an integrated system of pedestrian facilities which will connect with pedestrian facilities- provided by the project. • Does the local Capital Improvement Program include local funds for providing pedestrian facilities which will connect with pedestrian facilities provided by the NC TIP project? • How many pedestrian facilities currently connect with the pedestrian facilities provided by the project? • How many subdivisions have provided pedestrian facilities which are or will be connected with pedestrian facilities provided by the project? • Has a responsible local government agency agreed in writing to maintain the EFF. DATE 12/I/76 8 REV. DATE 4/16/01 21 POLICY AND PRQCEDURE MANUAL pedestrian facility? SIDEWALKS 28/1 3. Continuity and Integration. The project provides a connection to an existing or a proposed pedestrian network and will provide a critical link in the network. • Is the project acritical -link in an existing network? {For example, will this project provide a~nissing link in an existing network where there are pedestrian facilities extending beyond the length of this project?) • Is the project a critical link in a proposed network? {Far example, will this project provide any link in a proposed network where there will be pedestrian facilities extending beyond the length of this project?) 4. Location. The project is located within a Census defined urban area or growth area where development is anticipated in the immediate future; a majority of the properties within walking distance of the project- are developed; or projected to be developed within 5 years at urban type residential densities. This five year period will begin at -the completion of the appr-opriate environmental document. • Is the project located in a Census defined urban area? • Is the project located in a growth area (Urbanized Area Boundary) where development is anticipated in the immediate future, but is not in a Census defined urban area? • Are a majority of the properties within walking distance of the project developed, or projected to r3e developed within 5 years at urban type residential densities {a minimum of 1 dwelling unit per acre)? 5. Gener-ators. The project serves as a primary access from one or more of the following to another: • -day care, elementary or secondary school • -college or university • -community facility (such as a library or park) • -public transportation • -commercial, office, industry, or business centers • -residential areas • -Will any of these land-uses within two kilometers {1.2 miles) of the project use this project as a primary access? 6. Safety. The project provides demonstrable safety benefits for pedestrians. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 9 REV. DATE 4/16/01 22 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 2811 • Will the pedestrian facility separate pedestriansfrom automobile traffic with a posted speed greater than 80 kilometers per hour (50 miles per hour)? • Will the pedestrian facility be used by children (0-14), elderly (65+), -handicapped, or low-income people? • Will the pedestrian facility educe potential pedestrian=vehicle conflicts? • W_ilI the pedestrian facility reduce potential identified safety needs of the area? 7. Existing or Projected Traffac. Continued, susta.ine~i pedestrian travel can-be shown by any of the following: - Evidence of existirg usage such as well wom paths. - Projected usage based on previous experience with similar facilities. - Minimum of 1 SO pedestrians per 24 hour period along a corridor planned for the project. REQUIRE1ViENTS FOR DOT FUNDING REPLACING EXISTING SIDEWALKS Section "b" of the Pedestrian P-olicy states: "When a highway construction project having to do with the widening of an existing street requires that an existing sidewalk be torn up to make room jor the widening, it is the policy of the Department of Transportation to replace the sidewalk.'r This statement says the DOT will pay 100% of the cost to replace an existing sidewalk which is removed to make room for a widening project. There is no monetary cap for this category of funding pedestrian facilities. PREVENTIlYG HAZARDS Section "d" of the Pedestrian Policy states: "In the planning, design, and construction of TIP transportation projects, the .1~OT shall consider the needs of pedestrians and will not create hazards to pedestrian movements." If there is evidence that a TIP project would create a hazard to- existing pedestrian movements, the DOT will take the initiative to not create the hazard. However, if there is evidence that a TIP project would create a hazard to existing pedestrian movements, the municipality will need to prove there will be pedestrian movements which will be affected within five years by the hazard created by the TIP project. The five year period will begin at the completion of the appropriate environmental document (Categorical Exclusion, Finding of No Significant Impact, or Environmental Impact Statement). EFF. DATE 12/ 1 /76 10 REV. DATE 4/16/01 23 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 CERTAIN SITUATIONS Section "e" of the Pedestrian Policy states: "The Depart~rcerrt recognizes there are certain situations in which pedestrian facilities provide sign cant benefits in the movement of pedestrian traj~c. The Department of Transportation may participate in the provision of these facilities on a full or shared-cost basis." This statement says the DOT may participate in funding-incidental projects, and independent projects as described below. INCIDENTAL PROJECTS Incidental pedestrian projects are de-fined as TIP projects where pedestrian facilities are included as part of the project. The DOT may share the incremental cost of constructing the pedestrian facilities if the "intent of the criteria" are met, -and the request for DOT participation is made prior to or at the post hearing meeting for the Design Public Hearing. Only improvements that have a sidewalk adjacent to it will be included in the total prof-ec± construction cost: Additionally, the cost of bridges will not be included in the total project construction cost since the provision of pedestrian facilities on badges will be funded entirely by the-DOT. This total project-construction cost does not include the construction cost of any incidental pedestrian facilities. The matching share is a sliding scale based on population as follows: MUNICIPAL POPULATION PARTICIPATION DOT LOCAL > Ioo,oao so°i° so°r° 50,000 to 100,000 60% 40% 10,000 to 50,000 70% 30% < 10,000 80% 20% The local government share of the pedestrian facility construction funding may not be Federal or State money for the purposed of these guidelines. In addition, the right-of-way municipalities provided for pedestrian projects may not be counted toward the required local contribution. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 11 REV. DATE 4/16/01 24 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 EXAMPLE A IO mile project proposes to widen an existing two Iane road to a five Lane curb and gutter roadway. Four miles of the project is within the city limits and there are no existing sidewalks. The city requests that sidewalk be included an one side on 2 miles of the projECt that falls within the city boundaries. The DOT concurs that the sidewalk. is warranted--and it added to the project. The city population is 75,000. To determine the contribution by the DOT and by the city, the "total project constru€tiion cost", for purposes of determining participation, must be calculated. Costs are included only if the construction occurs within municipal boundaries and a r-equested sidewalk is adjacent to the roadway. Additionally, the cost cif bridges is excluded from the cost. Therefore, the "total project-construction cost" will be the cost of improvements for 2-miles of the project. DOT estimates that it will cost $5 million to construct the 2 miles of improvements, not including the_ cost of-the sidewalks or bridges. It is estimated that the sidewalk will cost $170,000 to construct. DOT's share would be 60% of $170,000 or $102,000. The city's share would be $68,000. INDEPENDENT PROJECTS Independent pedestrian projects are defined as projects where pedestrian facilities are the entire project. The DOT will have a separate category of money for all independent pedestrian facility projects in North Carolina. The independent pedestrian facility funds will be administered similar to the fiicycle Program. iVlunicipalities will prioritize their request under the enhancements section of the local request list, and the DOT will fund as many projects as funding will allow. GENERAL INFORMATION The attached flow chart illustrates the decision process for a project engineer. In addition, the funding caps, right-of--way and maintenance requirements described below must also be met. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 12 REV. DATE 4/16/01 25 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/1 Process For Determining Eligible TIP Projects For Incidental Pedestrian Facilities TIP Project Will existing pedestrian Facil be removed? I Na I Policy (dl < I _..~ ._, - - - - ----- - - 1 "To the extent practicable, the DOT wilFnot create barrier to pedeskean movement." Yes Is Thera a pedestrian W movement that Yes ui meets the inientaF _ Polley (dJ NO the guidelinesi• "Prol'ect is not eligible For hazard funding" t^----.._____^... No t Policry (b} _ "Doi will re ace pedestrian aciliy °~ 1_.-- I l project create an :ceptable barrier to pedeslriotF moxementsi< Is Policy (cl NO - right-of-way YBS Policy (c) available? "As a minimum, DOT should make a level walking are behind curb" Does pedestrian Policy {c} NO Facility meet inter of guidelines? Yxs Will municipality No agree to Yes poll e Policy (c} cost sharing? cy ( } "DOT is not responsible "DOT will wnstruct for building pedestrian pedestrian facility." facilities." EFF. DATE 12/1/76 13 REV. DATE 4/16/01 26 POLICY AND P1tOGEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 2$II FUNDING GAPS Funding caps are no.Ianger applicable. RIGI-FT-OF-'~V'AY In general, municipalities are responsible for providing any right of-way needed to construct pedestrian facilities. The DOT will allow pedestrian facilities on DOT -right of- ay only if the pedestrian facility vain not. compromise the safety of vehicles or pedestrians. Far preventing hazards, the DOT may buy the necessary right-of--way, For .incidental. and independent projects the-DOT shall not pay extra right-of--way cost for pedestrian facilities. Since the DOT's typical curb and gutter cross-section generally has. a 3.Q meter (10 foot} berm,. a 1.5 meter (5 foot) pedestrian facility may. fit within this standard right-of-way. Applicably AASHTO standards for right-of--way and design must. be met. The. DOT -will not narrow automobile travel lanes to accommodate incidental pedestrian facilities. For exatnpie, if a project specifies five 3.b meter' (12 foot) lanes on a section of road, the DOT will not reduce the width of the travel lanes to 3.Q meters (10 feet} to create room for pedestrian facilities. In addition, if right-of-way is restricted,, and there is insufficient room for pedestrian facilities and a utilifiy stripy the utility strip will take precedence, Applicable Federal -and State regulations must also be rnet. For example, if right-t~f- way for a particular project. is restricted by historic property, federal regulat%ons on historic preservation may prohibit. the DOT from Lisirig additional right-off way for pedestrian facilities. MAiNTEN~INCE Local governments are responsible far maintaining ail pedestrian facilities. The Municipal Agreement will formally specify that the DOT is not -responsible for maintaining pedestrian facilities:. EFF. ?ATE 1211./7b 14 REV. DATE 4J16/Ol 27 POLICY AND PROCEDURE MANUAL SIDEWALKS 28/ 1 APPENDIX POLICY ADOPTED BY THE NC BOARD-OF TRA3'~TSPORTATION A406 CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES a) It is the policy of the Board of Transportation that highway funds-are for the.purpose of constructing and improving streets and highways for the movement of people and foods. Generally, within municipalities, the constriction of a sidewalk on a state highway system street is considered_a municipal responsibirty. b} When a highway construction project having to do with the widening of an existing street requires that anexisting- sidewalk be torn up -to Ynake room for the widening, it is-- the policy of the Department of Transportation to replace the sidewalk. c} For construction and widening projects where sidewalks do not already exist, it is the policy of the Department of Transportation that it will not participate in the construction of sidewalks except as in subsections (d} and (e}. If adequate right of way is available, the Department of Transportation will grade out a level walking area. back of the curb in the utility strip. The municipality may, at its own discretion, construct sidewalks. If the municipality desires sidewalks as a part of the construction project, they will be constructed and the city will reimburse the Department of Transportation for the cost of the sidewalks by appropriate municipal agr-Bement. d) In the planning, design, and-construction of T1P transportation projects, the Department of Transportation shall consider the-needs of pedestrians and will not create hazards to pedestrian movements. e) The Department recognizes there are certain situations in which pedestrian facilities provide significant benefits in the movement of pedestrian traff c. The Department of Transportation may participate in the provision of these facilities on a full or shared cost basis. EFF. DATE 12/1/76 15 REV. DATE 4/16/01 19A NCAC 02D .0404 MAINTENANCE WiTH1N MUNICIPALTTIES (a) Definitions and Abbreviations. The following is a listing of definitions to provide greater understanding of this Rule: (1) Municipality means an incorporated city or town within the State of North Carolina. (2) The State Highway System includes those streets and highways as described in G.S. 136-44.1. (3) State Municipal System street or Highway is any street or highway on the state highway system within a municipality. Note: See G.S. 136-66.I(l) {4) Nan-State System Municipa} Street or Highway {Municipal System) is any street or highway accepted by the municipality which is not a part of the state highway system. [Note: See G.S. 136-66.1(2)] (5) A Rural Highway or Street is highway or street on the state highway system outside the limits of a municipality. (6) Board means the Board of Transportation. (7) Maintenance means routine care or upkeep to keep roads, streets or highways in the -existing condition and with the existing traffic carrying capacity. (8) Pavements are the paved-portion of streets including pavea shoulders and on street parking areas but does not include sidewalks and driveways. {9) Storm Drainage or Storm Sewers means a system of underground pipes, culverts, conduits-or tunnels including drop inlets and catch basins, designed to convey water from surface areas to-eventual_disposal-into outfall streams. (IO) Open Drainage means drainage systems utilizing open side ditches, tail, lateral and outfall ditches to convey surface water to outfall streams. (11) -Cross Pipe Lines are pipe lines under the roadway surface, designed to convey water from one side of a street or highway to the other. (12) Shoulder, is earthen,-soil, clay, gravel or turf section of pavement support extending from outer pavement edge to the bottom of side ditch, including shoulder sections which are paved: (l3) Sidewalk means walkway, paved-or unpaved, parallel to streets or highways. (b) Maintenance Responsibility. { 1 } The streets and highways comprising a part of the state highway system, at all times, are the responsibility of the department of Transportation and this overall responsibility- is not shifted to the municipality by reason of their assumption, under reimbursable contract, -of maintenance, construction, or improvement on behalf of the Department of Transportafion as outlined in G.S. 136- 66.1. ' (2) The cost of municipal maintenance is paid for out of funds allocated by the Board for this purpose. (3) The Department of Transportation within its discretion may enter into contracts with municipalities for the purpose of .maintenance, repair, construction, reconstructing, widening or improving state system steeets within municipalities. (4) The maintenance of state system streets may be performed by the municipality by a continuing agreement with the Deparment of Transportation on a reimbursement basis. Such an agreement may be executed covering all or part of maintenance operations on all or a part of the state system streets within the limits of the municipality involved. (c) Policies and responsibilities. { l) Patching and resurfacing of pavements is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. (Z) Repairs for pavement cuts for utility repair and other purposes by or under the wntrol of the municipality shall be- the responsibility of the municipality. The Division of Highways district engineer, or his designated representative, shall be notified in writing 48 hours in advance of any pavement cut and approval must be obtained prior to making the cut. Pavement cuts due to emergencies shall proceed as necessary with the Division of Highways district engineer being notified as soon as possible after the emergency is discovered and the pavement cut is made or anticipated. Note: See G.S. I36-93. {3} If the maintenance ~of any state system street is perforrned by- the municipality, then it shall be the responsibility of the municipality, subject to the approval and direction of the Department of Transportation, to install and maintain proper signs, barricades and other safety devices of like nature and to furnish flagmen when necessary; all in accordance with the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). (4) An encroachment agreement is required for the initial installation of any utility on the state highway system right of way by the municipality as well as by utility companies and individuals. (5) Drainage: (A) The maintenance of roadway ditches including median drainage, where applicable, and cross drainage pipes, outfails and structures is the responsibility of Department of Transportation within the highway right of way or within a drainage easement area. (B) The maintenance of storm drainage and storm sewer systems draining state system streets is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation, within the highway right of way or within a drainage easement area. Where systems draining state system streets are enlarged and expanded to accommodate drainage from municipal streets, the initial cost and the maintenance cost shall be home jointly by agreement. (C) Attachments to drainage structures -- Written approval of the Department of Transportation is required prior to any utility or other attachment being made to any bridge or structure on the state highway system. Approval is also necessary before turning any utility under or through a bridge ar drainage structure on the State Highway System. '`~ (6) Sidewalks. T'he maintenance of sidewalks is a municipal responsibility. 29 (7) Roadside Maintenance:- (zA) Freeways, interstate and other contrdled access highways. A11 planting, plant maintenance, mowing, erosion control, and litter pickup are the responsibility of the Department of Transportation, except as otherwise provided herein. (B) Non-controlled Access Surface Streets (i) Without sidewalk or pedestrian space (paved or unpaved). Erosion control, machine mowing, litter pickup and the maintenance of trees over the entire width of right of way are the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. Maintenance of shrubs or other planting is also the responsibility of the Department of Transportation subject to theprovision providing for specific planting projects as outlined in Part{7}(C)ofthis Paragraph. (ii) With-sidewalk or pedestrian space {paved or unpaved). Since the area outside of the curbs or within and beyond the sidewalk or pedestrian space is used almost exclusively for pedestrians, the maintenance of such areas is the responsibility of the municipality. (C) Specific planting projects on state highway system right of ~vay. Should the municipality desire more extensive planting than is provided-by the Department of Transportation, a plan for such-proposed planting shall be submitted to the Department of Transportation and shah be considered a construction or improver-sent item. An individual permit and- agreement on Department of Transportation and municipal responsibilities for planting andplant maintenance will be required in each instance, covering not only financial responsibility but also the furnishing of personnel, equipment and materials for performing plant maintenance and associated hand mowing operations. (D) Proposed planting by civic organizations_ Civic organizations desiring to provide-more extensive planting of trees and shrubs in the municipality on Department of Transportation right of way than is provided by the Department of Transportation shall handle negotiations through the municipality as outlined in Part (7)(C} of this Paragraph. {S) Snow and Ice Control: (A) The responsibility for clearing state system streets is the responsibility of the Department of'lYansportation; however, muniClpalities may, with the concurrence of the division engineer, execute an agreement with the Department of Transportation providing for reimbursement by the Department of Transportation to-the municipality for the assumption of this_responsibility. (B) Tfie removal of snow from sidewalk areas is not the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. {9) Guard Rai[. The maintenance, repair and replacement of guard rail on Highway System streets and-highways is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. (1Q} Street Lighting: (A) Freeways -- Inteestate System and Other Controlled Access Highways. Where in the judgment of the Department of Transportation street lighting is necessary, the maintenance and the electric current necessary for the operation of the lighting system shall be the responsibility of the Department of Transportation. (B) CFther System Streets. The maintenance and the electric current for lighting systems on other than as refereed to in Part (1 OxA) of this Paragraph is the responsibility of the municipality, unless otherwise provided for by specific agreement. (C) The installation of street lighting systems by the municipality on state system streets within the right of way may be allowed by the Department of Transportation by encroachment agreement only. (il) Blocking of Traffic Lanes. In-order to provide for the safe movement of traffic, it is a joint responsibility between the Department of Transportation and the municipality to insure that traffic lanes be kept open and if blocked at any time for any reason that such blockage is properly signed or flagged. History Note: Authority G.S 136-66.1; 136-93; 143E-346,• 143B-3500; 143B-3S0(~; Eff. July 1, 1978; Amended E,}J`.' 1Yovember 1, 1993. 30 [MU-7] EXCEPTIt"~NS TO 1V(AINTENAN+GE. RESPQNSIBILITIES ON STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM STREETS iN MUNICIPALITIES -Rev. 8/18103 There are a number of maintenance activities that. take place within the right of ~vay Qf a State .Highway System street inside the. corporate. limits. of a municipality that are.. not considered appropriate or necessary for the movement of traffic upon the State Highway System streets. Therefore, these maintenance activities:and financial responsibilities are borne by the appropriate municipality and the NCDOT has no liability for their activities. Some of thexrrore important are outlined as follows A. Street Lighting. The normal lighting of municipal streets is in the interest .of puhliG safety.. It is not considered-a NCI30T responsibility. Therefore, the -cost of installation of streetlights, the maintenance of streetlights and the payment of electrical hilts is the responsibility of the municipality.. in certain instances, such as an Interstate or a con~•olled access facility interchange, the NCDOT may determine that additional lighting is necessary for traffic safety. In this instance, the NCDOT may undertake to install such additional Lighting as necessary and work out agreements for the. maintenance and payment. of electrical bills with the. municipality yr appropriate utility. ~. B. Sidewalks The construction and. maintenance and. all-financial lia-bit_.ity for accidents on sidewalks are the complete responsibility of the municipality. Sirnilariy, that section of grotard between the curb and gutter and the sidewalk and. from the sidewalk to the edge. of the right of way is considered a municipal responsibility from a maintenance standpoint. C. Driveway Entrances ' Control of construction of driveway entrances on curb anal gutter streets and similarly on shoulder sections is considered. a municipal responsibility. The determination of the number and location of these driveway entrances must be in accordance with manuals on driveway entrances as set forth by the NCDOT or such standards as developed by the municipality, whichever is more- restrictive. All commercial driveway entrances and shopping centers must have the approval of the NCDOT. Il. Municipal Signing There- are a large number of signs used by the municipality to control parking on State Highway System streets. These are parking limit-signs such. as "2 hour parking"' and. other signs that do not have as -their purpose the signing for the movement of traffic on the street- or highway, These types of signing are the complete responsibility of the nlunlcipality. The municipality also, in same eases,. may Have an interest in erecting Special-destination signs or special. "All America City" signs. All such signing for these purposes is set forth in the policies under Traffic Engineering, Chapter 12 of this manual. E. Marking There are certain types ofparking space and other markings. thaf are not necessary for the movement of traffic. These are the responsibility of the municipality and. agreement on these matters is normally worked out between the municipality and the NCDOT Division Engineer. F. Small Pavement Cuts: 31 There is a large number- of pavement cuts on State Highway System sixeets within the municipalities. These are undertaken by the .rnunicipal[ty and many types of utility companies. In. order to make these pavement cuts; these age. ncies must obtain apermit- from the appropriate NCDQT District Engineer. The municipality- or utility takes full responsibility for the erection of appropriate signing in conformance with 'the Manual on Unif~Ym 7'raf~e Control ~evices and such other detours and safety dev~es as needed. Accidents caused 6y these activities ar+e the responsibility of the municipality or appropriate utility agency.. G. Major Pavement Cuts There are instances where the NCDQT receives requests for utility cuts completely across. the pavement or for extensive distances along the entire State Il'igl:way System street. zt is the general policy of the NCDOT that these extensive pavement cats are riot normaflly permuted. The municipality or utility is required to tunnel urnler the State highway system street or place. the utility outside of the pavement area if it is for an extended distance such as a new water- line, storm sewer line, etc, H.:l~lanting on State Flighway System Right of t~U_ay Should' the municipality desire more extensive planting than is provided 6y the T~1CI~Q'I'; a plan far such proposed planting should be submitted to the. Department and would be considered a construction or improvement item.. An individual permit and agreement on NCDOT and municipal responsibility f4~ planting and plant maintenance will be required in each instance, covering not o~aly financial responsibility but the furnishing of personnel also, equipment and materials for performing. plant maintenance, and. associated hand mowing operations. I. Proposed Planting by Civic Organizations Civic organizations desiring to provide more extensive planting of trees and shrubs on NCDOT rights of way shall handle negotiations through the; municipality as outlined previously in this section. I:'or the guidance of municipalities =and civic organizations in submitting their planting plans to the NCDQT, a document has been prepared. entitles[ G~rclelne.~ for Plantzrrg Wichita Hi~;l~w~ry Righx of Ways (Glick can link bel©ru,}. Compliance with these standards or acceptance shall be determined by the NC©OT on an individual basis. htt~.l;~k~~~v.ciol.dot..state.nc.uslt~r•ecoi~structlhi~la~'a,}-r'dstl stye/~-aluelmanual5' J. Blocking of Traffic Lanes In order to provide for the safe movement of traffre, it is considered. a joint responsibility between the NCI?DT and. the municipality to ensure that. traffic lanes be kept -open, and if blocked at any time,, such. blockage is properly signed- or flagged.. With its police power, the municipality has a high degree of responsibility far these activities. K. Rubberized Railroad Crossings In most instances, NCDOT funds. were utilized to install those crossings. It is the municipality's responsibiI.ty to repair or replace those cross"rags. If the municipality fails to properly maintain the crossing, the NGDOT will remove the crossing acid replace it with asphalt. G.S. 136-IS{~~ 19A NC A.C. ~i211.0~106 (Construction and i1>laintenance of S`-dewalks)