HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 11-01-2018 5-a - Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan Update 1
ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: November 1, 2018
Action Agenda
Item No. 5-a
SUBJECT: Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan Update
DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
1. Planning Document Amendment Nishith Trivedi, Transportation Planner, (919) 245-
Outline Form — Efland-Buckhorn- 2582
Mebane Access Management Plan Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor,
2. Frequently Asked Questions & (919) 245-2579
Public Comments Craig Benedict, Planning Director, (919) 245-2585
3. Presentation
UNDER SEPARATE COVER
4. Draft Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane
Access Management Plan
ONLYAVAILABLE ELECTRONICALLY
AT.-
http://www.orangecountVnc.goWDocum
entCenter/View/5314/Revised-E-B-M-
AMP?bidld=
PURPOSE: To conduct a public hearing, review, and make a determination on the Efland-
Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan (E-B-M AMP).
BACKGROUND: On April 3, 2018 the BOCC authorized the Planning Department to update
the adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP through the attached Amendment Outline Form (Attachment 1).
This update has been conducted through a comprehensive public involvement process which
includes community input and recommendations from the Planning Board and Orange Unified
Transportation Board (OUTBoard).
The updated E-B-M AMP can be found online at:
http://www.orangecountync.gov/DocumentCenter/View/5314/Revised-E-B-M-AMP?bidld=
The E-B-M AMP is:
• A combination of the original adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP, 2017 Transportation Study, County
Planning, City of Mebane, and public comments.
• A long-range transportation vision for the area illustrating roadway alignment and corridor
width necessary to serve future land uses and address traffic impact as development occurs.
2
• A plan that assists the County in promoting economic development through its development
review process by encouraging developers to dedicate right-of-way necessary for future
roads.
The E-B-M AMP is not:
• A proposal for, nor does it seek authorization for, funding right-of-way acquisition.
o However, an AMP would be a necessary prerequisite to guide the investment to improve
access, where necessary.
• A collection of future road design and construction projects, nor does it include a schedule.
• A guarantee that future development will occur or that roads will be built.
Summary and key highlights from the E-B-M AMP (Attachment 4)
Chapter 1 - Introduction — federal, state, and local regulations authorizing such plans including
the process used in updating this plan.
0 2030 Orange County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives.
o Traffic trend details in addition to the 2017 Transportation Study results.
Chapter 2 — Access Management Planning — Introduction of 2017 Transportation Study and
recommendations for the planning area. This should be a focus area for review.
o Includes Volkert, Inc., County staff and the recently adopted Mebane 2040
Comprehensive Transportation Plan (June 2018).
Chapter 3 — Enforcement (aka Implementation) — lists the various resources, roles and
responsibilities of state and local officials as well as property owners.
Chapter 4 — Appendix — 2011 E-B-M AMP, 2017 Transportation Study and remarks collected
throughout the planning process.
o Contains survey results and specific comments provided by the public.
Community Meeting - August 28, 2018
Planning staff conducted a community meeting at Gravely Hill Middle School and an estimated
100 people attended. Following are highlights from the public discussion:
• Can you tell us about the infrastructure north of 1-85 and Buckhorn Road mainly for several
residents there that are not tied to any lines but may be able to?
o There is an agreement in place for that area's connection to Mebane's water and sewer.
Coordination with the City of Mebane is needed with regard to its annexation policies.
• When will all these roads occur?
o As development occurs. There is no set year when the network will be realized. Even
since the 2011 E-B-M AMP, only one road, the one to Morinaga, has actually been
constructed.
■ The AMP with its background and study enabled NCDOT's investment of $750,000.
• What about US-70? What are the findings along that road and are there any
recommendations for it?
o Staff will be studying this corridor in more detail to determine what is most needed. It has
been identified by NCDOT and the Durham-Chapel Hill-Carrboro Metropolitan (DCHC
MPO) as a Strategic Freight Corridor. There are several intersections identified by staff
that may require improvements to address the increasing traffic especially around Efland-
Cedar Grove Road, 1-85 connector, and Buckhorn Road.
• What are you planning around the Preston Loop (off West Ten Rd.) area?
o Nothing in the subdivision. There will be a 100-ft buffer between the residential area and
the surrounding large parcels should any future development occur. We also want to
make sure a road network through that development will be sufficient to address the
increased traffic brought on by any new development.
3
o The entire network, once realized, could direct traffic directly to Buckhorn Road instead of
West Ten.
A summary of key planning areas and responses to public concerns are provided below.
• West of West Ten Road and east of Mebane city limits.
• Plan updated to avoid multiple stream crossings
• Intersection locations updated and requiring additional study
• Railroad crossings in Efland — Efland-Cedar Grove Road to Mt. Willing Road.
• Plan not changed; carry forward from original adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP.
• Key crossing identified by staff requiring additional study.
• NCDOT requests Orange County conduct feasibility study through MPO.
• Turner Street Extension through Center Street residential area.
• Plan not changed; carry forward from original adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP.
• Property zoned Local Commercial; UDO Section 3.4.10 requires property "have
direct access to a street classified either as an arterial or collector".
• Provide access to land locked parcels west of residential neighborhood.
• US-70 and Presto Loop Subdivision
• Plan not changed; carry forward from original adopted 2011 E-B-M AMP.
• No recommendations on US-70 or through Preston Loop Subdivision.
For detail responses to all public comments see Appendix C of the E-B-M AMP.
Planning Board Review - September 5, 2018
Planning Board began reviewing the Draft E-B-M AMP. Following are key highlights from its
initial review:
• What is planned for the area, where will development occur, and will County take property
for roads?
• The AMP is similar to the Future Land Use Map; it expresses a vision, has no financial
component, and is achieved over an indefinite time period.
• The plan gives the County legal standing to request right-of-way dedication during the
development review process. If development does not occur, neither do new roads.
• Who contracted the study (2017 Transportation Study)?
o The County funded the study and contracted it out to Volkert, Inc.
• Does it include alternative transportation such as cyclists and pedestrians?
o Yes, the 2017 Transportation Study recommended 3 of NCDOT's standard street cross
sections. Each includes either a 5-foot sidewalk or wide paved shoulder or both.
OUTBoard Review - September 19, 2018
The OUTBoard received the Draft E-B-M AMP and will provide its recommendations on October
17, 2018. Following are key highlights from its initial review.
• What about multimodal travel?
o The recommended NCDOT approved standard street cross sections include either a
sidewalk or wide paved shoulders. Some include both.
• Bicycle safety needs to be included in the scope of the project.
o The street cross sections address Bicycle and Pedestrian safety by including 5-foot
sidewalks and/or wide paved shoulders. The plan does not include specific road
design/engineering but does accommodate sufficient right of way in several cases for
future bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
4
Public Notice of Planning Board and OUTBoard meetings
On September 20, 2018, approximately 1,000 notices were mailed to property owners in and
within 1,000 feet of the planning area informing them of the October Planning Board and
OUTBoard meetings.
Planning Director's Recommendation: The Planning Director recommends approval of the
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan.
Planning Board Recommendation - October 3, 2018
Planning Board recommended BOCC approve the E-B-M AMP with Planning Director's
recommended revisions and the following additions:
• Provide more clarity on what the plan is and is not.
o Information added to Draft E-B-M AMP
• Provide more information on how the plan meets Economic Development Objective 2.2 and
2.3 (Page 5 of Draft E-B-M AMP).
• Include a street cross section with a bicyclist and cite NCDOT guidelines
• Information added to Draft E-B-M AMP
Department of Environment, Agriculture, Parks and Recreation (DEAPR) - October 10, 2018
The environmental consultants identified some tributaries to Haw Creek as having endangered
species; however, the NC Natural Heritage Program does not have records of endangered
species in these tributaries or in the entire study area.
DEAPR will need to consult with Planning Department to determine if endangered species were
found in the Haw Creek tributaries. If so, work with Planning and the NC Natural Heritage
Program to list these species within their database and determine the best protection strategies.
OUTBoard Recommendation - October 17, 2018
The OUTBoard members who were present — in the absence of a quorum - provided the
following comments:
• Include roundabouts as potential intersection improvements for both 2017 Transportation
Study and staff recommended intersections.
• Limit lane widths in the planning area to 11 feet and provide more shoulder.
• Incorporate recent advancements in Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies
at intersections.
• Incorporate public transit into the plan.
• BOCC proceed with its decision provided all comments are addressed.
Public Notice of BOCC Public Hearing
On October 19, 2018, approximately 1,000 notices were mailed to property owners in and within
1,000 feet of the planning area informing them of the BOCC Public Hearing.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no immediate financial impact associated with this item. The
2017 Transportation Study was funded through the FY 17-18 budget at a cost of $35,000.
SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goals are applicable
to this item:
• GOAL: CREATE A SAFE COMMUNITY
The reduction of risks from vehicle/traffic accidents, childhood and senior injuries, gang
activity, substance abuse and domestic violence.
5
• GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY
The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary
for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their
dependents.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board:
1. Conduct the public hearing and accept public comments on the E-B-M AMP;
2. Close the public hearing; and
3. Adopt the E-B-M AMP.
Attachment 1 6
PLANNING DOCUMENT
AMENDMENT OUTLINE FORM
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan (E-B-M AMP) Update
A. AMENDMENT TYPE
Map Amendments
❑ Future Land Use Map
From:
To:
❑ Zoning Map
From:
To:
❑ Other:
Text Amendments
❑ Comprehensive Plan Text:
Section(s):
Other Amendments
® Type: E-B-M AMP Update
B. RATIONALE
1. Purpose/Mission
In order to better promote economic development opportunities and help preserve
planned sewer and road capacities for all land uses within the E-B-M AMP planning
area, the Planning Director is suggesting consideration of updates to the current
Access Management Plan.
2. Analysis
Proposed Changes
Update to the E-B-M AMP. This update will utilize a 2017 Transportation Report for
the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Study Area to renew and replace the original 2011
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Economic Development District Access Management Plan.
In a few cases, it will also incorporate other road and intersection improvements
recommended by planning staff. The final E-B-M AMP Update is scheduled for a
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) public hearing on November 1, 2018.
Background
The original Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan was adopted
November 15, 2011 and it implemented a recommendation of the Efland-Mebane
Small Area Plan (2006). It also served as a tool for implementing aspects of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan (2008).
1
7
The original plan consisted of multiple access management strategies and was
completed with limited on-site analysis. However, this plan was instrumental in
gaining North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) acceptance and
participation in roadwork improvements necessary to serve the Morinaga America
Foods Inc., which opened in 2016. Developments like this along with increased
residential growth in Hillsborough and commercial expansion in Mebane, especially
growth's impact on traffic, demonstrates the plan's importance.
A thorough existing conditions, environmental, and traffic analysis was conducted
through an engineering-based transportation study by Volkert Inc., based in Raleigh,
NC. This report reinforces the original Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access
Management Plan with a comprehensive investigation of the area's development
potential, traffic impact and recommended improvements.
The original Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane Access Management Plan should be updated
by incorporating the latest transportation study recommendations.
3. New Statutes and Rules
N/A
C. PROCESS
1. TIMEFRAME/MILESTONES/DEADLINES
a. BOCC Authorization to Proceed
April 3, 2018
b. Planning Board Review:
September 5, 2018 — Introduction and review
October 3, 2018 - Recommendation
c. Public Hearing
November 1, 2018 (and possible BOCC decision
d. BOCC Updates/Checkpoints
October 3, 2018 (BOCC received September 5 Planning Board agenda materials)
e. Other:
2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM
Mission/Scope: Planning staff held a Community Meeting on August 28, 2018 at
Gravely Hill Middle School. Notices for the Community Meeting were mailed out to
747 property owners in and around the planning area. Notices were also mailed out to
1009 property owners in and around the planning area informing them of the October
Planning Board and OUTBoard meetings. Notices were mailed out again for the
November 1, BOCC Public Hearing. A website was also created keeping the public
2
8
informed of the planning process and providing them a copy of the draft plan.
a. Advisory Boards:
Orange Unified Transportation Board
(OUTBoard)
September 19, 2018 Review/Comment
October 17, 2018 Recommendation
b. Local Government Review:
City of Mebane attended the August 28, 2018 Community Meeting to answer
questions and provide comments. They also provided comments on the draft plan
Their comments are included in Appendix C of the plan.
c. Notice Requirements
d. Outreach:
❑ General Public: Community meeting, August 28, 2018, Gravely Hill Middle
School, 4:30 — 6:30 pm, approximately 100 interested
,persons attended.
❑ Small Area Plan Workgroup:
❑ Other:
D. AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS
Staff is proposing the update be approved as a whole so that the County can better
promote this area to economic development prospects and help preserve planned
sewer and road capacities for all uses within the designated planning area.
3
9
APPENDIX C Attachment 2 10/23/2018 3:17 PM
Frequently Asked Questions and Public Comments
# Description Source Response
City of Mebane shares Orange County's goal of developing the Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane study area
for economic development.The following is offered for Orange County's considerations:
*Due to environmental and cultural constraints presented in the 2017 Transportation Study,the
east-west roads between Ben Wilson and Roch Quarry be relocated further north to avoid multiple
(5)stream crossings over Haw Creek. Mebane Road network west of West Ten Road has been updated to avoid environmentally and culturally sensitive areas.Orange County staff
to better coordinate the two models.
•A north-south road crossing Haw Creek be removed in favor of a single east-west crossing. is working with Mebane staff
•New intersection on West Ten Road near Rock Quarry Road,perhaps reducing the number of
intersections along West Ten Road.
*Improve data coordination between PART'S Transportation Demand Model(TDM)and Triangle J
1 Council of Government's Triangle Regional Model(TRM)
What is the railroad doing at Efland-Cedar Grove Road,will there be an overpass?Uncertainty of
railroad crossings in Efland may scare away future property buyers.Future road network attempting
to connect Efland-Cedar Grove Road to Turner Street would be better served with a roundabout NCDOT has requested Orange County conduct a Feasibility Study through the MPO and determine the best solutions necessary to
rather than T-intersections. address increasing vehicle and freight traffic along the railroad corridor in Efland.
What about Efland Village/Mt.Willing/US-70/1-85 Connector/Efland Cedar Grove Road,the entire
2 area needs to be coordinated in an effort to make it viable and useful
Common concerns expressed by all property owners:
*Will you take,condemn,purchase,etc.my property for these roads? This is clarified in the presentation-and narrative-by describing what the plan is and is not better throughout the planning process.
*When will County build these roads?If not County,who will? IKEA pulled out of Cary after getting its approval.No news is found concerning where they will locate.As an economic development
*Will existing roads be removed? area,anything from small shops to medical clinics,from schools to shopping malls,from big box stores to warehouses may locate
3 *What and when will development occur?Will IKEA come here? here.
What are you planning around the Preston Loop area?
4 What about US-70,any recommendations for that corridor? Nothing is planned for either area.There are buffer requirements between commercial and residential development.
Can you tell us about the sewer and water infrastructure north of 1-85 and Buckhorn Road mainly for Public
5 several residents there that are not tied to any lines even though they should be? Comments There is an agreement in place for that area's connection to Mebane's water and sewer.
The western portion of the planning area,to Buckhorn road,is seen as how far the city will grow.However,the city cannot annex the
6 When will Mebane expand into this area with all its growth? area on its own.Developers and property owners must petition to annex into the city due to changes in state law.
The 2017 Transportation Study used the POD analysis to determine how much traffic would be generated(Table 1 p.13).These
values"were added to the future 2025 AADTs of the existing roadway network based on the proposed access points."(p.22).The
7 What is the traffic in this area going to be like in the future and how was it determined? results are presented in Figure 10 p.24 of the 2017 Transportation Study.
Please develop this part of Orange County(Buckhorn Road),nothing changes.Orange County is very
8 slow or no development at all. We are conducting this planning exercise in an effort to address future development anticipated in the area.
Traffic will continue to increase throughout the planning area as development continues to occur,especially along those roads
providing direct access to the 1-40/1-85 interchange as Mt.Willing does.Mt.Willing road is minor collector road(NCDOT)and is used
by commuters and trucks traveling north and south from Efland-Cedar Grove Road.It provides more immediate access than US-70
Center Street Neighborhood concerns: connector.
•Opposes Turner Street Extension connecting it to Efland-Cedar Grove Road and new service road. This is part of the planned Turner Street which calls for a 50'right of way and extends it Ben Johnston Road.It is the current right of
•Does not want to see more traffic along Mt.Willing Road,too long to get out of neighborhood. way still in existence passed on from the original owner.We are studying how to address the growing traffic in the area;especially if
9 1*Deviate traffic to other properties like those along the 70 connector so neighborhood is safe. Ithe large property to the east is fully developed.
1of1
10/19/2018
Outline
ORANGE COUNTY - Background
NORTH CAROLINA o What is an Access Management Plan?
o The Plan &The Transportation Study
Efland-Buckhorn-Mebane - Updating the Plan
Access Management Plan o Process&Analysis
o Public Involvement
November 1, 2018
• Next Step
•Implementation
•Action
- oRAr.IG�CO-NJTY
Background - What is AMP Background - This Plan
A proposed long range master plan of possible new
roads&connections to existing roads and helps A long range vision for the area
maintain the transportation network as area Dedication of ' of - through -
develops over time. Is development application
Ensure future development addresses
transportation through approval process
Minimize cong n& Funded new roads or improvements
Is e of Right
Not Construction of future roads
Efficient traffic • develops
&access to properties
Background - How the plan works Background
Property owner 2004-
develops their :submits application Expansion of
property or sells to County for Public Water and
their property to development 7981- Sewer to Hand- 2011
Comprehensive BMeb
Mebane E--M
plan AMP
1991- 2006- 2017-
It does NOT fund Does NOT take, Does NO7 say Does NOT say me Band- Volkert
when future when or how EFlantl Mebane transportation
road projects nor condemn or buy Area small study
acquisition of right private land for development will new roads will study Area
of way. future roads. occur be built Plan
2008 Comprehensive Plan
Future Land Use Map
• Economic Development
• Non-Residential
1
10/19/2018
Background - Future Land Use Map Background - 2011 E-B-M AMP
�+ `"" i • Highlighted key nodes&
+' L, corridors
a �-L
vi
AetivNy Nod =—••�•--• `s_
Multiple access--
�ee..mem.1 r...wen
qTr,,,,,,,,,T—a management strategies 9__—� .� —
2008 Comprehensive Plan
E°^°�^' .k. •"T* ■� 2 possible street cross W.
Economic Development p
Non-Residential sections
Background - 2011 E-B-M AMP Background - 2017 Transportation Study
September 7,2011 � O w
•�roro«wl,,.,craw.ra o.w�u...
••• u = Planning Board
P1 L O T E N V I R O N ME N T A L I N C
September 21,2011 -
....re.....e�r�,..a _ Orange Unified
R Transportation Board
November 14,2011
Public Information Meeting
Existing conditions analysis
_ ■ November 15,2011 Cultural and environmental issues
BOCC Adoptions Land use and traffic impacts
Corridor and intersection feasibilities d A
Background - 2017 Transportation Study Background - 2017 Transportation Study
30 rows of data for 4.25 square miles of potential development w
n � r
_ .. .. .. -
40 _
..
.. a.
_ - ._ -- •_.-.nom_ 4E
wa.oeis.wao...+u.s
_ I
-- - T, 24 different NCDOT street cross sections evaluated
2
10/19/2018
Background - 2017 Transportation Study Updating the Plan
) -
- Studied possible
--
improvements
;" ti 4t
i
J
'y'e
N E .'j<72(94)
..b�l 1I1
�7,
Updating the Plan - Process Updating the Plan - Process
Public Input
� o
2011E-B-M AMP 2017 T,.-p—tion St.dy
City of Mebane,Planning
Department,DEAPR,etc.
Updating the Plan -Analyzed Network Updating the Plan - Cross Section
i G-KW4E
t 4 I i i. a• s e' � � q y a• MiK
P
-4 - 8J'MM WG RGiWAY
4-
NC DOT-"Typical"Highway Cross Section-2D
„�.`•� l 2 Lane undivided with paved shoulder and sidewalk
All streets west of Buckhorn Road
V A-
3
10/19/2018
Updating the Plan - Cross Section Updating the Plan - Cross Section
II 4
P.e.
80'MIN.1✓9CASrOF WAY
NCDOT—"Typical"Highway Cross Section—2A NCDOT—"Typical"Highway Cross Section—3A
2 lane undivided with paved shoulder 2 Lane with two way left turn lane and paved shoulder
All streets east of Buckhorn Road
Updating the Plan - Cross Section Updating the Plan - Improvements
South bound right turn lane
_ North bound right turn lane
- Ben Wilson Road at New Road A West bound right and left turn lane
West Ten Road at New Road A Right and left turn lanes in all directions
.,�•. g ,rrlsww„�,,. Q Q aS ^w Right and left turn lanes in all directions
Mt.Willing Road at New Road H Right and left turn lanes in all directions
w West bound left turn lane
- East bound right turn lane
• NCDOT—"Typical"Highway Cross Section—4F I Northbound right and left turn lane
• 4 Lane Divided with Curb and Gutter,wide outside lanes and
sidewalks
Staff Recommended along Arterials in coordination with Mebane
2045 CTP
Updating the Plan - Public Participation Updating the Plan - Common Theme
What the plan is and is not.
- _— ��� _. - °•_- Will existing roads be removed?
Will government take property for the roads?
When will the development occur or the future roads?
What about Multimodal, bike, ped,transit, etc.?
--.� No four way stops, roundabouts!
Existing roads will not be removed.
Website All comments included in plan No,government is not taking or buying land.
Mailed notices to property • This is a Vision, Ian has no horizon ear.
owners in and around planning p y
area Cross sections takes multimodal into consideration
• Community Meeting
• PB and OUTBoard meetings
• BOCC Public Hearing
4
10/19/2018
Next Step Next Steps - Public Process &Actions
Planning Board
Public Notice&Website Review Recommendation
(September) (October)
Website Review Recommendation
(September) (October)
Board of County Commissioners
Public Notice&Website Public Hearing Consideration
(November) (November/December)
Next Step - Implementation Planning Director Recommendation
Orange County,Nc Based on Public Comments
(V) an
Code of Technical Ordinances Section Site Plan
Compliance with County adopted r
Unified Development Ordinance access management,transportation
!!a iuoO) and/or connectivity plans and denote the
location of future roadway(s)and access
AapW AP.a620" easements,(A• SECTION 6.10.A(1) Roadway Design/Improvement
(a)Whether improvements are required or not,adequate right-of-way must be dedicated to
accommodate the projected right-of-way Ae East-West access requirements as identified in adopted ts environmental resources thoroughfare plans. duces stream crossings
sections and S curve moved
o cemetery removed es and improves future uc ctions along West Ten Road
ccess connects to existing
Quarry Road
Next Step - Recommended Additions Next Step - Planning Board Action
Executive summary Planning Board recommended BOCC approve the E-B-M AMP with Planning
• Maintain the overall safety for all users of the transportation system; Directors recommended revisions and the following additions:
• Provide for efficient traffic flow and pedestrian and bicycle safety;and
Page 14 El Provide more clarity on what the plan is and is not.
Install a traffic light at high frequency crash intersections to ensure safety for all users and assist Information added to E-B-M AMP.
traffic flow.
Support NCDOT's County Complete Street Policy,which was being updated at the time this Plan ❑ Provide more information on how the plan meets:
was prepared,to address multi-modal travel and protect pedestrian and bicycle circulation o Objective ED-2.2: Encourage mixed use projects that support
around residential subdivisions and commercial areas. walkable communities.
Page 20
4.a.Align major intersections and minor entrances with positive offset(s)to increase safety for all o Objective ED-2.3:Promote public transportation, alternative modes
users. of transportation, and encourage carpooling and park-and-ride
6.Where feasible along arterials,provide vehicular and pedestrian and bicycle connections participation.
between adjoining properties through the recordation of access easement(s)with maintenance
provisions,and construct connection(s)to the boundary with adjoining undeveloped parcel(s). o Information added to E-B-M AMP.
7.Provide frontage roads with non-residential development/redevelopment to increase safety for
all users on arterials and collector roads,and promote non-residential development for economic
benefit.
5
10/19/2018
Next Step - OUTBoard Action Requested Action
The OUTBoard members who were present—in the absence of The Manager recommends the Board:
a quorum-provided the following comments: Conduct the public hearing and accept comment on the
•Include roundabouts as potential intersection improvements E-B-M AMP.
for both 2017 Transportation Study and staff recommended Close the public hearing;and
intersections.
• Approve the E-B-M AMP
•Limit lane widths in the planning area to 11'and provide more
shoulder.
•Incorporate recent advancements in Intelligent Transportation
System(ITS)technologies at intersections.
•Incorporate public transit into the plan.
•BOCC proceed with its decision provided all comments are
addressed.
6