6/28/1988 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

right-of-way. The sidwalk is required by the ordinance, and staff feels it is needed for pedestrian traffic through and around the project. Staff, therefore, is recommending denial of the appeal. Chairman Scurlock asked if there was a contribution of right-of-way on AIA or whether we paid for it, and Mr. Boling advised that there is 10 feet there and we have not paid for it. It is not on the capital improvements program, and it would not qualify for traffic impact fees. They can either reserve it or dedicate it; however, they show dedication on their site plan that was approved. Attorney Vitunac advised that there is no way for the Board to grant the appeal of the applicant at this time because there is no mechanism in our code for such an appeal. This is an absolute requirement. This matter is on the Agenda today so that if the Board feels our code is wrong, they can direct staff to rewrite the code to allow variances from the sidwalk requirement under certain conditions. Chairman Scurlock pointed out that in some neighborhoods, there are gaps between sidewalks of 15-20 ft., especially along AIA, where older developme.nts abut newer developments which have had to built sidewalks. He did not believe that was the Board's intention when they approved the sidewalk requirements. Robert Keating, Director of Planning & Development, advised that the Board soon will be reviewing a draft of a plan regarding policy on the installation of bike paths and sidewalks, and some of the issues that have been identified in this matter will be addressed in that plan. The plan will show proposed locations and priority of the bike paths and sidewalks and will set up an implementation system, with recommendations as to whether the funding should come out of County funds or result from development's action. BOOK 13 PA E 110