Minutes - 19900516 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

62 150 feet which means four lanes and this would be an alternate bypass to get from 70 to north Durham. Mr. Norwood referred to the staff recommendation for deleting the outer loop. The roads that would ultimately face the greatest consequence from that recommendation is Elizabeth Brady Road, its extension, and Lawrence Road. He asked that this be considered when making a decision on this outer loop.. Motion was made by Commissioner Hartwell, seconded by Commissioner Marshall to refer this item to the Planning Board for a recommendation no sooner than August 6, 1990. VOTE: UNANIMOUS 2. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY a. Article 13 Orange County Zoning Ordinance b. Section IV Orange County Subdivision Regulations These proposed amendments to the Orange County Zoning Ordinance and the Orange County Subdivision Regulations include the requirements for a Traffic Impact Study. The proposed amendments would require that a Traffic Impact Study be performed for zoning changes, special use permits, and site plans that would generate traffic in excess of 800 trips per day. Amendments proposed to the TIS requirements deal primarily with clarification. However, there are some changes of a substantive nature, most notably: 1) The inclusion of 100 trips during the AM or PM peak-hour of highway traffic as a threshold for requiring a TIS; 2) using level of service D as the measure of deficiency in urban or developed areas; and 3) adding Table 13. 1, Typical Thresholds for Required Preparation of a Traffic Impact Study, to the Zoning ordinance. CITIZEN COMMENTS PAT DAVIS stated that the EDC has some concerns about the existing ordinance and the proposed amendments. They agree with the concept that the impacts of land development activities upon all transportation systems be considered. They agree that developers should be required to pay their fair share of the improvements that are needed to support growth in accordance with the County's Land Use Plan. One concern is that the ordinance is written in such a way that it appears that a developer could potentially be required to make substantial off-site improvements of their particular development parcel. The concern is that these improvements might benefit adjacent property owners and could also benefit existing residents as well which creates an equity issue that needs to be addressed. The ordinance does not clearly define how the improvement area will be determined. It appears that it is somewhat open ended as to how far away from the project site a developer must evaluate existing and future traffic patterns. The limits of these areas need to be established. The Ordinance appears to utilize some high vehicle trip generation rates establishing a threshold for development and thus require a traffic impact study. Some of these levels used for the various land uses are considerably lower than the