Agenda - 03-04-2004-9a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

6 .DRAFT 1 If the County Commissioners and the Planning Board make any recommendation, and 2 could see that the deviations were reasonable, we could recommend for the site plan with a 3 couple of conditions that we felt would be an addition for safety purposes. 4 5 We're staying with the same ones that were on the previous plan. 6 7 The access that DOT is saying needs to be eliminated, we're staying with that. We agree 8 with the DOT, and it's their road, so we didn't have much a choice on that. 9 10 Also, for the northern driveway, Staff is recommending that it be converted to a right-in- 1 l right-out at this time, whereas, DOT's recommendation was to do it at some later date 12 when the cross-section for Old NC 86 was improved. They're calling for that to be a 100- 13 foot right of way, 16- and 14-foot travel lanes with sidewalks, and a 25-foot median, which 14 takes you. to a 100-foot cross-section. And they're saying, at that time, when that happens, 15 and where they're thinking roughly 2010, maybe, then that would become aright-in-right- 16 out. So, we're actually saying maybe it might be best to get used. to that now. That's one of 17 the Staff conditions. 18 _ 19 There's also [referring to map], for interconnectivity along the. front there, with the 20 undeveloped -with the house to the south should that property develop -- a request to 21 allow access between these two tracts, and, that, potentially, if that next tract develops, you 22 could have Millstone line up with this side of the road, which would allow properties up here 23 to come out at a potentially lighted intersection for safety purposes. In no event, would we 24 recommend the southern driveway as they propose. _. . 25._ _. _ _ _ _ _ 26 We have a traffic~study that was updated - not a lot of updating was done to it. They, 27 believe, have a presentation for you on the traffic patterns there. And then there was a 28 one-page update that shows the amount of traffic--how much drive-thru traffic -that they 29 have at certain times. 30 -':` ~3~ _ ~ The site plan itse{f that has been looked at ---they~are :proposing some _u.ndergrQUnd storage:. " -32. " Qf their stormwater. As you all know now there is an over ground storage area next to_` ~ ; 33 Oakdale, that has a fence around it, a chain link fence with brown tarp, plastic or something 34 around it. That would stay in place to handle the existing drainage on the existing site. 35 36 For the new addition, they're proposing an underground drainage storage tank that would 37 discharge at a rate---i'm not an engineer---that would not provide any storm water 38 problems. That would be located roughly underneath of, [Mr. Davis refers to map], 39 underneath of the parking there, next to teller station. And they can probably give you a few 40 more details on that. 41 42 They had looked into doing underground storage a few years back on this other one 43 [existing one] and nothing ever came to that. But there were a couple of folks that did 44 inquire about the potential of doing that. !t would have required that some of those trees be 45 removed up in the front portion to get in there right, because you would have to use this 46 area. You would have to build it [the new one} at another location. You couldn't tear this 47 one up until you got the other one in place. So, you would end up~with some trees gone. 48 So they dropped that. I don't know if How's the opportunity to do that, but you can check 49 with their engineer on that. I don't know that they're even interested in doing that anymore.