|
Robert Davis;:.. Right. We would have encouraged traffic that is already in .there to have; different
<br />options to go out, but no# someone to cut through Mil stone and weave their way through.:. You
<br />could still take that road: across, :but it would have to quickly move up to the property line to get
<br />.around over to service. That whole portion of property back there is owned, I think, by one:
<br />individual, all the way down to Cornwallis Hills. They would need access to come through from
<br />MiNstone to tie into that.. But, it was basically a grade issue. We originally started out with all thee:
<br />connectivity: in the back, but with the queuing up from the folks going through the ATM,. they were
<br />backing up into your iwo-way traffic. It did not function like we would have liked to have seen it.
<br />You were having people sitting there queued up to go into the ATM and into the drive-throughs
<br />backed up into thetwo-way traffic lane in the back, so they proposed something upfront, which has
<br />its own drawbacks because you` have people leaving, such as not paying attention jsticking their
<br />money in their wallets) pulling out, and you have traffic coming across the front.:.
<br />Commissioner Jacobs::. I would hope hat the Planning ,Board and the S#aff and the
<br />Commissioners would consider adding astub-out there, so that if we decided that was more optimal'
<br />in the future, we had not precluded that possibility.
<br />Now, one thing thaf was mentioned, is there or is there not aright-of-way dedicated on Oakdale at'
<br />the intersection with; Old 86?
<br />Robert Davis: One of the DOT comments was to dedicate a site distance triangle up a# the
<br />corner there, which tells me that that was done but this did not pick up the 86 right-of-way,.: but
<br />they"ve dedicated their portion there on weir ide, at least:.
<br />Commissioner.Jacobs: So, we're sure then. that you could put a right turn, or, at least a #aper in
<br />there a#this time.
<br />Robert Davis: You may have to go curb and gutter for drainage purposes but the cross-section is
<br />wide enough --it's generally 12-foot {antis. Twelve, twelve, twelve, and then; #urn lane -right; lane -
<br />'12 -that's 3fi feet. And you have a 55 foot right-of-way..
<br />Commissioner Jacobs:. Because one of the things #hat having: a right turn there would do would
<br />be to address some of the concerns that were raised about making a left turn at that light.-
<br />Because, since there's no option but o sit there until you get #o the light to make a right turn, it
<br />queues the traffic way more than it has to. I spoke at the '[997"Public Hearing, and Orange
<br />County's Transportation Planner at that time said it wasn't necessary. I think it's an example of
<br />how,. when we don't look ahead, the problems are created. Were there a right turn lane .there now,
<br />people wouldn't drive through the swell' o make it anyway. I would suggest that we talk with DOT
<br />about whether there will be - we had mentioned this. to them -whether there would be money
<br />available under NC Moving Ahead, if in fact we do have adequate right-of-way, to have that paved.:,
<br />without asking the applicant to pave it
<br />I`think that ought to be,part of this process,. that we have that discussion, about- how we're going to
<br />require or acquire a righttum' lane there, because I think that will-address some of those questions
<br />about if we're moving the traffic so tha#:'it goes out to the traffic light.: And I use that intersection a>
<br />lot.. The way I look at that, the existing driveway on Old 86 lines up with the existing driveway on
<br />the Citgo. Am I correct? There's no control of access there, so you. have people making opposite
<br />left turns :going across traffic, one of the most highly traveled roads in this part of the County. And.
<br />just because NCDQT does things in a stupid way doesn't mean that we have to perpetuate it. If
<br />that's their recommendation, fine. But drive up Churton Street. There: are all sorts of examples of
<br />-this. The taperforthe left:-turn lane starts almost at that same point. S'o you have people who think:
<br />they're moving left, to get in the left turn lane, people turning left, people turning left,. and people
<br />coming this way.. As Barry said, as it ge#s more highly trafficked, it just gets worse. To say that it's
<br />programmed without funding, is to say that we wish it will. be true but there's no guarantee that
<br />
|