Agenda - 08-21-1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

DRAFT 5 -16 -90 PH Minutes 2 page JAY ZARAGOZA understands that the right -of -way for St. Mary's Road i 150 feet which means four lanes and this would be an alternate bypass t get from 70 to north Durham. Mr. Norwood referred to the staff recommendation of deleting the outer loop and the roads that will ultimately face the greatest consequence from that is Elizabeth Brady Road and 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 woul 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 so 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 developments should be require to pay their fair share of these improvements that are needed to support growth in accordance with the County's Land Use Plan. One concern is that the way the ordinance is written, it appears that a developer could potentially be required to make substantially off site improvements of their particular development parcel and that these improvements might benefits adjacent property owners and could also benefit existing residents as well. There is an equity issue that needs to be addressed. The ordinance doesn't clearly define how the improvements area is goin to be established. It appears that it is somewhat open ended as to ho 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 to establish a threshold for development that would b