Browse
Search
OCPB agenda 020415
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Planning Board
>
Agendas
>
2015
>
OCPB agenda 020415
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/7/2018 3:49:38 PM
Creation date
3/7/2018 3:47:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/4/2015
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
OCPB minutes 020415
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Planning Board\Minutes\2015
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
This information was distributed at the April 7, 2014 Public Information Meeting and was the basis of discussions Orange County Planning staff <br />had with a group of residents from August 2014 – January 2015. <br />Efland Interstate Overlay District <br />Easy <br />Ref. <br />No. <br />Section Number <br />in UDO <br />Revisions <br />Proposed Standard Explanation / Rationale <br />6. 6.6.3 (A)(3) In order to manage access on public streets, a site <br />shall be permitted no more than one entrance/exit <br />point unless justified by site configuration, trip <br />generation, and traffic conditions, including the <br />need for separate service and visitor/employee <br />vehicular access, and/or one-way traffic movement. <br />A limit on the number of access points on a roadway helps to <br />maintain traffic flow and capacity on roadways. Capacity is <br />affected when there are many turn movements because traffic <br />must slow down to achieve the turn movements. <br /> <br />Additionally, current DOT practice for driveway permits will <br />likely limit all but the largest projects to one access point. <br />Lastly, this is also a requirement in the UDO for properties in <br />the Economic Development Districts because it is good <br />planning practice. <br />7. 6.6.3 (A)(4) Intra-site accessibility shall be provided. Vehicles <br />shall not be required to enter the public street in <br />order to move from one area to another on the <br />same site. <br />This standard is proposed in order to ensure projects do not <br />use the public roadway as the only access to move from one <br />area of the site to another area. This is good site planning <br />practice because it helps to maintain traffic flow on public <br />roadways. <br /> <br />Additionally, this is also a requirement in the UDO for <br />properties in the Economic Development Districts because it is <br />good planning practice. <br />8. 6.6.3 (A)(5) On all corner lots, no vehicular openings shall be <br />located closer than 60 feet from the point of <br />intersection of the street right-of-way lines. <br />This proposed standard helps to maintain traffic safety and <br />flow near intersections. Additionally, current DOT practice for <br />securing driveway permits also requires this distance, for the <br />stated reasons. <br />9. 6.6.3 (A)(6) Entrances/exits shall not exceed 36 feet in width <br />measured at the property line; however, in <br />instances where parking lots serve tractor/trailer <br />traffic, the driveway entrance/exit may be <br />increased to 40 feet in width <br />This proposed standard ensures that driveway points are <br />delineated which avoids situations of the entire street frontage <br />being used to pull into and out of a property, which can result <br />in safety hazards. It helps to improve traffic flow and safety on <br />the roadway. Additionally, current DOT practice for securing <br />driveway permits also requires these widths, for the stated <br />reasons. <br />Page 3 of 20 <br /> <br />25
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.