Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
396 <br /> Kimley>>>Horn Jagt <br /> 6. Add language that lighting for the project shall comply with applicable <br /> NC Department of Transportation requirements for roadway lighting. <br /> Response: Cutoff light fixtures will be provided, and light fixtures will not exceed 45'in <br /> height. All roadways internal to the project are private and not subject to NCDOT <br /> requirements. <br /> 31. Comment: Page 10— I.B.14—Section 3-1 Internal Traffic Circulation and Parking: No <br /> initial comments other than those referenced under`General Comments'. <br /> Response: Noted. <br /> 32. Comment: Page 10— I.B.15—Section 3-2 TIA Improvement Summary: <br /> i. The TIA describes the Project as consisting of"2,251,200 sq. feet of <br /> warehouse". <br /> As there will be a myriad of other development occurring within the Project (i.e. <br /> light manufacturing, warehousing, research, medical, fulfillment services, etc.) <br /> staff is concerned the TIA does not adequately anticipate/define impacts. <br /> ii. According to the TIA, the Project anticipates generating 3,648 new trips per <br /> average weekday, with 320 AM peak trips and 326 PM peak trips. The AM/PM <br /> "peaks" represent only 18% of all trips. This number seems small to staff. This, <br /> combined with the anticipated mixture of land uses summarized herein, could <br /> create issues with some of the lower-performing LOS intersections (and overall <br /> greater rates of congestion in the area). <br /> iii. There does not appear to be sufficient right-of-way to allow for the <br /> development of a dedicated right-turn lane on southbound Old NC 86. The <br /> concern for staff is that this `right-turn lane' is the designated connection to <br /> three (listed as A, B and C within the TIA) of four total driveways to be <br /> constructed (the fourth, D, will be on Davis Rd.). <br /> iv. The three "exceptions" that do not meet LOS D or better for average <br /> intersections are all predicated on a "typical" AM and PM peak time. Staff is <br /> concerned this will, actually, be the case if the majority/entirety of the <br /> development is warehousing. <br /> V. The turn movements were calculated in October of 2016. Staff is concerned <br /> how valid this data may still be. <br /> vi. One Page 31, Table 8 of the TIA there are references to Old NC 86 at 1-40 EB <br /> have an issue with maxing out the 200-feet of available storage during AM <br /> travel periods. <br /> Staff is concerned none of the recommendations contained within the TIA call <br /> for an additional lane or improvement beyond a traffic light to address this <br /> issue. <br /> vii. The overall conclusions (page 34 of Exhibit H) identify the problems that create <br /> a LOS E and LOS F for these particular intersections, but offer no solutions. As <br />