|
21
<br /> 821 Beth Trahos: No sir, I have not.
<br /> 822
<br /> 823 Statler Gilfillen: It goes, our small neighborhood and our children's school Eno River Academy both share the
<br /> 824 property line. The proposed new big development on Highway 86. We were at the initial property
<br /> 825 meeting, and just received notice of the application to rezone 78 acres, I will be out of town and
<br /> 826 unable to attend the meeting but wanted to voice my concern regarding this development. The
<br /> 827 proposed property runs next to Stroud's Creek, a major tributary to the Eno River and protected
<br /> 828 watershed.The creek is used by Eno River Academy students as a significant learning tool, the
<br /> 829 students do creek studies and hike trails they created year-round. There is an outdoor classroom
<br /> 830 that is utilized almost daily.We would be heartbroken to have sewage from the proposed 50
<br /> 831 septic fields to each home or runoff from the building process leaking into this creek causing
<br /> 832 contamination. Thank you for your consideration in not rezoning for a large housing development.
<br /> 833 Now, my question is two-fold. I think it has also been established that 86 as a highway is
<br /> 834 potentially dangerous to access to. Your development is putting two new entrances on 86, not
<br /> 835 one,which raises questions to me as an architect and planner about the safety during the peak
<br /> 836 hours. Two exits instead of backup coming onto the property. The Eno and this raises the other
<br /> 837 point. The Eno Academy is right behind your property, have any discussions been done with
<br /> 838 them about the possibility of bringing access through their property and better coordinating with
<br /> 839 them of things that what you develop on your property could actually benefit the academy more,
<br /> 840 and the students could use, particularly natural trails and other things, might be really useful in a
<br /> 841 public setting to your neighbors. Have any discussions in this direction begun to be thought or
<br /> 842 taken?
<br /> 843
<br /> 844 Beth Trahos: So,you have asked two things.The first was with regard to access, and Josh, you jump in, but I'll
<br /> 845 just say,the layout was designed with Josh's input and shown to NCDOT, but obviously it is
<br /> 846 NCDOT that will permit any access points. If they determine that an access cannot function
<br /> 847 safely, they will not issue a driveway permit for that access. So,we have to do what NCDOT tells
<br /> 848 us to do to make the accesses function safely. And we will do those things.
<br /> 849
<br /> 850 Statler GiIfillen: Well, let's put it this way. Why have you designed it, I'll continue this, as two accesses when you
<br /> 851 have the option to make one of them a dead end and let the entrance to the site only come
<br /> 852 through one.
<br /> 853
<br /> 854 Josh Reinke: I won't say the why the team has designed that, but I would say more often than not, I actually
<br /> 855 hear the flip side of that in these meetings, and it's,what happens if something happens at that
<br /> 856 one driveway, and you don't have a secondary access for somebody to respond to a house that's
<br /> 857 further back,say there was a car crash at a driveway, but a fire happens at a house in the back,
<br /> 858 and now how does the fire department access.That additional access, and once again, exactly
<br /> 859 what Beth said, is if they say there's an issue with site distance,they could restrict it to a right in or
<br /> 860 right out,they could do any one of a number of things. DOT could say we want turn lanes at both
<br /> 861 driveways to make sure we have that. But I'd say having the additional driveway, as long as the
<br /> 862 design is safe,where we're saying we're not concerned about the site distance because they've
<br /> 863 mitigated those concerns, then I think the additional access actually is a safety precaution,saying
<br /> 864 now you have two ways to access that in case there was an emergency.
<br /> 865
<br /> 866 Statler GiIfillen: All commercial buildings, as an architect speaking, under state law, have to have two exits. I am
<br /> 867 not sure of the specific highway requirements, that's why we'll defer to you.
<br /> 868
<br /> 869 Josh Reinke: Yeah, and once again, not a requirement, more of a, like I said proactive just like doing this traffic
<br /> 870 study is saying this might be a concern having to access, usually I see much larger developments
<br /> 871 where they say they just want one because it's less improvements that they'd have to do things
<br /> 872 like that, and they're forced to, based on development ordinances and such. This one, like I said,
<br /> 873 no requirement,just forward thinking in case something were to happen,worst case scenario, now
<br /> 874 you have that additional access, and once again both, if DOT says we have concerns, it's not
<br /> 875 they're going to say put a turn lane at one but don't worry about the other because you put it. It is
<br />
|