Agenda Package - 10-18-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

005 • Staff has also discussed this proposed design change with representatives of NCDOT. NCDOT officials indicate that having a standard that is different from their minimum is not a problem, as it would just have to be enforced locally. This would primarily be the case for new subdivision streets created in the County and under the jurisdiction of the Fire Marshal's office. Please note that the Joint Planning Commission (JPC) met on Sept. 23, 2010 to review this proposed amendment. The JPC recommended that the proposed amendment be forwarded to all three jurisdictions for consideration of adoption. Draft language for consideration (changes in Italics): 6.7.1.4.2 The radius for the circular terminus, or turnaround, shall be not less than 45 40 -feet of pavement width, with a minimum right -of -way radius of 50 feet. If the pavement radius exceeds fifty (50) feet, an island may be planted in the center of the turnaround. The island shall have a minimum radius of 10 feet. Amendment 5 — Section 10.7 of the UDO regulates new non - residential development along our major thoroughfares and highways. It provides minimum standards for the exterior design and appearance for such new buildings. Attached you should find a copy of Section 10.7 for your review. Staff has worked with these regulations on many occasions since these standards were adopted in the 2006. However, staff has discovered a potential loop -hole that we would like to bring to the Commission's attention. As you are all aware U.S. 1 has, in certain places, secondary roads that parallel the highway and act essentially as service roads for U.S. 1 in these locations. Examples include portions of Beechtree Drive, Charleston Drive, McNeill Road, Douglas Drive, Tiffany Drive, Legion Drive, Westover Drive, and Keller- Andrews Road. Staff suggests that projects that front on these parallel roadway segments have prime visibility along U.S. I and should be subject to the design standards of Section 10.7. However, the current language 10.7.2.3 does not specify or clarify that these parallel roadways are subject to the regulations of Section 10.7. Therefore, staff is recommending that the UDO Section 10.7.2.3 be amended to include such language. Please note that the Joint Planning Commission (JPC) met on Sept. 23, 2010 to review this proposed amendment. The JPC recommended that the proposed amendment be forwarded to all three jurisdictions for consideration of adoption. Draft language for consideration (changes in Italics): 10.7.2.3 The following highways "Freeway /Expressway" or "Thoroughfare'' County Thoroughfare Plan (adopted April U.S. as identified by on ( *) below: • US 15 -501 • US 1 (including parallel roadway segm and roadways are classified as a as included in the City of Sanford /Lee 1992), except the segments that parallel sets as described below*) J