Laserfiche WebLink
<br />for those exiting movements, it is recommended that the existing right turn lane on the site <br />access be lengthened to approximately 225 feet. <br /> <br /> <br />b) Would the proposed redevelopment cause any negative impacts regarding traffic safety on Coun(v <br />Road E and Lexington Avenue along the frontage of the subject site and at the intersection o.(those <br />two roadways? <br /> <br />In the last five years (2002 to 2006), there has only been one crash at the site access onto Lexington <br />A venue and none on the site access onto Country Road E. A total of two crashes were reported on <br />Lexington A venue between County Road E and the site access. Since the proposed development <br />increases traffic volume on that segment by only 2.4%, no material increase in crashes is expected. <br />No segment crashes were reported on County Road E between Lexington Avenue and the site access <br />in the last five years, Of the 74 crashes at the Lexington Avenue/County Road E intersection in the <br />last 5 years, there were no fatalities, seven known injuries, 2] possible injuries, and 46 property <br />damage only crashes. Since the proposed development increases traffic volume at that intersection by <br />only 2.7%, no material increase in crashes is expected. <br /> <br />c) Would the current site plan provide satisfaetmy traffic and parking operations within the site? This <br />question focused on examination o.(thejollowingjive principal points: <br />i. Overall adequa(v o.fproposed parking supply <br />ii. Relatively high parking demand at the south end of the site <br />iii. Head-in parking along the east edge of the existing retail building <br />iv. Drive-through queuing for the proposed pharmacy <br />v. Spacing beflveen County Road E andjirst access serving pharmacy drive-through and parking <br /> <br />The following are the principal Ilndings regarding each of the above items pertaining to internal <br />traffic and parking operations: <br /> <br />i. Overall adequacr of proposed parking supply, The overall parking supply proposed for the <br />redevelopment is adequate. <br /> <br />ii. Relative~v high parking demand at the south end o.(the site. Since the developer has indicated <br />that the south building (building C) will be on two stories (same total square footage) with 50 <br />percent retail and 50 percent office, the parking supply near thc south end ofthe site will be <br />adequate. <br /> <br />iii. Head-in parking along the east edge 0.( the existing retail building. Head-in parking will <br />provide satisfactory and safe operations. <br /> <br />IV. Drive-through queuing for the proposed pharmacy. The drive-through pharmacy queuing will <br />adequately be accommodated. To minimize conflicts at the north end ofthe drive-through, it is <br />recommended that the 90-degree parking just west of the drive-through be converted to angle <br />parking with one-way circulation in the southbound direction. <br /> <br />v. Spacing between County Road E andfirst access serving pharmacy drive-through and parking. <br />A concern was raised that vehicles entering the County Road E driveway that are waiting to <br />turn left into the first access for the pharmacy could block the entrance to the site and cause <br />entering vehicles to backup onto County Road E. To resolve this concern, the developer has <br />agrced to install a four-foot mcdian on the County Road E driveway, which will prcvent left <br />turns into this first access for the pharmacy, <br /> <br />2 <br />