Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Access And Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ballantyne neighbors press council for environmental and safety review after petition to add right-in/right-out access
Summary
Neighbors asked the council to require stricter conditions and environmental review after a site-plan amendment by Tribet Properties would add right-in/right-out access onto Ballantyne Commons Parkway; residents worried a convenience-store/fuel station scenario could produce thousands of daily trips, increase noise, and affect nearby pool and school bus stops.
Petition 2025057, a site-plan amendment by Tribet Properties for a 2.17-acre parcel at Lancaster Highway and Ballantyne Commons Parkway, focused on changing vehicular access to permit an additional right-in/right-out driveway on Ballantyne Commons Parkway.
Land-use consultant Bridget Grant, speaking for the petitioner, said the change was reviewed by CDOT and NCDOT and would direct retail traffic away from nearby residential streets. The petitioner said the request is limited to modifying the access points; existing entitlements and design standards would remain.
Nearby resident Anastasia Khmelovska and other Adair neighborhood speakers expressed strong concern that the parcel is actively marketed and that a fuel-station/convenience-store scenario (modeled in the recent traffic analysis) could generate roughly 3,383 daily trips. They asked for a full environmental and fire-safety review, limitations on hours of operation (to prevent 24-hour activity), lighting and pollutant safeguards because a neighborhood pool and a school bus stop are close by.
The petitioner replied that a fuel station had been noted on the original 1998 rezoning and that the team performed an updated traffic study to reflect current conditions. The petitioner said they would continue discussions with neighbors and adjust conditions where feasible. Council members said the issue is largely about whether the access change is safe and appropriate; one council member noted a site-plan amendment is a more limited action than a rezoning, but neighbors requested the council consider added conditions if a high-intensity use is likely.
The council closed public comment and asked staff and the petitioner to consider neighbor requests (limiting hours, lighting buffers, and additional safety analysis) before taking the matter up for decision. The petitioner said it would review the suggestions and continue community engagement.
