My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-20-1991 Planning Minutes
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1991
>
05-20-1991 Planning Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/14/2022 12:00:00 PM
Creation date
12/14/2022 11:58:52 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Hi <br />M]' i <br />H <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD MAY 20, 1991 <br />(#9)ZONING FILE #1645-GRAF CONTINUED <br />vehicles pulling out of that driveway. The City Engineer has <br />confirmed that the proposed west access would work well. <br />Rowlette asked what impact on traffic circulation there <br />would be if Sugarwoods Drive were to become a one-way street. <br />Mabusth stated that such a proposal was not discussed during <br />the Sugarwoods subdivision process, nor was the impact of an <br />island separating the road discussed. Mabusth advised that there <br />will be other properties within the Sugarwoods Development that <br />will have similar problems. <br />Kelley stated that, in his opinion, there will not be a <br />significant amount of traffic going through this neighborhood, <br />other than the Sugarv;oods residents. <br />Bellows agreed with Mabusth that the islands were not <br />included in the review process, and seemed to just appear. She <br />stated that Planning Commission has reviewed this particular <br />property before, and did not unanimously agree to grant a <br />turn-around. Bellows indicated that she would have a problem <br />recommending approval of a second curb cut. She said. We <br />pointed out very early on in the review process of the curb cuts <br />that any request to deviate from what we originally approved had <br />to come before us before the lot in question is developed. I <br />think it is inappropriate for this request to be before us at <br />this point." <br />With regard to the amount of traffic on Sugarwoods Drive, <br />Graf stated that there wi 1 be three houses constructed for the <br />Spring and Fall Previews, which will generate an enormous amount <br />of traffic. Graf state * that there is also a great deal of <br />construction traffic, am. that he does quite a bit of business <br />entertaining in his horn.-;. He said, "My primary concern is that <br />the property juts in and it is difficult for traffic heading west <br />to see anyone coming out of my driveway. It is especially <br />difficult to see young children, of which I have two. The second <br />curb cut provides better sight distance for my children to see <br />on-coming traffic up the road, and is much ea.sier for motorists <br />to see as well." <br />Kelley suggested closing off the existing curb cut. <br />Graf replied, "That would leave me with a significant amount <br />of asphalt in my front yard that would serve no purpose." <br />Kelley asked who had put up the "Keep Right" sign, and for <br />what reason. <br />Mabusth replied, "The City put up the sign because there is <br />not adequate width for traffic to meet in the section of road on <br />- 11 -
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.