Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING <br />Monday, July 15,2002 <br />6:30 o’clock p.m. <br />Weinberger stated that staff has concern about public works vehicles on the Parkway and access <br />for bike traflic. <br />Johnston stated that providing bituminous trail for bikes on one side and sidewalk on the other is <br />very doable. <br />Lindahl indicated that, in order to avoid turning Kelley Parkway into a speedway, one needs to <br />narrow the street and add landscaping and/or a canopy. <br />While some numbers were provided at the work session, Krall stated that the traffic figures have <br />demonstrated that approximately equal trips are taken whether it be this mixed unit development <br />or single family residential. She added that higher senior densities provide a broader peak period <br />as well. <br />Mabusth asked Public Service Director Greg Gappa to comment on the Park Commissions view. <br />Gappa noted that while the Park Commission had not commented on specifics, they would likely <br />suggest a wider parkway since no one knows what will develop across the street. <br />Mabusth asked if any standards exist for a parkway. <br />Gappa stated that no standards exist, however, 41’ was suggested perhaps due to the public <br />works trucks. <br />Gaffron stated that the CMP merely designates scenic parkways along the lakes, and the City has <br />gone no further than naming this parkway. The 60’ corridor was platted when this was <br />designated single family residential. <br />In his thoughts. Consultant Case stated that 41’ is very wide for a road that doesn’t have any real <br />standard, adding that 28’ may be appropriate. He suggested that the City review the Engineer’s <br />report when available. <br />Bremer asked if a turning lane into the development could be added. <br />Berg reminded the Commission that there will be commercial across the street and thought needs <br />to given into what might go there. She maintained that, likely, half of the people in the <br />development will be coming and going during peak times. <br />Johnston noted that even without a traffic study, it still seems likely that 41 ’ and two lanes would <br />be appropriate at either end of Kelley Parkway; however, he questioned the need for 41’ the <br />entire length. <br />Berg stated that consideration needs to be given to people traveling at peak times and off peak <br />times, in order to be proactive and avoid problems. <br />PAGE 22 of 35