My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/23/1992 Minutes
Document-Host
>
City North Olmsted
>
Boards and Commissions
>
1992
>
1992 Planning Commission
>
06/23/1992 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2019 12:32:08 PM
Creation date
1/29/2019 6:15:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
N Olmsted Boards & Commissions
Year
1992
Board Name
Planning Commission
Document Name
Minutes
Date
6/23/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />should be made after the project is completed); no street lights be installed <br />(County will not install street lights, this might be done by city). Based on <br />these concerns and from their observations, CPC has made several preliminary <br />recommendationse speed limit should be posted at no more than 35 m.p.h; need for <br />traffic light at Pheasants Walk and Lorain should be re-evaluated after road is <br />completed with consideration of the timing; after completion of the roadway, a <br />traffic study should be done to determine the needs of the other projects in the <br />city; street lights should be allowed at the intersections (including one at the <br />proposed intersection at the Bradley Woods); pedestrian and bicycle links should <br />be provided between the neighborhoods and the Metroparks, including either a <br />pedestrian bridge over the roadway or mid-block or bicycle cxosswalks (maps 8, 9, <br />10 and 11); (Mr. Schultz was not sure if the cost of a pedestrian bridge could be <br />included in the funding or if a bridge would comply to the American Disabilities <br />Act): if the city and residents do not agree to the bike path, it should be <br />deleted, and the sidewalk could serve for both; North 0]msted Board of Educations <br />should install a pedestrian link between the school and the pedestrian walks <br />along the road since there are paths, and children will cut through; some safety <br />fencing should be considered around the school except where the walk will be <br />(this type of access would probably not require school zone restrictions, but <br />warning signs could be posted). The concerns.of the home owners regarding safety <br />during construction should be monitored by the city and the county during <br />construction. The mounding or fencing adjacent to the neighborhoods will improve <br />the visual impact and is estimated to cost about $50.00 per foot, and should be <br />e.xplored. Utilities should be encouraged to install lines underground. Regarding <br />environmental concerns, there are some wetlands, and an envirorunental study is <br />partially completed as required and the city should encourage full disclosure of <br />the resu7_ts and advance notice of the public hearing; the city might consider <br />establishing a wetlancLs ordinance to define, identify locations, establish <br />procedures for proper litigation and rules for enforcement for all wetlands. The <br />Metroparks should be encouraged to provide pedestrian and vehicle access to the <br />park from Crocker/Stearns. The Uneconomic remnants of lots split off for the road <br />should be acquired by the city or the county so that the ownership can be <br />transferred back to the owners with deed restrictions requiring that these <br />parcels remain in a na.tural state since it might be possible to join and use <br />these remnants for other purposes. Chairman Gorris asked the audience to make <br />their comnents at this time and explained County Planning Commission had been <br />hired to help develop a ma.ster plan and one of the main areas of concern was to <br />minimize the impact this road would have on the residents. Mro Grant, a resident <br />of Stearns Road, stated that formerly the residents voted against the road <br />because it was to become the new Interstate 76 in which case the residents will <br />have no control over the speed limit or anything else. He is concerned about <br />water backing into basements after the Yu.ghway is completed since there will be <br />no drainage. City Engineer Deichmann stated that there is a drainage plan and the <br />storm sewers are sized larger than what the city would require. Mrs. Le Pore, <br />speaking for the Pheasants Walk Home Owners Association, re-emphasized the points <br />mentioned above: deletion of both sidewalks and bike path, or the combination of <br />the two and deletion of street lights. She explained that any sidewalks etc. <br />would encourage children to go onto the a heavily travelled, high speed highway <br />on which drivers will exceed the 35 m.p.h. speed limit. If their request for an 8 <br />foot wooden fence and a 4 or 5 foot mounding with pine trees on top can be built <br />to separate their lots from the road, they might be amenable to sidewalks, but <br />they still believe that there is a danger. She quoted from the noise study which <br />stated that "sufficient area exists between private properties and proposed <br />roadway to construct an earth berm, however doing so would require the purchase <br />3
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.