|
<br />. ..,PLAWIING . , .. ,
<br />COM[,1ISSION I0/14/69
<br />- Page 2
<br />'
<br />.:• ,
<br />' mwde by tae city a.clmii3istration prior 'to submission of the S. D. C. uroposa.I.
<br /> Mr. LQCkhart,, 5519 Decker Road, cited. the 60 peopIe who had a.1Z obj ectsd ?t
<br />- .Council meeting because of the traffic situAtion on Decker. He feels that
<br />.. '. ' these:°peoile who are-,there 24 hours a day are better able to judge the situation.
<br /> He ' also c.ited. the nddition to the high school and the 40% iricrease in students
<br /> at that time. i`Rr. Patton, 5551 Decker Road, cited a traffic report m«de by
<br /> AAA in 1965 which st,ated the area wca.s a traffic hazard even then and stated
<br />„ that roug?z1y,300 additional homes have been built west of Decker since that
<br /> tir.ie.. 43.5% of the stud.ents are coming from west of Deeker arid Aecker Road is
<br />'. , getting a1I this traffic. Mr. Sees, 5558 Decker Road, ca.Iled Mr. Richardos
<br />' ' survey haphazard and utated that he doean?t feel that a 3 to 6 hour survey is
<br /> adequate. TZrs. 1,loltman, 556$ Decker Road, stated that after last week9 s
<br /> footba1Z game, no fire engine could have-gotten through for at least a half
<br /> hour., Mr. Kitson suggested thc-it streets cou? d be rnade one j-ray to allevi.ate
<br />, traffic }:roblera which he believes to be non-exist,-nt ?myway. Mr, Lockhart
<br /> sta.ted that he thought alterna.tive traffic patterns -aouZd be stud.ied. Mr.
<br />, Devine, 5548 Decker Road, asked about the width of Nortern. Mrs. Lockhart
<br /> mer?tioned the additiona7. 575 students that wiZl be ??. ?,en ing the high school
<br />, upon completion of the additione. Mr. Engoglia, 6777 McKenzie Road, stated
<br /> that he doesn't feel the number of students is relevant - that the traffic
<br /> iaill be there whether or not the proposed $I houses go ine He feels that
<br /> the Deople on Decker,Road are being very unfair. 14r. Mesker, 5585 Decker
<br /> R.oad, asked -,,*hat wouZd happen. to the street and whether the peopla would be "
<br /> asked to pay for re-».vingo Mr. Lockhart repeated that he felt an openiMg onto
<br />' Lorain Road would help to alleviate traf£ic. Mrs. Lockhart asked about the
<br /> ownershi-o of land west of the proposed subdivision. Mr. 14a.gner, 5434 Decker
<br />? Foad., asked why atreet h as to open onto Decker Road at all. It was exnlained
<br /> that the City recomrnends multipZe openings. Mr. Patton stated that he felt
<br />. ': ''Ascension Ghurch had been given every consideration in,this matter and asked
<br /> wY?y the people of Decker Road had not been given the s°me. Mr. Esgar stated
<br />. , that the peonle were being given every opportunity to voice their opinions
<br /> a.nd that they were being considered. rffr. Byers presented a letter from AAA '
<br /> S-rritten in 1965 and recognizing the traffic problem in the arew.: It cited
<br /> congestion at Lorain, Porter, Butternut Fidge and Burias. Mr. Li.mpert, City
<br />' ?'. Spfety Director at tha.t t 3nie, studied the problam and found that the problem ,
<br /> 't-ias confined to a short period of time during school opening aMd closing hours
<br /> and therefore did not recom-mend one way traffics Improvements to the street
<br /> t3ere made at that ti.mo.. Additional access roads have also been built -
<br /> Southerri Avenue has been cut through and a road to th.e parking lot off of
<br /> Revere has been put in. These should help to al.leviate the problem, He ,
<br />. ' stated-tha.t the situation is_cnused by the city itself a.nd traffic to and
<br />;' .f'rom the street. •He feels tha.t the proposed subdivision would not add to the
<br />'., traffic any nore than a subdivision in any.other section of the city. He d.oes
<br /> not recoLnnend another or-ening onto Lpra.in. He feels there are too many nvw
<br />;. ! and thet another one would add to the congestion.;_, If the traffic is to be '
<br /> relieved9 he feeZs that the argument is with,the 5chool board who refused to
<br /> build an access road through school proPerty.? This-iS the only inmediate
<br />-„ relief that he c:in see. There"is not enough space now between traffic lights
<br /> ori Lora.in Road. Mr. Richards sta.ted that he feels it t-rould be very poor
<br /> traffic plan to hG.ve another opening onto Lorairi in this location. Mr. Byers
<br />' stated that since he feels.that any traffic problem thmt exists is not being
<br /> created by tl2e property owner and that since the street ca,n adeauately ha.ndle
<br />, the new develonneMt, he moved that the Planning Commission approve the S. D. C;
<br />, '. Subdivision a.s revised. Mr. Fichards seconded the Motione Unanimously passed.
<br />(b) ;Vacation of Northerri - Mr. Byers stated that in view of the fact that the
<br />• S. D. C. Subdivision has been approved and that e.xisti.ng Nortllern will be
<br />,
<br />„ required, he moved to.deny the request to vacate Northern AveMUe.- r'Ir. Richards
<br />' ' seconded the motzon. Unanimously passed.
<br />
|