PC 080807 - Laserfiche WebLink

that the signs did not work at all and believed that signals causing the traffic stop would be effective. Commissioner Blank noted that while he hated to see signals on a country road, he understood the necessity for safety on this road. He liked the idea of the warning sign or a low-profile traffic light on County property. Commissioner Narum noted that she had seen a number of parcels that appeared to be four to five acres, with a house it, and inquired whether a traffic study had been done for this area regarding those parcels. She inquired if there had been a traffic study assuming whatever development was planned for various parcels. She believed measures had to be taken to solve the safety problem on the road. Commissioner O’Connor noted that he drove the road to see how much time a driver had coming around the blind curve, and what would be visible. He noted that he was going 45 mph and that drivers behind him were honking at him. He did not drive the road during the off-peak hours when the classes were planned. Commissioner Blank noted that on Sunday, the traffic was not as heavy, but it was faster in some cases. Commissioner O’Connor did not believe this road was a country road any more and considered it to be more of a freeway bypass. He did not have any objections to traffic lights, as well as breaking up the traffic to enable the development residents to enter the road. Ms. Decker noted that it was likely that there would be some method to study this traffic situation outside the normal traffic model, which addressed peak hour traffic. Chairperson Fox noted that the main entrance was at the end of the curve and inquired whether the main entrance could be moved more toward a straightaway, where there would be better visibility. She also noted that there were some churches that had the requirement of one ingress and one egress waived and requested staff’s comments on that option. Ms. Decker stated that when looking at access points on the site, it should be noted that Fish & Game, as well as Fish & Wildlife, had concerns about the creek; the existing crossings were preferable to creating new crossings over the wetland areas. She noted that an in-depth study of the creek had not been done and added that the State was quite sensitive to the impacts on the creek. Staff was hesitant to provide direction to move the access points and that discussion of that issue must take place with Fish & Wildlife and Fish & Game. She pointed out the creek on the map. She noted that the Fire Department wanted separate ingress and egress points on the site and that they had turning radius and parking lot configurations design criteria that must be addressed as well. Staff was hopeful that the points of access would remain as they were and that staff was working with the applicant’s civil engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES August 8, 2007 Page 17 of 24