12/16/1985 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- matrix contains ratins of the four alternatives based on these e crit~ria with "10" being the best and "1" being the worst. Alternative One As indicated on the attached table, Alternative One rates highest on the likelihood of timely implementation, but has the greatest impact in terms of right-of-way costs and displacement of businesses. Its ratings on the other criteria are all high: it has a good level of service and a safe design. Its construction cost is comparatively moderate, it has some degree of impact on businesses other than actual displacement, and it would have only a moderate effect on local circulation, by creating several new signalized intersections for north-south traffic to cross. Alternative One. Elevated at East End This alternative would use the alignment of Alternative One but would place it on an elevated roadway to provide grade-separated crossings over Conger, Wilson and McKinley Streets, and over the rail sidings in this area; a grade separation for west bound traffic over 7th Avenue (Highway 99 southbound) would also be provided. This feature of grade separation would result in the new highway having no traffic signals or intersections between Highway 99 and Seneca, and only one at-grade rail crossing (between Seneca and Conger). This would represent an improvement in both traffic safety and level of service. The right-of-way cost of this alternative would be somewhat less than that of e Alternative One since a slightly narrower total width would be required and "flairs" would not be required at intersections. Construction cost would be. highest of all four alternatives, since about one-half mile of structure would have to be built. Displacement of businesss would be about the same as for Alternative One, although elevating the roadway could make a difference in one or two instances; the same can be said for other short-term business impacts. There would be virtually no impact on local circulation, since the existing street system in the area would remain unchanged. We judge this option would have a low potential for delay and a high accepta- bility to the State and federal agencies. On the other hand, funding might be a problem due to the substantial added cost of the one-half mile of structure. The 5th-7th Couplet This concept was initially proposed by City staff in 1982 to facilitate local traffic flow between Highway 99 and Bailey Hill Road. (A summary of the public hearings and staff report was included in the testimony at your November 25 publiC hearing). At that time, the outcome was a compromise, leaving 5th and 7th in 2-way operation between Highway 99 and Seneca. This was based on testimony from a number of businesses in the area, who raised the following objections: - 5th and 7th are too far apart and do not have enough cross streets e connecting them to function efficiently as a one-way couplet. 3