03/24/92 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

The total estimated cost of this alternative is $490,000 with an estimated construction cost of $325,000. i,~he :major cost components would include grading, curb and gutter and pavement. This alternative would have reduced drainage and wetland mitigation costs over Alternative 1, as well as a reduced distance of roadway to be constructed. Alternative~3: Maintain Status Quo. An alternative with any construction project is of course, to do nothing or maintain the status quo. The prime ~.ad, varltage of this alternative is that the initial cost is zero. However, the public will pay the costs ati~ciitted with additional mileage travelled and additional travel time in perpetuity. Future dev~lOpm~ ent may reduce the feasibility or increase the cost of providing this corridor at a later date. ~ Existing cross traffic between Armstrong Boulevard and Variolite Street will continue to increase on residenti, al streets such as 156th and 157th Avenues. The rate of increase is highly dependent upon devek~pm~nt. However, even a single successful commercial operation, such as the soon-to-opg~ N0~Ythfork Golf Course, could significantly impact traffic levels on these streets. In general, however, traffic levels might be expected to triple over the next twenty years. Alternative 4: Improve 156th Avenue between Variolite Street and Armstrong Boulevard. This alternative Would make use of the existing streets in the area and upgrade them to handle the increased tmffic"volumes and truck loads. If 156th Avenue were improved to MSA standards, it would still~re.qu4ffe traffic to expend additional travel distance and time involved. Similar to Alternate 2~ it Would not only encourage, but it would actually place arterial volume traffic and truck traffiO on ~;street platted and designed for residential use. Additional right-of-way would be required arid the placement of the roadway would reduce setbacks for several homes to approximately half of the recommended forty feet. Traffic level:imPacts can be expected to be similar to those described for Alternate 3 with the exception t~at the traffic increases anticipated on 157th Avenue would be directed to 156th Avenue. Total projeCt~cos~t for this alternate would be $450,000 with $300,000 in construction costs. Major constructiort Costs would include curb and gutter, pavement, drainage and restoration. Alternative'5: Construct an Extension of County Road #116 from Ramsey Boulevard to Armstrong Boulevard. This alternative was proposed by a resident at the December 10, 1991 meeting. The proposed alignment is,illastrated on the attachment entitled Alternate 5. This alignment would extend existing Cou$ty Road #116 from its existing terminus at Ramsey Boulevard westward for a length of 1.2 miles terminating at the intersection with Armstrong Boulevard and the south line of Section 21. This wo~ld, effectively extend County Road #116 as a crosstown arterial from Armstrong Boulevard ,eastward to the eastern City Limits. This alignment could not be considered a crosstown ~_~eri~l further west than Armstrong Boulevard as traffic wishing to traverse the entire length of tl~e.Ci~ would need to make two turns and travel a one-half mile distance north/south along Arm~tiong Boulevard. There would be safety hazards similar to those identified in the discussion 0f:Alfernative 2 with the speed differential caused by accelerating and decelerating over a short distance.