08/04/94 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

to Andove?~, shown in Figure 2, and Elk River, shown in Figure 3, may accelerate the need for these cammercial nodes. The locations are: · 167th Ave. NW and TH 47 (as currently zoned) · Armstrong and 154th This commercial node would be located to the east of Armstrong between 154th and the proposed 153rd ,Ave. extension. ~ · Armstrong and 173rd. ISSUES FOR FURTHER ANALYSIS The bridge ~alternatives suggest different land use classifications along a similar transportaticn system. Each alternative presents its own challenges. The eastern bridge location at ~ississippi West Park presents issues regarding north/south traffic through the city. The western location requires the acquisition of more land for the right of way. The right of wayl for the eastern location is already partly acquired. In addition, [he western bridge road creates two intersections, interchanges, or overpasses at the two proposed roads--the business access road and the residential collector. If access to th{ bridge road is to be limited, the eastern bridge alignment requires only one overpass. Blecause the overpass would be close to the Hwy. 10 overpass, there would be less need for~ grade changes of the bridge road. The western bridge alignments, in contrast, w6uld require either two overpasses in addition to the Hwy. 10 overpass or would requi~e that the entire bridge road be elevated for its entire length--approximately 3/4 mile. TlJe road from the eastern bridge alignment would be less than 1/2 mile long from the riv~ir to the HWY. 10 overpass. Both bridge ~lternatives may pose design challenges. Because of the locations of Hwy. 10, CR 116, tithe railroad tracks, Armstrong Blvd., and Ramsey Blvd., traffic flow and current transportation routes will have to be adjusted for traffic coming offa bridge road onto HWY. 10. Bridge road traffic may be merging very near these major intersections, where the railroad tracks already create traffic constraints. Modifications to existing access to H,dry. 10 will be necessary, contingent upon a detailed traffic analysis and the final design cifthe bridge road. In addition to potential physical constraints, the bridge alternatives should be compared again.to the Creliminary criteria assembled early in the planning process. The subcommittee, of the Planning Commission agreed on a set of Goals and Criteria for a bridge location and alignment (Attachment B). A very preliminary analysis of how the bridge alternatives measured up to the goals and criteria was conducted as part of a report 11