Agenda - Planning Commission - 12/01/1992

Home

The total est'~mm~d cost of this alternative is $490,000 with an estimated construction cost of $325,000. The major cost components would include grading, curb and gutter and pavement. This alternafige Would have reduced drainage and wetland mitigation costs over Alternative 1, as well as a redui:ed 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 adgan~ge of this alternative is that the initial cost is zero. However, the public will pay the costs ass~ciged with additional mileage travelled and additional travel time in perpetuity. Future devel0pmcnt may reduce the feasibility or increase the cost of providing this corridor at a later date. Existing crosi traffic between Armstrong Boulevard and Variolite Street will continue to increase on residential streets such as 156th and 157th Avenues. The rate of increase is highly dependent upon devel0pme, nt. However, even a single successful commercial operation, such as the soon-to-open ,r'Notnhfork Golf Course, could significantly impact traffic levels on these streets. In general, howffver, traffic levels might be expected to triple over the next twenty years. Alternative 14: 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 traffic Volumes and truck loads. If 156th Avenue were improved to MSA standards, it would still r6quite 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 traffic o~ a street platted and designed for residential use. Additional right-of-way would be required andI tho 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 thal: the-traffic increases anticipated on 157th Avenue would be directed to 156th Avenue. Total project cost for this alternate would be $450,000 with $300,000 in construction costs. Major constmcnon oosts would include curb and gutter, pavement, drainage and restoration. Alternative 15: Construct an Extension of County Road #116 from Ramsey Boulevard to Armstrong Boulevard. This alternatiYe was proposed by a resident at the December 10, 1991 meeting. The proposed alignment is illustrated on the attachment entitled Alternate 5. This alignment would extend existing CourRy Road #116 from its existing terminus at Ramsey Boulevard westward for a length of 1.2 miles t0j'rninating at the intersection with Armstrong Boulevard and the south line of Section 21. This wotild 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 arterial further west than Armstrong Boulevard as traffic wishing to traverse the entire length of the City would need to make two turns and travel a one-half mile distance north/south along Armstt;ong Boulevard. There would be safety hazards similar to those identified in the discussion of Alternative 2 with the speed differential caused by accelerating and decelerating over a short distance.