Central Park & Riverland
Public Meeting Recap
A total of eight (8) alternatives were identified as reasonable intersection improvements. Each alternative was studied and ranked based on specific screening factors such as right-of-way impacts; motorist, pedestrian, and school safety; impact to grand trees; Level of Service for design year 2040; and vehicle queue.
Of the eight (8) identified, the following three (3) alternatives ranked highest and moved forward for further analysis.
Alternative 1
| Metric | Data / Peak Hours | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Right of Way Impacts | .77 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 10 (10) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | B | B | B |
| Riverland Drive Northbound queue (ft) | 261 | 247 | 273 |
| Riverland Drive Southbound queue (ft) | 165 | 153 | 166 |
| Central Park Road Westbound queue (ft) | 81 | 118 | 169 |
Alternative 2
| Metric | Data / Peak Hours | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Right of Way Impacts | 1.23 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 6 (5) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | B | B | B |
| Riverland Drive Northbound queue (ft) | 387 | 316 | 241 |
Alternative 3
| Metric | Data / Peak Hours | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Right of Way Impacts | 2.16 Acres | ||
| *Grand Tree Impacts (Oaks) | 7 (3) | ||
| 2040 Peak Hours | AM | School | PM |
| Level of Service | C | B | B |
The comment period ended November 30, 2018.
The project received 307 comments: 79 paper and 228 online.
| Alternative Preferences | ||
|---|---|---|
| Alternative | Number in Favor | Percentage in Favor |
| Alternative 1 | 44 | 14.33% |
| Alternative 2 | 10 | 3.26% |
| Alternative 3 | 231 | 75.24% |
| Combination | 2 | 0.65% |
| No Options or Other | 20 | 6.51% |
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did you not consider a more traditional traffic signal design?
The original plan required the removal of twelve (12) grand trees, which put the project on hold in 2015. Updated criteria and traffic data would now require nineteen (19) grand trees, seven (7) more than the 2012 design.
Eliminated Alternative
Which is the least expensive alternative?
| Alternative 1 | Alternative 2 | Alternative 3 |
|---|---|---|
| $4,105,000 | $4,278,000 | $4,630,000 |
