2000-09-13 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

170 smaller version takes up too much space. Mr. Cox said he feels the same way about the Garrett Street site, and feels like the location next to the Onmi is the only one that has a chance. Mr. Cox said he would be interested in seeing locations for parking garages that could be located in the next ring out from downtown. Mr. Revelle said that the further you move out the garages, the less people will use them unless a shuttle system is used. Mr. Revelle said that parking is generally located at the middle, not the edge point. Mr. Toscano said that a process needs to be developed for making decisions, and said he feels that a public hearing could be held on the proposed to reduce the two-hour on-street parking and increase the fmcs fairly quickly. Mr. Toscano said that decisions should be made on the other issues prior to adoption of the capital budget. Street. said he Mr. Lynch said that with a shuttle service, parking could be located on West Main Mr. Lynch said he has trouble with the public subsidizing parking. Mr. Lynch feels that Council needs to decide where they want growth to occur. Mr. Caravati said that he will discuss a schedule with staff. Mr. Toscano said that he feels the shuttle issue is key. MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY Mr. Will Rieley, consultant on the design of the proposed Meadowcreek Parkway, explained that he was asked to explore the following issues: transition from downtown; pedestrian/bike access; intersection at Route 250 Bypass; analysis of current plans; and a linear park. Mr. Rieley said he also looked at: extending Mclntire Park along Mclntire I/,oad; relocating the entrance to the Rescue Squad; relocating the skate park and the gas buildings; a pedestrian underpass across Route 250 Bypass; and an overhead structure to carry pedestrians/bikes from the east to the west of the park. Regarding the intersection Mr. Rieley said that an), at-grade intersection at this location will fail, and his traffic consultant said that a 20-lane intersection is the absolute minimum that should be built. Mr. Rieley said that Council had previously agreed to a 17-lane intersection which has been evaluated by the consultant. Mr. Rieley said that the 20-lane intersection has three more dedicated turn lanes than the 17 lane. Responding to questions from Mr. Caravati, Mr. Rieley said he hopes there will be a cooperative effort between the City and County and both consultants. Mr. Rietey said the City needs to be clear and consistent in design guidelines for VDOT, and he thinks the City is in a good position to see the road designed the way they favor, though VDOT is not there yet with their design. Ms. Richards noted that with a 17-lane intersection, current dedicated east/west lanes will be lost. Mr. Lynch asked how a grade-separated interchange would work, and Mr. Rieley said it would work better as there would be much more continuous movement, and would help pedestrians and bikers. Mr. Rieley said a grade-separated interchange would be much more expensive, between $15 and $20 million, and noted that the traffic consultant said that he felt a tight urban intersection would work. Mr. Rieley repeated that the 20- lane intersection is the smallest they could professionally recommend. Mr. Cox asked how much the underground tunnel and bridge would affect VDOT's budget, and Mr. Rieley said he guessed that it would add 10% to the total budget. Mr. Cox asked if Mr. Rieley thinks that VDOT will build a road that he has designed, and Mr. Rieley said that VDOT does not design in this mode, .and the City will have to be very specific, but he said he thinks VDOT will agree in the end.