Laserfiche WebLink
173 <br /> <br /> Ms. Richards said she supports a 20-lane intersection as 17 lanes degrades the <br />current traffic on the Bypass, noting that the overlay drawings show very little additional <br />asphalt is needed to increase to 20 lanes. Ms. Richards said she thinks safety will be <br />improved as she is concerned about cueing with shared turn and through lanes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Lynch said that while the 20-1ane intersection improves traffic flow, it is not <br />as good for pedestrians and necessitates doing the underpass. Mr. Lynch said he feels the <br />underpass that is proposed needs to be wider, and if that is done, he would favor going to <br />a grade separated interchange. Mr. Lynch suggested that the intersection be negotiated <br />with YDOT. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said his vision of the intersection is a smaller one, and his first and <br />primary goal would be to move pedestrians to Mclntire Park, not traffic. Mr. Cox said <br />that it is difficult for pedestrians to cross 20 lanes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano noted that the number of lanes across the Bypass are not proposed to <br />increase over their current number. Mr. Toscano said he would defer to the consultant on <br />the number of lanes that would be safe and improve traffic movement. Mr. Toscano said <br />he would go with the proposed underpass, and also noted that the median helps to soften <br />the crossing of the Bypass at grade. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said if Council is so interested in efficiency, why not have a separated <br />interchange, and said he thinks that is an option to be considered. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rieley said that a grade-separated interchange is a big budget item, though it <br />would be more efficient. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati questioned what is different now than a year ago about the number <br />of lanes. Mr. Caravati said he has not heard that 17 lanes is unsafe or any material <br />change. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rietey noted that no analysis was done of the 17-lane intersection option until <br />after Council has agreed to it. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said he feels the issue is what is the most appropriate road, and feels <br />Council should Iisten to the consultant who tells us that 20 lanes are most appropriate. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said that the consultant also said that the vehicular numbers were bogus, <br />but Mr. Rieley said the traffic consultant is suspicious of all of the numbers for the <br />roadway, but the numbers for the intersection are accurate. <br /> <br /> Mr, Gouldman explained that the former Mayor came up with the 17-tane option <br />when the letter was being drafted to VDOT, and it was considered symbolic of a tight <br />intersection. <br /> <br />Ms. Richards said the 17 lanes was an arbitra~ number, <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he feels the number one reason to change the number of lanes is <br />safety. <br /> <br /> Mr. Rieley said that often as a road becomes more congested, more accidents <br />occur, though they tend to be less serious in nature. <br /> <br />Mr. Caravati said he will vote for 17 lanes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Toscano said ti-mt Mr. Caravati has said that the burden is on supporters of 20 <br />lanes to prove the safety issue, but he thinks the burden is on supporters of 17 lanes to <br />prove that it works. Mr. Toscano suggested that others be consulted about the safety <br />issue. <br /> <br /> Mr. Jim Tolbert, Di~mctor of Neighborhood Planning and Development Services, <br />said that at peak hours any intersection with shared turning lanes is clearly less safe. <br /> <br /> <br />