Business Retention and Development Committee Agenda and Packet 2012 05 07

Home Browse Search

Performance Measures for Highway 42 Level 1 Evaluation: Level one evaluation will be based on intersection configuration alternatives and subsequent typical sections developed for the corridor. Individual alternatives will be rated against one another to determine a set of alternatives that best meet each goal along the corridor. Level 2 Evaluation: Following level one evaluation, the appropriate intersections and subsequent typical sections will be combined to form various corridor alternatives. These alternatives will be evaluated against each other using the outlined Level 2 evaluation criteria. Goal Performance Measures Level 1 Level 2 Develop state, regional and local partnerships to implement the transportation system by working cooperatively with all stakeholders to identify the preferred alternative Have the alternatives been established and agreed upon by the project coordination team and confirmed by the project partners? How well does the preferred corridor alternative meet the established goals and objectives of the project? Provide safe and convenient facilities for a broad range of users and multiple modes of travel Are all modes travel accommodated? Is the corridor alternative convenient to all users of all and ability levels? Are users of all ages and all ability levels accommodated? Does the alternative degrade traffic operations to unacceptable levels where individuals may make unsafe decisions? Do the improvements proposed provide safer conditions for all users and ability levels? How does the alternative provide appropriate transitions between roadway design and design speed? Are existing deficiencies addressed? How does the alternative minimize speed differentials between various users? How does the alternative minimize conflict between modes? Develop solutions that maximize opportunities for design features that are sensitive to the context of the surrounding land uses and appropriately reflect the context of the corridor Does the intersection design allow typical sections which provide room for design amenities which are consistent with existing and envisioned roadway context? Such amenities could include: landscaping, street trees, on- street parking, public art and buildings with zero lot -line setbacks. How does the alternative provide room for design amenities that are consistent with existing and envisioned roadway context? - Are the proposed design geometrics appropriate for design speed? And, do they accommodate lighting, landscaping, street furniture and other urban design features within the ROW that are consistent with downtown? To what extent does the alternative support the Highway 42 Revitalization Plan? Does the intersection design allow typical sections which reflect the rural environment on the eastside of the corridor and the diverse urban environment on the westside of the corridor? Which alternative allows typical sections that provide drainage facilities consistent with the rural setting on the east and the urban setting on the west? Which alternative allows typical sections with the maximum buffer between the residential properties and the roadway? How does the alternative create a livable and distinctive place that creates a sense of arrival into Downtown Louisville?