Laserfiche WebLink
BOOK 82 FA,C .31J j <br />C-' <br />the flow of traffic during construction. This alternative <br />provides an increase in capacity for the least amount of <br />money while still retaining the flexibility to be expanded <br />to six lanes if the need arises in the future. <br />The estimated detention pond area for Alternate "B" and <br />Alternate "C", as per the IRFWCD adopted interim criteria of <br />two inches per 24 hours during the 25 -year storm, is 8.0 <br />acres. Alternate "A" requires 9.4 acres. <br />RECOMEMATIONS AND FUNDING <br />Staff agrees with the Consultant's recommendation to select <br />Alternate "C". <br />It is recommended that the Board approve Alternate "C" with <br />the provision that right-of-way be acquired in sufficient <br />width to allow for expansion to six lanes if the need arises <br />in the future. <br />Commissioner Bird had three areas of concern - the power <br />poles, the proximity to the canal which is so deep and so <br />dangerous, and the possible existence of considerable areas of <br />muck that could affect construction costs, and he wished to know <br />if all these are addressed in all alternatives. <br />Director Davis agreed that the poles are certainly a <br />physical constraint on the west side of the roadway, but <br />Alternate "C" does provide for a 4 lane median roadway east of <br />the pole line, and they do not foresee Kings Highway needing more <br />than this in this section for more than the 20 year planning <br />horizon. The canal is to the east of the highway, and Director <br />Davis advised that we have talked to the Drainage District about <br />this. They are concerned about being able to maintain the canal, <br />and we have provided an 18' green area between the back of the <br />curb and the canal for maintenance operations. There is to be a <br />continuous guard rail along the road the length of the project, <br />and we may have to shift that guard rail a bit closer to the <br />roadway. <br />Discussion ensued regarding the canal possibly encroaching <br />on road R/W, and Director Davis advised that the language in the <br />instrument which conveyed the R/W for road purposes addresses the <br />paramount rights of the drainage in the corridor, and it suggests <br />a cooperative atmosphere between the District and the County. As <br />to concern about muck, he noted that we will certainly have muck <br />problems wherever we put the road. We will have to do some <br />above -normal construction methods to compensate for these <br />68 <br />