Design Alternative: Roundabout. This scheme would replace the existing toll plaza structures with a roundabout. The curvature of the roundabout would encourage slower speeds while still allowing traffic to flow freely as it entered and departed the city. The center of the roundabout could be landscaped, used for signage, or include other design elements such as a sculpture or water feature. Its estimated cost is between $5 and $10 million.
As of June 18, 211 residents have completed the survey regarding the six alternative design concepts that were presented by the consultant, Michael Baker International, at the second workshop on the Coronado Gateway Project on June 4. See the article Six Alternative Design Concepts for the Coronado Gateway Presented published on June 7.)
So far the “Roundabout” alternative has been the overwhelming favorite. Forty-four percent of the respondents have voted it to be their top choice. A distant second at 27 percent is the “Cut and Cover” alternative. The alternative “Improve Existing,” which is the only alternative that would retain the “wing” over the toll booths, has received 16 percent of the votes. The other three alternatives, “Remove Structure,” “Boulevard,” and “Curved Alignment” have received seven, four, and three percent of the votes, respectively, as the favorite design alternative.
Pictured below are the other five alternatives, which are presented in the order of their popularity according to the survey results to date.
Design Alternative: Cut and Cover. This is the most imaginative of the solutions. The roadway would be placed under 11.2 acres of new park space between the golf course and Tidelands Park. This area could be used for recreation. Its estimated cost is in excess of $50 million.
Design Alternative: Improve Existing. This alternative would clean up the existing “wing” structure, narrow the traffic lanes, and move the incoming travel lanes closer to the median to reduce traffic speeds while maintaining the existing capacity of the roadway. The surplus right-of-way created by narrowing the traffic lanes and utilizing the inner lanes, which are presently blocked by barrels, would create opportunities for additional landscaping on the east side of the road. This would be the least expensive alternative with an estimated cost of under $5 million.
Design Alternative: Remove Structure. This scheme is similar to the Improve Existing alternative except it would remove the “wing” structure and the building used by the Highway Patrol. While the estimated cost is less than $5 million, it would be more expensive than the Improve Existing scheme since it would require additional demolition.
Design Alternative: Boulevard. This concept would narrow the traffic lanes and right-of-way to reduce speeds while maintaining the capacity of the roadway. Medians and landscaping would be used to create a narrowed gateway effect. A total of 6.2 acres of buffer would be created on each side of the road providing the opportunity for additional landscaping. The estimated cost of this concept is between $5 and $10 million.
Design Alternative: Curved Alignment. This scheme is a variation on the Boulevard. It curves the roadway to encourage slower speeds while maintaining capacity. A pedestrian overpass is shown in this alternative but it could be included in any of the other schemes. The estimated cost of this alternative excluding the pedestrian overpass is between $5 and $10 million.
The survey asks you to rate each of the six alternatives on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 defined as “Needs Improvement,” 3 as “Neutral,” and 5 as “Looks Good.” The survey goes on to ask you what you like/dislike about the alternative. Next, you are asked to select the feature that “best fits” with the alternative. The features that can be selected are sculpture, landscaping, water feature, architecture/structure, pedestrian bridge, wall mural, and signage. You are also given the option to select “none.” After you have reviewed and commented on each alternative, the survey asks you which alternative you prefer, and it concludes by asking you “Did we miss anything?”
By a slim margin a water feature was selected as the feature that would have the best fit with the Roundabout. Close behind it was landscaping, which was the top rated feature for all of the other design alternatives. Other highly rated features were a pedestrian bridge and signage. “None” was also frequently selected. Sculpture and architecture/structure were infrequently selected, and a wall mural was the least frequently selected feature in the cases of four of six of the alternatives.
The survey is available at http://www.coronadogateway.com/ and can be completed until July 4. The consultant will review the results of the survey and any other feedback and propose its final design alternative by the end of August.
——-
John Tato
Staff Writer
eCoronado.com
