|11/15/2017 - The North Ramp Pair that provides access to the Core Area of Lafayette, should remain where they currently are that is away from downtown and the historic districts. It is not in the interest of our community to have ramps along Sterling Grove or near downtown. |
|11/15/2017 - This will not boost business, but instead will harm the existing downtown and historic districts.|
|11/15/2017 - The current renderings presented at the CWG with ramps removed from our downtown area is the most currently acceptable for our community.|
|11/15/2017 - It is also essential to remember that we are here talking about Lafayette Louisiana and not New York or Houston and that the service road system for access to downtown will be quite sufficient to accommodate traffic. |
|11/15/2017 - Consequently, Sterling Grove neighborhood Association is strongly against revisions of the actual rendering that would bring back ramps in the downtown core of our town. We approve and support the current existing maps of the highway with ramps at an ample distance south of downtown and north of Sterling Grove around Willow as was presented to the recent CWG meeting.|
|11/8/2017 - Time to start while costs are moderate.5years the cost will be more.
|11/3/2017 - 1. Four lanes near downtown: The current design now has four travel lanes in the “core” area from the Pinhook ramps to the Willow ramps. When asked, the consultant indicated that this addition of travel lanes was necessary from a traffic perspective (apparently a combination of weaving and volume); however, that is unclear as this has long been talked about as a three lane facility, and I am not aware of what recent projections changed those numbers. That matters because, especially in the sensitive core area, additional lanes will add width to the bridge. As one of the primary concerns in reconnecting the urban fabric is to create a space under the spans that is safe, a net increase of approximately 24 feet will make the area under the mainline that much more of a barrier that we are working to eliminate/minimize. This addition represents the classic balance of neighborhood‐friendly design with facility needs, and I would ask that this be re‐studied.
|11/3/2017 - 2. 30’ vs. 22’: It is critical to the community’s understanding that visuals of the differences between 30’ and 22’ be shown, ideally sooner than later. Many members of the community that I speak to do not understand why you would lift the mainline to 30’—not understanding that the additional height serves as a CPTED (crime prevention through environmental design) technique. The ratio of approximately 154’ feet across (with a maximum 10’ gap between two bridges) to 22’ feet high will likely create a dark space where people do not feel safe. As the conversation regarding visual impact moves forward, the benefits of raising the mainline should be openly discussed so that the community becomes more educated on the tradeoffs involved.|
|11/3/2017 - 3. 30’ as maximum height: It is my understanding that the 30’ as a maximum height was originally determined because of the ramp placement especially when the ramps were located at Simcoe. If the southbound ramps are moved north to Willow as the current design indicates, there should be an opportunity for additional height if it is determined that such height could assist in a safer, more well‐lit atmosphere under the structure.
|11/3/2017 - 4. Downtown access: The removal of the slip ramp at Simcoe probably made a lot of sense from a neighborhood perspective in that area. However, Downtown access from the north is now significantly more difficult than it would have been. I am not sure that I have a strong opinion at this point; however, I think this is a point that additional discussions about tradeoffs could have been beneficial for the community’s buy in on either design. The design of the roadways around Simcoe may have needed design exceptions to work—or maybe they didn’t work. But the removal of that slip lane was not discussed openly with the community for the change to be understood. It is must understanding that several committee members have asked for further study of this decision.