Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />a <br />In <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />15 <br />17 <br />18 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />10 <br />IAT OUR EXISTING CITY CIRCULATION SYSTEM. THIS INCLUDES OUR <br />LOCAL STREETS, OUR MAJOR ARTERIALS, THE FREEWAYS WITHIN THE <br />CITY, AS WELL AS BUS AND RAIL TRANSIT. <br />IN DISCU55ING THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED <br />PROJECT, THE MAJOR DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PROJECT <br />ALTERNATIVES ARE COST AND DISPLACEMENT. WITH AN <br />EAST -SIDE -ONLY WIDENING, WE'RE LOOKING AT A $51,000,000 <br />PROJECT. THIS INVOLVES THE DISPLACEMENT OF 567 RESIDENTS. <br />THIS ASSUMES 3.3 RESIDENTS PER HOUSEHOLD. 73 6U5INESSES AND <br />43P EMPLOYEE5 DISPLACED. THIS ALSO A55UMES SIX EMPLOYEES PER <br />I BUSINE55. <br />WITH A WEST- SIDE -ONLY WIDENING, WE'RE LOOKING AT <br />A COST OF $45,000,000. THIS MOULD BE 439 RESID5NTS DISPLACED, <br />41 BUSINESSES DISPLACED, AND 347 EMPLOYEES DISPLACED. <br />WITH ACQUIRING PROPERTY FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE <br />STREET, WE'RE LOOKING AT A COST OF $73 ■000,000. THIS INCLUDES <br />DISPLACEMENT OF 779 RESIDENTS, 99 BUSINESSES AND 594 <br />EMPLOYEES. <br />"WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE ?" ON JU! `' 31, 1989, <br />THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON THE DRAFT ENVIROhuENTAL IMPACT <br />STATEMENT WILL END. IN AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER, STAFF WILL <br />PREPARE RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS. THAT WILL INCLUDE VERBAL <br />AND WRITTEN RESPONSES THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. WE'LL THEN COME <br />BACK. TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASK FOR CONFORMANCE FOR <br />THE GENERAL PLAN, AND WE'LL GO 70 COUNCIL IN OCTOBER OF 1989, <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />T <br />l <br />l <br />7 <br />