Laserfiche WebLink
IMPACT OF ALTERNATIVE IN FRANKUN TOWNSHIP OCTOBER 10, 1091CRITERION».1 DI D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 i1.Number of human rcsourcci wiihin the <br />•corridor. • <br />0 1H(M)1H(M)1M(M)0 0 IH(M) <br />2.No. of recreation resourcci in corridor. <br />(P*Ptrk, L^Lake, G=Golf Course, <br />PF^Playficld, T=TraiI) <br />0 <br />• <br />0 0 0 0 0 0 <br />3.No. of residential units/propeities in corridor <br />(including farmsteads). <br />0 10 10 13 7 10 !2 <br />4.No. of businesses in corridor.0 3 3 1 0 0 1 <br />3.Est. construction cost (millions of 1990 $).NOT AP PL 1C AB L E <br />6.*Accessibility (travel time) to Metro Area. <br />(VG s» Very Good, G = Good, VP = Very <br />Poor) <br />VP G Q <br />G G VG VO <br />7.Appropriate highway access for local <br />development? (Y = Yes) <br />Y Y Y Y Y Y Y <br />8.No. of residences within 4(X) feet of highway, <br />outside the corridor. <br />24 19 19 22 11 7 20 <br />9.No. of wetland and floodplain acres in corridor.0 9 9 13 26 41 30 <br />10.No. of woodland acres in corridor.0 1 1 S 4 23 27 <br />11.No. of acres of agricultural land in corridor.0 136 136 149 157 173 177 <br />1 12. No. of acres of Ag. Preserves farmland in <br />corridor. <br />0 6 6 6 44 44 6 <br />13.Safety and efficiency of traffic on existing TII <br />12.(VO * Very Good. G * Good, F = Fair) <br />F VG VG VG G G VO <br />14.Local traffic movement acrosi/adjaccnt to <br />existing TH 12. (F = Fsir, 0 « Good) <br />F F F F C G p <br />15.Level of service on exist. TH 12 in peak hour.*^E A A A C C A <br />16.Level of service on TH 12 sltcmalivc in peak <br />hour.*^ <br />u A A A A A A <br />17.No. of county/kKal road segments likely to need <br />capacity improvements. <br />0 0 0 0 0 1 1 <br />** Wont LOS in any location for a (ivcn Alternative.•S = School, DC = Day Care Center, M^Mjnicipal, C*»Churvh, H>=Historic Structure, CM “Cemetery, LB==Libnry