|Alternative 2A, widening the existing bridges, from the air|
from Task Force presentation, April 2012
But is it truly better?
Here are some of the real trade-offs for people who are not driving cars.
|from Chapter 2 of Draft Environmental Impact Statement|
(comments in black added)
The out-of-direction travel is even more aggravating for people on foot, for whom the deflections add several additional "block equivalents" to travel time.
At Union and Commerical, this alternative might also undo some of the intersection work that is scheduled for 2017 (and maybe also 2018) to make an easier crossing.
Though the thing could be sweetened by the addition of an overcrossing at the RR right-of-way.
This is complicated, however, by the fact that the ROW on the other side has a contested ownership, and Oregon Fruit, the adjacent cannery, is no longer owned by a Salemite. Working out a path connection through to Second Street might be even more difficult than it seemed. A connection to the Second/Edgewater district also doesn't help people coming from Glen Creek and points north, who must still navigate Wallace/Highway 221 and its massiveness.
Here's the summary.
|Task Force Summary, August 2012|
Otherwise it still just represents a massive dredging operation on the roadways, and makes it more difficult to make connections for people who aren't driving cars.
For more discussion, the Task Force conversations about 2A are interesting. Here are some of the relevant memos. The first two are from the elimination brackets with two alternatives set side-by-side and compared.
2A vs. 2B, with 2B dropped, July 2012
2A vs. 4A, about equal, July 2012
Alternatives Voting memo, August 2012
Online survey preferences
Summary Memo, August 2012
If 2A gains traction as a way to dump the Pine-Hope alignment of the "Salem Alternative," perhaps we'll revisit these in more detail.