STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK REQUEST
CEDAR STREET – COLLEGE ROAD TO HOLBROOK DRIVE
The Ingham County Road Department (ICRD) is pleased to announce Cedar Street between College Road and Holbrook Drive is planned to be reconstructed during the 2022 or 2023 construction seasons. Project development is currently in the concept design stage, so the ICRD is seeking stakeholder feedback on two alternative road alignments. We respectfully request feedback on these two alternatives by March 1, 2021. A website link to the plans for each of the alternatives are provided at the bottom of this page.
1) Background Information:
Cedar Street from College Road to Holbrook Drive is currently a four lane boulevard with numerous non-conforming median crossovers. Due to design requirements linked to the use of federal funds, Cedar Street cannot be reconstructed maintaining the current crossovers. Traffic volumes on Cedar Street do not warrant the need to maintain the existing boulevard, so the ICRD has developed two alternatives for consideration. One alternative converts Cedar Street into a conventional three lane road with a center turn lane running the full length of the project, allowing direct left turn access to all businesses. The second alternative maintains the existing boulevard, but the number of crossovers are reduced, requiring a U-turn for most businesses.
On a separate note, Delhi Township has been awarded funding from the Ingham County Trails and Parks millage to construct a non-motorized pathway within these same project limits. Currently, the proposed alignment of the pathway is proposed to be located between the businesses and the northbound lanes, where the county drain is located. It is our intent to coordinate the work between these two projects as much as feasibly possible.
2) Alternative A (Three Lane Concept):
This concept consists of eliminating the existing boulevard and constructing a three lane roadway with a continuous center left turn lane from College Road to Holbrook Drive. The location of the proposed three lane roadway would be constructed where the median and southbound lanes currently exist. The driveways along the east side of Cedar Street would be extended to meet the new road alignment. The proposed non-motorized path could potentially be located where the northbound lanes are currently, saving money in construction costs.
Pros for Alternative A:
▫ Direct left turn access to all business would be provided.
▫ All sized trucks would be accommodated by the center turn lane.
▫ Existing and projected traffic volumes are within the optimal range for a three-lane roadway.
▫ Removal of northbound lanes could allow for shallower ditch slopes.
▫ Anticipate a reduction of vehicle speeds and accidents.
▫ Winter maintenance will be more efficient.
▫ Lower construction costs between the two road alternatives.
▫ Potential for reduced construction costs on the non-motorized pathway project.
Cons for Alternative A:
▫ Passing of vehicles would be prohibited.
▫ The pathway project may need to be delayed to coordinate with the road project.
▫ Future traffic congestion if volumes more than double existing counts.
3) Alternative B (Modified Boulevard Concept)
This concept consists of maintaining the separate northbound and southbound lanes, but the number of crossovers will be reduced to meet current design standards creating one-way crossovers. The width of the median will remain the same, except it will be reduced where necessary to accommodate a turn lane at the U-turn crossovers. This alternative would be similar to the portion of Cedar St between College Rd and Howell Rd. The proposed non-motorized pathway will be located near the county drain.
Pros for Alternative B:
▫ Roadway can accommodate significant growth in future traffic volumes.
▫ Passing of vehicles would remain permissible.
▫ Vehicle speeds and associated safety concerns would remain high.
▫ The pathway project can occur prior to the road project.
Cons for Alternative B:
▫ Direct access to businesses would be reduced, requiring most traffic to make a U-turn.
▫ Large trucks will have difficulty navigating the U-turn crossovers as proposed.
▫ Significant impacts to businesses, pathway and right-of-way expected if the U-turn crossovers need to accommodate large trucks.
▫ Increased winter maintenance to maintain additional lanes for U-turn crossovers.
▫ Higher construction costs between the two road alternatives.
▫ Higher construction cost for the non-motorized pathway due to lack of construction coordination opportunities and the need for enclosing a portion of the county drain.
4) Stakeholder Feedback:
A public information meeting has not been scheduled at this time, due to COVID-19. Therefore, the ICRD is soliciting input directly from local businesses, property owners and other interested parties. Your input is greatly appreciated. Thank you!
Please click on the following links to view the 2 alternatives being considered for the Cedar St Project and let us now which alternative you prefer. Questions and comments may be emailed regarding your preference of the alternatives to ICRD at email@example.com by March 1, 2021.
Please note these links have aerial background and may take considerable time to download.
ALT A - NORTHWEST HALF - 3-LN CENTER LT TURN
ALT A - SOUTHEAST HALF - 3-LN CENTER LT TURN
ALT B - NORTHWEST HALF - 4-LN BOULEVARD W/ONE-WAY U-TURNS
ALT B - SOUTHEAST HALF -4-LN BOULEVARD W/ONE-WAY U-TURNS