Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Big Blue River study outlines options, puts price tag on new north–south connection
Summary
A locally funded cost-benefit study presented route options A–E for a second Big Blue River connection; estimated construction costs range from about $13.3 million (route C upgrade) to $245.6 million (route E), with Route A estimated at $98.4 million and Route B at $83 million. Planners said political consensus and local funding agreements would be required to move forward.
Jared Chamberlin, director with the Financial Support Organization, presented findings from a locally funded Big Blue River Second Connection cost-benefit analysis on May 21, outlining five route options (A–E) with differing lengths, bridge requirements and impacts. He emphasized the study's design criteria: a rural two-lane collector with 40 mph design speed, approximately 100 feet of right-of-way on average, and paved shoulders.
Chamberlin gave metric comparisons: route lengths and bridge spans vary (one proposed bridge approaches 1.5 miles on option E; other routes require shorter bridges or no major bridge at all), projected daily traffic ranged widely by route and scenario (current-model daily volumes near 2,000 for some options; high-growth 2050 projections push some routes above 5,000), and travel-time differences were modest in many cases. He presented cost estimates: "98.4 million's the cost" for route A, about $83 million for route B, roughly $13.3 million to upgrade route C, and about $245.6 million for route E, with a large share of each total attributable to bridge construction.
Chamberlin noted the project is unlikely to be a state or federal highway; it would probably be locally owned and maintained, requiring agreements on maintenance responsibilities. He said the next step would be political consensus and formation of a joint leadership committee to pursue preliminary design and right-of-way acquisition if the project advances.
Commissioners and staff discussed flood exposure, right-of-way impacts, and traffic-model sensitivity to assumptions; Chamberlin acknowledged the projections include high-end growth scenarios and that some routes would not stay passable in a 100-year flood. No formal action was taken; the presentation was informational and part of a larger public outreach program for the study.
