Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.2 Status Report El Charro/ I-580 Interchange ~ . -*,,' . . CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: January 24, 1994 SUBJECT: status Report for El Charro/I-SSD Interchange Report by: Public Works Director Lee Thompson EXHIBITS ATTACHED: / Summary of Access Study Report. A TJKM representative will be at the meeting to explain the Report and answer questions RECOMMENDATION: gu. Receive report FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None at this time DESCRIPTION: For the past several years, Alameda County, the Cities of Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin, and local property owners have been meeting to discuss needed modifications to the El Charro/I-SSD interchange. This interchange will be the key component in the future development of the surrounding area and improvements will be essential to mitigate the traffic impact of nearby future development. For the short term, interim improvements will be needed to handle the diversion of truck traffic from Stanley Blvd./First Street in Pleasanton beginning in 1995. The impact on Eastern Dublin would be felt initially by the Chang-Su-O-Lin and TMI properties. Impacts would also be felt on much of the Eastern Dublin Planning Area along the future Fallon Road. The El Charro Road task force was created and a consultant team consisting of TJKM, Bissell & Karn (Greiner), Inc., and George Homolka, Inc. was hired to develop design alternatives for the necessary interchange improvements. The cost of the consultant's work was provided by Alameda County (as a property owner) and five private property owners, including Kaiser Sand & Gravel, Calmet, RMC Lonestar, Johnson-Himsl Property, and the Lin Company. The Cities of Pleasanton, Livermore and Dublin provided staff review of the study. Presently, the El Charro Road/I-SSD Interchange is a diamond configuration containing a two-lane bridge with ramps controlled by stop signs. There are three major quarry/concrete operations located to the south which supply much of the aggregate resource for the region, and which will continue to do so for at least the next 2S years. Quarry trucks use both El Charro Road and Stanley Blvd. as access points. A lawsuit settlement agreement between the quarry operators and the City of Pleasanton requires that after January 19, 1995, truck traffic on Stanley Blvd./First Street in Pleasanton will cease. This will result in a substantial increase in truck traffic on El Charro Road and the interchange. In contrast, the interchange is receiving very light automobile use. The north side of the interchange (Fallon Road) presently only serves widely scattered ranches and does not provide access to any public through roads. The south side of the interchange serves the quarries and a non-through frontage road provides access to a weekend open-air market, a driving range, and some farms. Under present conditions, the El Charro/I-SSD interchange operates well. The truck traffic generated at the quarries has almost exclusive use of the interchange during weekdays while the automobile traffic has almost exclusive use of the interchange on the weekends. Plans adopted or now under consideration by the four Valley jurisdictions will substantially increase the amount of automobile traffic using this interchange. At the same time, truck traffic will have increased dramatically when all quarry trucks are required to use the El Charro interchange. The consultant team has developed in~erchange improvement concepts that would improve the safety and capacity of this interchange (see summary Report). In a recent meeting, the members of the Task Force decided not to pursue improving the interchange at this time, but to make improvements on local streets. It was further agreed that when improvements to the I-SSD interchange are needed, that developers and property owners on both sides of the freeway would contribute toward the improvements of this interchange. ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Chris Kinzel, TJKM ;.. - .. . . SUMMARY EL CHARRO ROAD AND INTERSTATE 580 ACCESS STUDY REPORT Prepared for the EI Charro Road Task Force Consultant Team: Bissell & Karn (Greiner), Inc. T JKM Transportation Consultants. George E. Homolka, Inc. OCTOBER 1993 LI . . SUMMARY The EI Charro Road Task Force under the guidance of the Alameda County Planning Department commissioned a study of the access around the EI Charro / Fallon Road and 1-580 interchange. The purpose of the study was to determine how to successfully mix the existing and future rock quarry traffic with proposed residential and commercial traffic growth in the immediate area. The present 1-580 interchange is a standard diamond interchange with single lane on and off ramps. The ramp ends are controlled by stop signs. The traffic on EI Charro Road and Fallon Road is not controlled. The interchange is owned and operated by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and any modification of the interchange requires their approval. EI Charro Road runs south of the interchange in the cities of Livermore and Pleasanton. The developed portion of the roadway is privately owned. Fallon Road runs north of the interchange in the City of Dublin and is publicly owned. The EI Charro/Fallon interchange presently handles a large number of quarry trucks and very limited automobile traffic. Because of the limited demand on the interchange, it operates at a high level of service. The demand, however, will increase over the next few years due to several factors: 1. In 1995, truck routes in Pleasanton will be altered thus requiring virtually all quarry trucks to use the interchange. 2. Quarry truck volume is projected to increase. 3. Residential and commercial development is projected to occur both north and south of 1-580. Existing and projected truck volumes are shown on Figures 1 and 2 respectively. Buildout and Modified Buildout traffic volumes are shown on Figures 3 through 6. The proposed residential and commercial development is planned to have access to 1- 580 at the EI Charro I Fallon Road interchange. In addition to the through traffic on EI Charro Road and Fallon Road, traffic will be augmented by traffic from new arterials parallel to 1-580. On the north side, the new parallel road will be North Canyons Boulevard. North Canyons Boulevard presents little concern with regard to truck/auto mix because no quarry operations exist on the north side of 1-580. As long as the intersection of North Canyons Boulevard and Fallon Road is at least 1200 feet north of the interchange ramp end, no unusual problems are anticipated. On the south side, the parallel road will be Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard. The new intersection of Stone ridge Drive and EI Charro Road must provide for the safe passage of a large . . number of quarry trucks and must provide adequate spacing for the safe mixing of automobiles and trucks as they enter the freeway. The location and design of the Stoneridge intersection with EI Charro Road is complicated by the following conditions: 1. Stoneridge Drive/Jack London Boulevard will be required to be extended east of EI Charro Road to Airway Boulevard as a condition of freeway access improvements. The location of the extension is undetermined at this time. 2. The Stoneridge Drive / EI Charro Road intersection will be very near the proposed new confluence of the Arroyo Mocho (Line G) and the Arroyo Las Positas (Line H). 3. The proposed Stoneridge Drive / EI Charro Road intersection requires the conversion of a private quarry haul road to a public street between the new intersection and Friesman Road. 4. Rock quarry traffic has had almost exclusive use of the 1- 580 interchange since it was built. Trucks have not been required to mix with auto traffic until they merged onto the freeway lanes. Several previous studies of the problems outlined above, have preceded this study. The goals of this study were therefore set as follows: 1. Develop an expanded interchange which will allow for the safe handling of the projected mixed auto and quarry truck flows and will be acceptable to Caltrans. 2. Develop an intersection at Stoneridge Drive and EI Charro road which will safely segregate auto and truck traffic. 3. Develop a phasing plan which will satisfy the requirements of the local jurisdictions and Caltrans. 4. Identify potential funding sources. 5. Develop trigger mechanisms to indicate the need to move to the next phase of development. The recommended configurations are shown on Exhibits 1 and 2. These exhibits show the recommended Stage I and Stage 1\ development of the circulation system. The costs for development of Stage I is $ 10,949,000 and for Stages I and II is $ 21,512,000 as shown on Tables 1 and 2 respectively. 2 . . In considering the sources of funds to construct the necessary improvements, only those that can realistically be expected are presented here. Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan: TOTAL $1,128,500 $5,886,500 $ 951,600 $7,966,600 1-580 Interchange EI Charro Road Flood Control Eastern Dublin Specific Plan Interchange Improvements $11,220,000. .Split evenly in the years 2003 and 2004 Livermore Transportation Improvement Fee Program (TIF) Not Programmed Alameda Flood Control and Water Conservation District- Zone 7 Special Drainage Area 7-1 Reimbursement Line G (Arroyo Mocho) Construction $ Line H (Arroyo Las Positas) Construction $ Junction Structure $ 431,592 198,624 30,400 $ 660,616 State and Local Transportation Partnership Program (SB 300) This program historically has participated at approximately 15-30% of Construction costs. Based on the construction costs shown in Tables 1 and 2 and a 15% participation, the SB 300 funds are expected to be: Stage I Stages I and II $ 1,312,000 $ 2,582,000 3 . . Funds available for Stage I: TOTAL $ 7,966,600 $ 0 $ 0 $ 660,600 $ 1,312,000 $ 9,939,200 $ 1,010,000 Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan Eastern Dublin Specific Plan City of Livermore TIF Special Drainage Area 7-1 SB 300 SL TPP funds Shortfall (excluding RIW costs) Funds available for Stages I and \I TOTAL $ 7,966,600 $11,220,000 $ 0* $ 660,600 $ 2,582,000 $ 22,429,200 Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan Eastern Dublin Specific Plan City of Livermore TIF Special Drainage Area 7-1 SB 300 SL TPP funds *TIF funds are not programmed at this time. Based on the above available funds, not including any participation by Livermore, plus 15% from SB 300, there is slight shortfall in funding for the development of Stages I. Stage \I appears to be fully fundable in 2004. This will depend on inflation and the City of Livermore TIF participation. Based on the above information, it was recommended that the EI Charro Road Task Force proceed with the development of a Project Study Report (PSR) to begin the required Caltrans approval process, develop a mechanism to cover the funding shortfall and begin development of the necessary agreements between the many jurisdictions affected by the proposed work. However, the time frame required for Caltrans approval and the potential funding shortfall for Stage lied the Task Force to request that additional studies be completed to develop scaled back improvements plans for EI Charro Road outside of the freeway right of way. These alternatives are presented as Interim Alternatives A, B, C and D on Exhibits 3,4,5 and 6 respectively. The development costs for each alternative are shown on tables 1 through 6 respectively. All of these reduced cost alternatives have traffic limitations. In order for the reader to determine the approximate life of any of these alternatives, Traffic figures 7 through 9 have been developed. These figures illustrate the critical intersections, their critical volumes and the traffic that would be added by planned development projects. By adding the volumes from the new development to the already approved volumes, the 4 . . new intersection volumes can be approximated. When the volume exceeds the critical volume, the intersection breaks down. The proposed improvements will require several inter jurisdictional agreements. This is due to the number of Cities that must eventually sign a new Freeway Agreement and must jointly fund the project. These agreements and the time consuming Caltrans process cause a long lead time for projects of this type. It is estimated that it will take at least 3 years from the beginning of the PSR before any major interchange modifications can begin construction. This process can take many years longer if funding is not available. Recommendations: 1. Develop the funding to cover the cost of preparing a Project Study Report (PSR) to begin the Caltrans processing for a modified interchange. The cost for the PSR will be between $300,000 and $ 500,000 and will take one to one and a half years to complete.. The PSR develops preliminary traffic, geometry and cost estimates for construction, RIW and Engineering. It also includes a Preliminary Environmental Evaluation Report used to determine the area of impact and required environmental studies. When approved by Caltrans, it becomes the controlling guideline for interchange geometry and the Environmental Document. 2. Develop agreements between the affected jurisdictions regarding funding and development control. 3. Establish a joint project with Zone 7 to ensure that channel excavation is used for roadway fill. 4. Develop funding to construct Stage I, if possible. 5. If funding is available, but Caltrans has not approved the project, construct Interim Alternative D. This stage will provide capacity for growth during the time it will take for Caltrans approval of the interchange modifications. It will also provide for the least sunk cost in staging. 6. If only minimal funds are available, consider the other Interim Alternatives in conjunction with limited growth until funds are available for the construction of Stage I. 5 z ~ WB 1-580 FRIESMAN RD. 20 (30)/ t .. (90) 30 [f tt: << :r u ui LEGEND (XXX) (A.M.) XX (P.M.) Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents EI Charro Road Improvement Study 1993 Gravel Trucks (based on 500 truck trips per day) jkM EB 1.580 II North FIGURE 1 , 4.066 . 8/93 - RH z g ~ (458) 14"8'4:: EB ~580 WB 1.580 HUESMAN RD. (572) 184/ t , (792) 225 o a: a: ~ u uj LEGEND (XXX) (A.M.) XX (P.M.) II North Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents EI Charro Road Improvement Study Design Year Gravel Trucks ' (based on 5,400 truck trips per day) Prepared By FIGURE likM 2 14.066. 10193. RH z 9 ~ WB 1.580 I I I I I 184: I 1 215 I 1,10~ + ~50 I 1,015 -:Jt 60 -----... 65~ fi cr g irl Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents. EI Charm Road Improvement Study Buildout P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes EB ~580 I , 1225 I , ~ 1,000 .....- 240 ~25 5' t ~5 435 I. II I I 1/225 II II tl 184 II North jkM FIGURE 3 14.066.10/93. RH z 9 ;;i u. we 1-580 , I I I I 572: I I 350 \ 65~ + ~OOO\ 330--" 240 -. ~ 25 o a: rz: ~ o Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents. m 1 loaded truck"" 3 autos 1 unloaded truck"" 2 autos EI Charro Road Improvement Study Buildout A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes I I , 1792 I I ~250 ..- 60 r-25 20 t h5 195 I. " , , , '792 " I' .' 572 iliM ee ~580 ~ North FIGURE 4 14-{)66 - 10193. RH :z o ~ we 1.580 2,26~ I I I I 1 184: I I 215 \ 1,10~ + ~50 \ 1,015 ---11 60 ----. 65~ Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents. 40 I 1 '225 I I ~ 1,000 .- 240 ~25 5d t r!5 435 I. 1 I 1 I "225 II II ." 184 o a: a: ;[ u ...J UJ EI Charro Road Improvement Stuc;iy Modified Buildout P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes E8 ~580 II North ikM FIGURE 5 14.066. 10193 - RH we 1.560 2,21~ z o g ~3 I I I I I 572: I I 405 \ 65~ + ~0001 330.J 240 ---ftoo- ~ 25 I I I 1792 I I ~250 ....- 60 ,r- 25 20 t ~5 195 I. I I I I 1'792 II II +' 572 o a: rr '" :r (.J Truck volumes are expressed in passenger car equivalents. ui 1 loaded truck = 3 autos 1 unloaded truck = 2 autos EI Charro Road Improvement Study Modified Buildout A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes jliM EB ~5B0 II North FIGURE 6 14.066 . 10/93 - RH i JJ~~~ ~ Ci5 10001"-'----"" -+ :::::::;--"" ~ ~S ~ ~.> ....~ ....- ....- ----fJo- 10001 ----fJo- ----fJo- l'll ~ J~ 1l- ~--::f=~ -... ..; - U ~rr G) C) ca Ci5 ........- ........- .....- ----fJo- ----fJo- -... .....- ........- ----fJo- ----fJo- J ~ ~ ~ \...\... J L J +- -+ IQQQI +- -+ , ---'l ttt I J J --- J~ [QQQ] llt G) J~ C) ~ .s Jl.. .....- en ~~ .......... ........- J 10001 .-- -4 - E r.--; --tJro- ----fJo- -... - -.. 'a::: "'" 'I llt C1> :s en G) 0 '0 E 0 _:;, N 0- ~g eo ~= I-'E o u T"" 1100 D EOL{) co ~ 'C ....: C") 2 II II c - --- c: o :;: () C1> en '0 ca o c: o '- '- ca ~ U W co s: o co L{) I ..c - .~ c o 'u 0> (j) ~~ 2 ctI Eo: O'l C 'w (j) e () ~ Q) > o o co LO I - o o C\J T"" 1108 EDL{) co ~ . i:: T""~ C") 2 II II c _ co w o co L{) I ..c - .~ c o 'u 0> (j) ~a... 2~' Eo: 0> > 'C o Q) O'l "0 'i:: .. 0> "Oc 0:0 - oC/) ~ ...... 0 ctI- ..co ()co -LO w~ o o N_ T"" 1108 Eoo co ~ -;:: ....: C") 2 II II C - --- ..c Q) -> .~ (5 C Q) .Q 0') U:Q Q) ...... (j) 0> ~ C Q) 0 - - EC/) Gl Gl ~ C C E j j Gl > ~o >- 0 'E :E ii: 0 OJ -g ~ .g )( :J ~ :i ~ C) t t t I W a: ~ ~- " r--- u: ~ ;! i1 >. "0 ::J Ci5 - c Q) rn E_ O> C ~ Q) a.E E Q) ~C) ctI C o co 0: ~ ~ e<( ~ ctI Q) ..c C () co w...J ."0 .5 B ~ .&J U Iii :J C ... c::l-;; -= c1t"5l w C c 8:= I- ::l o C ...l 5 m cO 0- - '.c c><u l'l!CllUl Ul 3: :J ';0..= c.~ BE -...Ul :i f!! iii Ul "'-0 l'l!l'l!1- CllCll C:Z Ul ~ CllUl.cU ....!!!U~ Uc.cE <l'l!I1lE C\l-a: C\lU) 0 (,) + )( iiii:i .., :: >. UlC"O CllCl)I1l C (,) CI) ..9 a: :!2_Ul OI1lCl) .cUE Ul = :J Cl)i: - .E(')~ I- :!: UJ 0 .. - ...- a::""'11l W c:( ~ "0 .... ~ (,) :g z en jjj a: l!! iijo Cl)E ~~ > :i C"O oCl) c> l'l! 0 Ul ... 11lC. CllC. 0:< Cl c 'ti -;( w Ul -c I1lCll ~E .- Cll ...> (,)0 :E J\.. "'" 00 00 00 00 00_ NN LOLO LOLO .... 0_ NN 00 o LO "<too 00 coco LO LO LO 0 LO en en en o LO 0....... ....C") LO LO LO"<t C")C") 00 "<t co .... o LO co 00 C").... :::2:::2 <0.: o o .... .... r:-; CD ~ VJ 0. oE OOro ~a: ~~ ---"'" LOO 00 .... f.t')_ .... .... N LOO "<to .... co_ .... .... 00 o LO "<too 00 NC") NCO LO LO .... N co....... o LO 0....... ....C") o LO ....... C") .... 00 N "<t .... LO 0 NLO C").... :::2:::2 <0.: o o .... .... ~ .-. .---.. ~r CD wen' 00. ooE f.t')ro ~a: ..-...-- .of-- .---.. 00 00 o LO C")_ LO .... 00 moo LOCO LO 0 C") 0 ....0 No .... .... o LO 0....... ....C") 00 men ....C") o LO LON N.... LO 0 m.... LOC") :::2::E <0.: o o .... .... )~ --A 10001 .. - - - - .... ~~t Q) OJ "0 ';:: Q) Q) c: > 0.- -- ... (/)0 III III i c c ~ j j > 3:0 >- 0 C :E u::: 0 OJ ] g ;; :i ~ c'3 t t t w a: :::) CO " u: :t: a: ~ ~ ;! i1 cu .- - c: Q) - o a. >,- '0 c: :J Q) U5 E -Q. a3 0 E- O) Q) > > o Q) CiC E Q) C) CO - en E -g o a: o ..... ..... ctl .- J::: ~ oS wE: . . ,"0 UJ .5 CGl U".l 0 0 0 II: 8.5 co ..- 0 co .0 cl!! Lll T'" C\J. ~ :J Q) :3 :JUj T'" C\J T'" T'" " Q it 'til 00 ca tbal U".l 0 0 U".l it LU cc "'<I' 0 0 U".l 0- .... (0 co C\J_ o~ T'" T'" T'" t- Gl :J ... 0 'til0 0 0 0 0 00 Q GI E 0 U".l 0 0 <0 en ...l ::~ C\J "'<I' .... ~"'<I' 5 > T'" m ~ c.s o . ej:(.c 0 to lOU".l 0 U".l ::lGlu "'<I' 0 I"--C\J co en _II! T"'_ ll). ca~:3 co I"-- <0 cq .!!!c..m T'" T'" .... c.." SE -"'II! c~- lO U".l 0 0 U".l 0 =...J! (0 C") C\J en lO ('I') caca~ C") '<t <0 co C") co GlCll a:z II! S GlII!.cU ...Glu'" 0 lO 0 0 0 U".l u'Q.cGl <(cacaE U".l I"-- 0 ll) 0 I"-- Niiia:E ..- .... C") .... C") N 0 0 C"O OGl e> to 0 U".l ll} 0 0 caO co ..- 0 (0 en O'l II!'" cae. C\J C\J '<t "'<I' ..- C") GlD.. a:<( + >< iiii~ Iii:::>> 0 0 0 0 00 GlC"O C\J C\J <0 C") cGlca 00 Gl ...J a: Cl c i 0 0 lO U".l U".l U".l - ..- C") lO '<t (0 (0 CO )( LU :;::: ~~ ~~ s:: ~ ~ Q) <( a.: <:a.: <(a.: ... >.0 :2_11! -00. OcaGl 0 0 0 :J i;.2E 0 0 0 ....... ... Gl~:3 cq, cq, cq, CJ) t: ;:o~ .... .... ..- ....... Q) c::: E t- <1> ~ )~ E 0.. ~- - - - -~ - - <1> 0 - - .-- ........-- > III ....--- 0- - .,- ~ -c ........-- .... Q) caGl )~ - c.> .~ E ....- ----. ---fJo- --A 10001 III III ii E Q) =Gl 10001 C c E ...> j j -0 00 ----. -.. , III 10001 ~ > -0 :!: D 1ft 11t >- 0 ctl Q) ----""" C :i ~ u: 0 "i o t: 'l:I ;>t 0:0 III () .2 - Ol 15 ::I .1: e o .. CO Ol :i .= u .... Q) L1J ...- CO "0 ctl ...ca ;: C) CJ ca'C en W en .;;:; t ! t ..c::: .cca 00.. 0.. OlOl () m ~ 00 coE oE l:: > I - ... [ja: lJ')CO COco 0,- I W(/) ~1I -.... ..l.CI: U"JO ;r a:: ~ ~ ;! . . . . _-:. ~-. ..~.i..J:..~7"':"':::::' .-. ... _: -<.:....."'...--- or" ~~ ~:=',':--=-~ .-= ',\',j --. t- - m - :I: X W ','-'-.''-'::'::"-,.""~.. _' __::i"":"'~'--:' ~,...~...~~ " _.:/_-;;'}~-'c::';!t';?C r r ( -:'n. ", .t;-;"" . l!/ ..-- .-- i .... 0 ~ "-' 0 "<t 0 0: <> '" ::> -N- ,:. ~\ <[ f- f- 0 '" '" "-' U 0: ~ "-' "-' ::> ~ Z 0: 0: ~ <.:l> .. .. f- f- ~iE -' -' '" '" <( 0 '" '" "-' -' u ","-' "-' u '" <.:l "-' '" Ul -'-" z xo: x ::> 0 Q "-' "-'... :i 0: 0: 0: Z '-" .... U ::> 0: '" .... U 0 000000 ..... ! 'j" " ~ / ',';,1.' '" r ~- :rj ~. : - r, o < o 0: ;z: < :; CIl 'l1J fE l~~-/'J; "I I , j- :1 ~ ~ . I, ., I ' J4..)"\' ;:"~,},-- _ ..". ,- c> 0'1101;1 NOONOl >l:lVr 01 .', p- - -, c:"" ?'_.~" r' ~~;... .:p-;"::"" r - ';"--n"r:t '~: .r'~-:: '- -- . . ' , . , . , ..:..-". .\ cQ' ,..".. -----........-...... .,-- ~- " " Cj- 1',- '_ -_/' \"\~s / %/ ./, \.\,S\tQ) /// ~O~~~~ .,:;/ / ~~/ ." -\ .-' '--, -~ iii:'-'~~~~~~::::~~ OHJOW OAOYl:/tf ~ ~ 6~ N w9 "- ~ ~~ 0 3 ~~ .... ~ w- W w a.: '" U1 ~ "8 ~ ~~ :J ~ . - .. 0 I ~:!!. om ~~ " w~ >~ ~m OJ:! . g- r::: l' ... " ~ ~ ~l ~i LC ~~ '" '" a:; . g e> "c 0 U1 ~ ! ~s '" .!:O ~~ -' ag i"i c:J !~ a. .. LLJ ~ <! I- 00 o <( o 0:: o 0: a: <! :c U ...J W . , , , . _ ~... ::""~?'S-~t~',. =- ......). ~ I --N- - ~ ..;-.-- <:> o ... uJ ..J <l: V (fJ B ~ ';.:..; .'r.. ":;~J~< . -.j, - 'j . C\I t- - m - :I: >< W -::..d - - ' /~~;~-~ ~".., , , ...!.n. ..... >- ~ Q i!i '" ~~ ~ ;r:;~ ... ~~ fa xa:: x ~lJ.. !i '" ~ .... .... uJ en LIJ U Z uJ uJ ::) <( ~ ~ ~ ~ -1 tI) (fJ :>- ~VJUJ...J ~ g~g~~~ ~5~~5~ OOOOgODO =-- ;;:: o~g~ ......;;::0 -,ga: -', .,:>::..-.0. . .-. ~ ..';.~.<:. ~ S\"\~s ./ )>./" ",~oO).p% /' OiO \.6c.~"\t7 /#.:: ~~'l' \..~t\. ~,?, -~ -, /' ~ _~~"6; ~~ .....,.. OHJOW o).6JJJJ~ , ,.. .,,:~',;~1~ :;, :.0, :!-:'=c;;:' I ~~ ~ 3 oiL,: ~ 2" ~ltJ~ ~ w" !J! a 3: Ul ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ III :I; cr ~ w .... Z ~- ~ g; " ~:: ~ ..5 i C . ~ .. ~ ... ~ . ~ H . . S ~ LO .~ M 0> iii .,; !2' ..< 0 . . lH ~~ N ~.. ..J i55 ,,0 [!' ffi! "- <l: - - UJ " <t ..... U) o <t o 0: o a: 0:: <t :c U -' 1lI ~. 1.;,.- ""( . -' \ - .. \. ~~/ Z ~ ~ +. ~ ,. h li ) ""- !C !!\ ~ go W '" !II! ffi ii ~ ..J !at:! lU :lIE ; go ~ ~ .. ... .... go '" go g :g ~ ti ') ) ~...~ 'r~ . . ~ ,. ~ .. "tl-al.X3 ;AIljO.3i>OIl:1"3HOiS . ,.~. t/P'F->.' " . . . (") I- - CD - :t: >< W . -.... ~.+ ,\--- I \ I ',-- I Y ~. I \01311} '( (03.1'(:) 1 00401111 S,(.1IS0~/ - \/ ........-. \.. ~.~~/ ~,,:.. ~ I!!:; ~u in . /; i R; ~ i! E it ~H a; il ih <C :aE - a: w I- Z - o <C o a: o a: a: <C :J: U ..J W '-. "(. c:t l- - 03 - X >< w . j"h li .. , :;:~ o ~ ~ v /is- :i. i ~~ ~ ~. : Q~ i ;. 5 :l; " e :;. ~ 0: c :.: t; ~: .." . i c: ,,; J. ffi 1 ~h LO . ~ ~\ ~\~;; ,- H DJ ." '-. i '" + '" z ,\- 03 \ \ ) 0 \ \ '-..---"" ~ \ - ') y a:. ) UJ ", \ l- Z " - % 0 en (/) 4- 0 0:: 0 () a: ~ III UJ 0 0:: () a:. -1 < a:. z oCt Q l- X 0.. U 0 ..J \'31:1) 1:11 \ u.l (03j.1:l~, 0-,01:1 OdS / ~ S1j.15 './ _____ \ ~ J,. ~'-../ --- - ----- ~ ~ '"'" -- ..\... 1-- .. ( . .... " -. \. -'\j ~, ~ ~ - -l-. Lt) t- - m - x x w - ,. i 8 ~ ~ ~N-..... . ~ 5 . ~ ~ J ..... ... "" !!i ; '" 0 .... .... e '" ... g ~I ~ '" ... ... ... a: a: a: z z .... .... 0"" '" ~ '" '" ... .... ;r;.c .... .. '" ... lti ....il e '" 0 z ~~ ~ u e g ~ ... ::> a: a: a: a: U ...... :II .... U III + '\ I \ I \ '-.....-- I J-; ,.' I o oooooo~. . "~- "". . - . ,... ~ ... .. ... ...... '"' . .. ~... . ~ .. ... -. ...., ;"1110 3~511113~OJ.S S1431.X3 . .. .." 140\ . . ) . ) " z en en o a: () ~ UJ UJ a: u ..J <C Z Q t- o.. o . ;1111 (a3.l"t:>~'OAOIlIl't' 5"t.l150cl 5"t ~ ----- \./ - - ..----'v - ------- ~ " OH;JOlf OAOIIII.. I' . II II . II ': Iii \ II !!' Ill! I : I II\! \ I ! III \ $ l'!:; .. ~9 ~ f ~ " u_ ~~ ! ;; ~ ~~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~~ .. , ~ wt~ ! ~i ~ ~:: ~. ~] ... :, I ~ i. LD (~ Qj ;1 U1 :_ Ul !.. .- ii CJ ~:l u ~ - a: w ..... z o <t o a: o a: a: <C :I: U .J W + '\ C I \ I \ '-.--- ~ I - V a: w I- ,o' I Z - (.:J c z en <t (I) 0 0 a: a: (,) ::.:: 0 UJ UJ a: a: (,) a: ..J c:( <t z 0 :I: I- 0 a.. 0 -I W "'" ~. , , \. ... /-- "( . -. ". " -. \. ~j ~ -~ .. ! 8 ~ ~ -~-~ : U m ) .... ... i '" 0 0 ... '" ... ~I .. '" ... 0 '" ~ II: II: Z ... "'... .. .. '" .. .. ;;,( .. '" '" '" 1:5 ...J: 0 '" la'" ... <..l 0 ... '" >< ::> II: :fE 5 II: II: <..l ... <..l o 000000 .~~ ... ... ~ ~ .. ~ ~ po .. .. .. " ~ , po ... ~.." . ~ ~ """ X3 ~^,l!~ 3~;1l!3;OJ.S O\S"1~ . . ~ ,.,.. " . :'> " ) OH:JO';' OJ.OIJIJtI' I' II " I II ! i. I i \I : ! II ~ ! I : I Iii! \ l! Iii \ U) I- - Dl - :I: X W t l";; ~ ~~ ~ ~ = u ~! i ~~ : ii ~ ::l~ .. = o c ~:; ! ei ~ ~: c a~ . , c:: ~i ... ~l ~ ~. L.iJ (~ w ;r Utd Ut I" .- ~i aJ ~:l . . COSTS. The cost of construction for each of the recommended plans is shown on the following tables. TABLE 1 ELCHARRO INTERCHANGE-STAGE I Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $225,000 Temporary Facilities $225,000 Earthwork $1,566,000 Paving and Base $1,335,000 Ramps $372,000 City Street $700,000 Truck Road $263,000 Structures $2,363,000 Overpass Widening $670,000 Creek Crossings $581,000 Retaining Walls $370,000 Tunnel $742,000 Drainage $450,000 Freeway $300,000 Local $150,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $150,000 Signals and Lighting $400,000 Mobilization $895,000 Construction Subtotal $7,609,000 Contingency (15%) $1,140,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $8,749,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $2,200,000 TOTAL INITIAL PHASE $10,949,000 . . TABLE 2 EL CHARRO INTERCHANGE - STAGES I AND II COMBINED Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $450,000 Temporary Facilities $450,000 Earthwork $1,855,000 Excavation $1,755,000 Imported Borrow $100,000 Paving and Base $2,717,000 Ramps $1,444,000 City Street $950,000 Truck Road $323,000 Structures $4,745,000 Overpass Widening $670,000 New Overpass $1,300,000 Ramp Overpass $315,000 Creek Crossings $1,348,000 Retaining Walls $370,000 Tunnel $742,000 Drainage $700,000 Freeway $450,000 Local $250,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $750,000 Signals and Lighting $1,495,000 Mobilization $1,800,000 Construction Subtotal $14,962,000 Contingency (15%) $2,250,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $17,212,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $4,300,000 TOTAL ULTIMATE PHASE $21,512,000 . . TABLE 3 EL CHARRO INTERCHANGE - INTERIM ALTERNATIVE A Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $125,000 Temporary Facilities $125,000 Earthwork* $1,566,000 Paving and Base $274,000 Overlay Existing Streets $14,000 New City Street $150,000 Truck Road $110,000 Structures $781,000 Overpass Widening $0 Creek Crossings $781,000 Retaining Walls $0 Tunnel $0 Drainage $150,000 Freeway $0 Local $150,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $50,000 Signals and Lighting $150,000 Mobilization $500,000 Construction Subtotal $3,721,000 Contingency (15%) $550,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $4,271,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $1,070,000 TOTAL INTERIM ALTERNATIVE A $5,341,000 * Includes moving all Creek excavation to future embankment. If material is moved to stockpile, then remove $600,000 from the TOTAL. . . TABLE 4 EL CHARRO INTERCHANGE - INTERIM ALTERNATIVE B Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $125,000 Temporary Facilities $125,000 Earthwork* $1,566,000 Paving and Base $374,000 Overlay Existing Streets $14,000 New City Street $250,000 Truck Road $110,000 Structures $781,000 Overpass Widening $0 Creek Crossings $781,000 Retaining Waifs $0 Tunnel $0 Drainage $150,000 Freeway $0 Local $150,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $50,000 Signals and Lighting $150,000 MobiliZation $500,000 Construction Subtotal $3,821,000 Contingency (15%) $550,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $4,371,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $1,070,000 TOTAL INTERIM ALTERNATIVE B $5,441,000 * Includes moving all Creek excavation to future embankment. If material is moved to stockpile, then remove $600,000 from the TOTAL. . . TABLE 5 EL CHARRO INTERCHANGE -INTERIM ALTERNATIVE C Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $130,000 Temporary Facilities $130,000 Earthwork. $1,566,000 Paving and Base $484,000 Overlay Existing Streets $14,000 New City Street $325,000 Truck Road $145,000 Structures $1,281,000 Overpass Widening $0 Creek Crossings $781,000 Retaining Walls $0 Tunnel $500,000 Drainage $150,000 Freeway $0 Local $150,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $50,000 Signals and Lighting $200,000 Mobilization $520,000 Construction Subtotal $4,511,000 Contingency (15%) $650,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $5,161,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $1,290,000 TOTAL INTERIM ALTERNATIVE C $6,451,000 · Includes moving all Creek widening material to future embankment. If material is moved to stockpile, then remove $600,000 from the TOTAL . . TABLE 6 EL CHARRO INTERCHANGE - INTERIM ALTERNATIVE D Conceptual Estimate April 1993 Site Clearing $150,000 Temporary Facilities $150,000 Earthwork* $1,566,000 Paving and Base $639,000 Overlay Existing Streets $14,000 New City Street $325,000 Truck Road $300,000 Structures $1,631,000 Overpass Widening $0 Creek Crossings $781,000 Retaining Walls $100,000 Tunnel $500,000 Drainage $170,000 Freeway $0 Local $170,000 Signs, Stripes and Barricades $60,000 Signals and Lighting $200,000 Mobilization $560,000 Construction Subtotal $5,126,000 Contingency (15%) $900,000 CONSTRUCTION TOTAL $6,026,000 Engineering, Administration and Inspection (25%) $1,510,000 TOTAL INTERIM ALTERNATIVE 0 $7,536,000 * Includes moving all Creek widening material to future embankment. If material is moved to stockpile, then remove $600,000 from the TOTAL