Alternatives Development. In order to develop a consensus on the baseline project, two alternatives will be developed to approximately a 10% design level and studied. Plans will include a bridge general plan and a roadway plan and profile sheet. Up to three replacement alternatives will be developed. These may include: • Replace with a 6-lane bridge with 8’ shoulders and 5’ sidewalks, Width = 118’. Demo the existing bridge and re- align traffic to new structure (off-alignment). • Replace with a 4-lane bridge with 8’ shoulders, 4’ striped median and 5’ sidewalks, Width =.82’ Demo the existing bridge and re-align traffic to new structure (off-alignment). Construction within existing right-of-way.
Alternatives Development. The Consultant will evaluate alternatives to recommended facility requirements. To accommodate the facilities identified in the previous phase, we will present, discuss, and analyze feasible alternatives.
Alternatives Development. This subtask will focus on refining the alternatives developed in Phase I through preparation of operating plans. Phase I developed generalized descriptions for bus rapid transit including fixed guideway components along Xxxxxxx Avenue and Shawnee Mission Parkway/Martway Street. Subsequent evaluation and screening of these conceptual alternatives will be completed to narrow the range of viable alternatives to a manageable number to carry forward into a detailed analysis. This analysis includes the development of more detailed definition of alternatives, including an adequate transportation system management alternative likely to serve as the project’s Baseline Alternative for Small Starts reporting purposes. The following alternatives were developed in the Phase I study: • No Build • TSM • Build Fixed Guideway on Xxxxxxx Avenue and Martway Consider alternatives (consistent with joint FTA/FHWA guidance, and new SAFETEA- LU requirements), proposed in Phase I of this study, review and revise the assumptions upon which those alternatives were considered, evaluate project elements, including but not limited to alignment options and station locations, and confirm that these alternatives meet the project Purpose and Need.
Alternatives Development. Based on the alternatives selected for evaluation from the Technology Review Workshop, FNI will develop the following for each alternative: • Process flow diagram, • Conceptual site layout with yard piping for existing and proposed tanks, • List of necessary TCEQ Chapter 290 exceptions as required, • List of safety requirements per Fire Xxxxxxxx coordination, • Construction and project cost estimate, and • Operating cost estimate. Key Assumptions: • The evaluation will be confined to the existing Xxxxxx Road PS site. If it is determined that the existing site does not have sufficient space for an alternative, an alterative sire will be recommended, but a land acquisition study will not be included.
Alternatives Development. CONSULTANT will compile findings from Task 3 to develop a range of multimodal improvements. CONSULTANT anticipates this will include a confirmation of projects identified in Connect 2045 supplemented by new projects identified through the update process. Projects will be defined sufficiently for the public and partner agencies to understand the general scale and scope and to assess planning-level impacts and costs. CONSULTANT will conclude this task with updates to the MTP project list and maps of the recommended transportation improvements. A statement of scope, lead agency, anticipated year or timeframe for implementation, concept-level cost estimates in base year and potential year of expenditure dollars, project type, funding source, and functional classification (when applicable) for each project.
Alternatives Development. Defining Efficiency Conservation
Alternatives Development. Engagement & Coordination The consultant will meet with City Staff to review transportation network issues and needs based on existing and expected network operations. Additionally, the consultant will hold one council workshop to review current issues and potential opportunities with various stakeholders.
Alternatives Development. Project Segmentation 7
Alternatives Development. Purpose: To develop build alternatives (up to five) for the interchange improvements. Product: A set of up to five build alternatives which address the future capacity needs of the project study area. Xxxxx Xxxxxxx will assist with corridor vision and incorporation of Context Sensitive Solutions per Caltrans guidelines and city vision and develop a set or alternatives which Personnel: Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxx XxXxx Task 3.2 Geometric Development Purpose: To develop schematics/layout plans, select profiles, utility plans, and typical structural cross-sections for each alternative developed in Task 3.1. Per the updated PSR-PDS guidance, schematics/layouts plans are required for the PSR-PDS report. Other pertinent information such as profiles, utility plans, and typical structural cross-sections will be included in the project files. Approach: Schematics/layout plans, select profiles, utility plans, and typical cross-sections (schematic geometric plans) will reflect proposed lane, shoulder, buffer, and right-of-way widths for each alternative. RBF will identify early potential constraints, allowing the development of alternatives that will avoid or minimize negative environmental impacts. Cost effectiveness and right-of-way impacts will also play significant roles in the geometric development process. Products: Schematics/layout plans to be included as an attachment to the PSR-PDS document. Select profiles, utility plans, and typical cross sections will be included in the project files. HDM Advisory and Mandatory design exception(s) will be identified for each alternative in the PSR-PDS document. Personnel: Xxxx Xxxxxxxxx, Xxxxxx Xxxxx, Xxxxx XxXxx, Xxxxxx Xxxx
Alternatives Development. Three build alternatives were proposed that Xxxxxx-Xxxx developed in coordination with the City’s Capital Program and Planning Department staff during the PID phase. The range of potential improvements is specifically designed to meet the project objectives while maintaining flexibility and providing reasonable options that can be refined during the PA&ED phase. The following build alternatives will be the basis of our effort in this task: The two principles in our approach to developing the alternatives were: 1. Minimize right of way impacts; and 2. Meet highway standards to the extent reasonable. At several locations retaining walls may be required to avoid impacts to private properties and Amargosa Creek. These alternatives will be further developed based upon input from the City, Caltrans and the Public Scoping Meeting. Three build alternatives will be developed for consideration. If alternatives can be eliminated based on the input and City acceptance of the developed alternatives, they will be dropped to reduce the effort required to analyze and clear three build alternatives in the PA&ED phase.
