|
® AECOM
<br />4
<br />detail, they will be scored based upon criterion defined by
<br />the Project Development Team (PDT), including the definition
<br />of the importance, in terms of point values, for each of the
<br />factors used for comparison. It will be our responsibility
<br />to thoroughly study these alternatives, so an accurate and
<br />defensible account of each relative to the other can be
<br />achieved. The RFP mentions developing "initial screening
<br />criteria" to assist in this process, and this is exactly how we
<br />develop the grade separation projects we have successfully
<br />completed. We use a Comparison Matrix shown as Figure 3,
<br />and have included an example within this proposal, located
<br />immediately after the alternatives figures. This example has
<br />been populated with very preliminary data, but serves well
<br />to show how this tool assists in the differentiation of the
<br />studied alternatives.
<br />Three (3) alternatives are included in this proposal, more fully
<br />described as follows:
<br />Alternative 1: Centerline Alignment-Undercrossing
<br />This alternative follows the existing centerline of the
<br />roadway, and is shown in plan and profile in Figure 1. The
<br />profile for Alternative 1 daylights at or nearthe Santiago
<br />Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor overlay on the
<br />westerly project limit, and for the easterly limit, also meets
<br />the existing roadway just west of the 1-5 Southbound (SB) off -
<br />ramp. Some of the advantages of this alignment are:
<br />• Requires no additional right of way, and incurs no
<br />foreseeable relocation or severance costs
<br />• Most effective for Land Use, since it maintains the
<br />existing use through -out the project
<br />• Maintains the existing tangential alignment for Santa
<br />Ana Boulevard
<br />Some of the disadvantages are:
<br />• Requires the most utility relocations, those affected
<br />being gas, water, sewer, and storm drain
<br />• Requires traffic to be detoured away from the existing/
<br />future path of travel for a longer duration, when
<br />compared to the other two alternatives
<br />Alternative 2: South Alignment
<br />This alignment is shown in Figure 2. Beginning from the
<br />western limit of the project, this alternative turns southerly
<br />using a set of reversing curves, continues for a short distance
<br />parallel to the existing centerline, then turns northerly
<br />using another set of reversing curves, finally matching the
<br />existing alignment west of the 1-5 SB off -ramp. Similar to
<br />Alternative 1, the profile daylights at or near the Santiago
<br />Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor overlay on the
<br />westerly project limit, and for the easterly limit, also meets
<br />the existing roadway just west of the 1-5 SB off -ramp. Some
<br />of the advantages of this alignment are:
<br />• Requires the least amount of utility relocations
<br />• Can be constructed with the least amount, and
<br />duration, of traffic disruption
<br />Some of the disadvantages are:
<br />Introduces two sets of reversing curves to the
<br />horizontal alignment, resulting in the most degraded
<br />final alignment, when compared to the other two
<br />alternatives
<br />Has the least effective land use planning, given the
<br />remnant parcels from the current street alignment
<br />adjacent to the residential properties
<br />Requires additional work to reestablish access to
<br />Fruit Street and the adjacent properties. Even though
<br />the RFP states this leg of Fuller Street is to become a
<br />cul-de-sac, it may be prudent to revisit keeping this
<br />access to Santa Ana Boulevard in support of future
<br />development
<br />Alternative 3: North Alignment
<br />This alignment is also shown in Figure 2. Beginning from the
<br />western limit of the project, this alternative turns northerly,
<br />continues northwesterly on tangent, then turns southerly
<br />matching the existing alignment easterly of the 1-5 SB on-
<br />ramp. Similar to Alternative 1, the profile daylights at or near
<br />the Santiago Street centerline requiring, at most, a minor
<br />overlay on the westerly project limit, and for the easterly
<br />limit, also meets the existing roadway at or near the 1-5 SB
<br />off -ramp. Some of the advantages of this alignment are:
<br />• Similar to Alternative 2, it minimizes utility relocations
<br />• Similar to Alternative 2, it can be constructed with less
<br />disruption to the traffic than Alternative 1
<br />Some of the disadvantages are:
<br />The City has stated right of way acquisition within the
<br />residential parcels located between Santiago Street
<br />and Lincoln Avenue, north of Santa Ana Boulevard, is
<br />very controversial to the neighborhood; therefore this
<br />disadvantage is fairly encompassing, and probably is
<br />enough to classify Alternative 3 as non-viable
<br />Impacts the alignments of both the 1-5 on and off -
<br />ramp, resulting in the need to involve Caltrans in a
<br />permit/oversight role, increasing both the schedule and
<br />the cost of the project
<br />May be the most environmentally impactful, due to the
<br />need to construct the new roadway on the currently
<br />vacant parcel westerly of the 1-5 SB off -ramp
<br />Overcrossing Alternative
<br />Our site visitations, and our discussions with the City, have
<br />educated us on the constraints of the project, such that at
<br />this early stage of the project development, it can be safely
<br />stated that the roadway overcrossing alternatives can be
<br />discounted (although we wilt study them to ensure the
<br />alternative analyses are thorough and complete). It appears
<br />that overcrossings wilt not be the most cost effective solution
<br />to this project, nor without substantial public controversy,
<br />due to the visual impact and close proximity of the residential
<br />properties to Santa Ana Boulevard (as mentioned above in
<br />the discussion on Alternative 3). Acquisition of right of way
<br />from this development, or even the construction of a bridge
<br />adjacent to the neighborhood, will be highly controversial.
<br />Proposal for Project Study Report Equivalent and Conceptual Engineering Plans for
<br />Santa Ana EoOevard Grade Separation Project
<br />
|