Alvernon Way /Swan Road Realignment Study DRAFT Final Report Prepared by: October, 2008 098022015 Copyright © 2007, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE AND NEED ..................................................................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................... 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION........................................................................................................................ 3 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS – OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS ............................................... 7 2.1 ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS .................................................................................................... 7 2.1.1 Roadway Facilities ........................................................................................................................ 7 2.1.5 Transportation Improvement Plans and Programs .................................................................. 15 2.1.6 Future Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................... 16 2.2 LAND OWNERSHIP ................................................................................................................................ 17 2.2.1 ACTIVE LAND DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................................ 17 2.3 FLOODPLAINS AND WASHES .................................................................................................................. 20 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................. 22 3. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS ................................................................... 28 3.1 DESIGN CRITERIA ................................................................................................................................. 28 3.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES......................................................................................... 29 4. COMPARATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS ............................................................. 36 4.1 TRAFFIC AND ACCESS IMPACTS ............................................................................................................. 36 4.2 RIGHT-OF WAY / LAND OWNERSHIP IMPACTS........................................................................................ 38 4.3 FLOODPLAIN / DRAINAGE IMPACTS ........................................................................................................ 39 4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ................................................................................................................... 40 4.5 UTILITY IMPACTS ................................................................................................................................. 41 4.6 COSTS.................................................................................................................................................. 43 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................... 45 Appendix A – Environmental Screening Questionnaire Appendix B- Typical Cross Section Appendix C-Design Criteria and Cost Estimates Appendix D-Responses to Utility Request Letter Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 i LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1-1 – VICINITY MAP ........................................................................................................................ 2 EXHIBIT 1-2 ALVERNON WAY REALIGNMENT................................................................................................ 3 EXHIBIT 1-3 SOUTHEAST AREA ARTERIAL STUDY RECOMMENDED MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES PLAN .......... 4 EXHIBIT 1-4 AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN ....................................................................................................... 6 EXHIBIT 2-1 – EXISTING AND FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES.............................................................................. 8 EXHIBIT 2-2 - REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY .................................................................................................... 11 EXHIBIT 2-3 – EXISTING (2007) PEAK PERIOD TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES ............................................ 14 EXHIBIT 2-4 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS – LAND OWNERSHIP .......................................................... 18 EXHIBIT 2-5 - AERIAL BASE MAP OF STUDY AREA ......................................................................................... 19 EXHIBIT 2-6 – FLOODPLAINS AND WASHES.................................................................................................. 21 EXHIBIT 2-7 – ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT SENSITIVE SPECIES LIST THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE ALVERNON SWAN ROAD RE-ALIGNMENT STUDY AREA IN PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA ...................................... 24 EXHIBIT 2-8 – SPECIES LISTED IN THE PIMA COUNTY PRIORITY VULNERABLE SPECIES DOCUMENT THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE ALVERNON SWAN RE-ALIGNMENT STUDY AREA ............................................................ 24 EXHIBIT 3-1 – ALTERNATIVE A .................................................................................................................. 30 EXHIBIT 3-2 – ALTERNATIVE B................................................................................................................... 31 EXHIBIT 3-3 – ALTERNATIVE C................................................................................................................... 32 EXHIBIT 3-4 – ALTERNATIVE D .................................................................................................................. 33 EXHIBIT 3-5 – ALTERNATIVE E ................................................................................................................... 34 EXHIBIT 3-6 – ALTERNATIVE F ................................................................................................................... 35 EXHIBIT 4-1 – ASSESSMENT CRITERIA......................................................................................................... 36 EXHIBIT 4-3 – RELATIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPACTS ...................................................................................... 39 EXHIBIT 4-4 - RELATIVE WASH IMPACTS ..................................................................................................... 40 EXHIBIT 5-1 – SUMMARY OF IMPACT SCORING BY ALTERNATIVE .................................................................. 45 Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 ii 1. INTRODUCTION PURPOSE AND NEED Pima County has undertaken an alignment study to plan for the realignment of Alvernon Way and Swan Road south of Valencia Road in Tucson, Arizona. The primary need for these realignments is due to the planned airport expansion at Tucson International Airport (TIA). As part of the TIA expansion, the airport is planning to construct a third parallel runway located east of the existing runways. The 11,000-foot long runway would run diagonally (NW to SE) and extend through the existing Alvernon Way roadway and terminate near the vicinity of existing Swan Road. Due to the required runway protection zones at each end of the runway, any realignment of Swan Road would need to be east of the existing roadway. Associated with this realignment, Hughes Access Road would also need to remain connected to Alvernon Way or Swan Road to provide continued access to Raytheon Missile Systems. The project area is shown in Exhibit 1-1. In addition to the planned airport runway, the realignment of Alvernon Way has been identified in the Pima County Major Streets and Routes Plan (MSSRP). The need for an improved north/south corridor has been identified in the Pima Association of Governments (PAG) Southeast Area Arterial Study, and the PAG State Transportation System Mobility and Regional Circulation Needs Feasibility Study (Loop Study). Both PAG reports forecast a marked increase in development within the southern PAG metropolitan area which results in the need for additional arterial capacity. Due to the location of the Tucson International Airport and Davis Monthan Air Force Base, north-south arterials between Nogales Highway and Kolb Road are limited to Alvernon Way, Swan Road, and Wilmot Road. The purpose of this report is to compare various alignment alternatives for the realignment on the basis of access, cost, right-of-way, and floodplain impacts. DESCRIPTION OF THE STUDY AREA The area in which the alignment alternatives were developed is roughly bounded by Craycroft Road to the east, Alvernon Way to the west, Los Reales Road to the north, and Old Vail Connection Road to the south. Much of the study area is current vacant though there are several large land uses that create sizable obstacles to roadway alignments. These include the City of Tucson Los Reales Landfill, the United Sports Arizona Race Park, and the Granite Construction Swan Road Plant which mines and processes sand, gravel, asphalt. In addition to the Granite Construction facilities which are located on the east side of Swan Road, there are several other operations located between Alvernon Way and Swan Road that obtain access from both roadways. Access via Alvernon Way is currently on property owned by Tucson Airport Authority. These operations are currently signed as Sierra Mining and Crushing Company and CalMat of Arizona. In addition, Raytheon Missile Systems, employing 10,000 persons at its Airport site, uses Alvernon Way and Hughes Access Road to provide access to its main entrances on the Raytheon South Access Road. This gated entry, open 24 hours a day, is the main truck route for the site, and serves 6600 cars per day. The Tucson International Airport is a major land owner in the study area. Alvernon Way/Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 1 Vicinity Map Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 1-1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION HY RD 0 E VALENCIA RD N E VALENCIA RD W R AM P E BE NS ON HY I1 0 E S WILMOT RD ALE NC IA RD W I1 0 W I1 0 RA M P S WILMOT RD S ALVERNON WY S ALVERNON WY S SWAN RD S SWAN RD S ALVERNON WY I1 0 S WILMOT RD E LOS REA LES RD EV S WILMOT RD I1 0 S WILMOT RD NS O 1 EI BE NC IA E ALE HY I10 N EV NS O S WILMOT RD BE S ALVERNON WY S ALVERNON WY E W E HUGHES ACCESS RD E HUGHES ACCESS RD E OLD VAIL CONNECTION RD HY S NOGALES S WILMOT RD S WILMOT RD S NOGALES HY E OLD VAIL CONNECTION RD E DREXEL RD E LOS REALES RD E LOS REALES RD S NOGALES HY E HUGHES ACCESS RD I1 0 W S PALO VERDE RD E S ALVERNON WY E LOS REA LES RD E VALENC IA RD S COUNTRY CLUB RD S TUCSON BL S NOGALES HY E CORONA RD S PALO VERDE RD S PALO VERDE RD S CAMPBELL AV S NOGALES HY E VALENCIA RD S COUNTRY CLUB RD Y W VALENCIA RD E VALENCIA RD E VALENCIA RD EXHIBIT 1-2 ALVERNON WAY REALIGNMENT S TUCSON BL S TU CSON BL SH E DREXEL RD S CAMPBELL AV E AL S PARK AV S PARK AV S PARK AV OG SN W DREXEL RD S COUNTRY CLUB RD Pima County in the 1980s or earlier determined that Alvernon Way and Swan Road could be impacted by expansion of the Tucson airport to the east. Staff proposed, and the Board of Supervisors approved, an amendment to the Major Street and Scenic Routes Plan showing Alvernon Way realigned to Swan Road south of Los Reales Road. A detailed alignment was not determined at that time, but a 150-foot right-of-way was established for the new alignment (see Exhibit 1-2 below). In 2002, recognizing that roadway infrastructure in the southeast area of Tucson would not accommodate future anticipated population growth and development, Pima Association of Governments initiated the Southeast Area Arterial Study to analyze future roadway needs in the southeast area of Tucson. The study area was roughly bounded by I-19 to the west, Valencia Road to the north, State Route 83 to the east and the Santa Rita Mountains and Coronado National Forest to the south. The study developed a new traffic circulation and access framework for future planning and updated the PAG travel demand model. The study recommended a major streets and routes plan for the southeast area including a realignment of Swan Road that extended to Sahuarita Road (see Exhibit 1-3). Alvernon Way/Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 3 EXHIBIT 1-3 SOUTHEAST AREA ARTERIAL STUDY RECOMMENDED MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES PLAN Alvernon Way/Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 4 Beginning in 2004, developers under the name South Wilmot Land Investors, LLC began to acquire large parcels of land at the end of Swan Road south of the Old Vail Connection Road and began master planning for the Swan Southlands project. Swan Road is a key roadway to provide future access to this project. A development agreement with Pima County stipulates that the developer will widen and improve portions of Swan Road to accommodate the anticipated traffic that would be generated by the Swan Southlands development. In 2005, the Tucson International Airport updated its Master Plan which identified short and long-term development projects necessary to accommodate projected aviation needs over the next 20 years. The Master Plan Update recommended that a third parallel runway be constructed to accommodate future demand, but did not stipulate when this would occur. The plan shows the new runway located east and north of the existing runway, cutting across both Alvernon Way and Swan Road and ostensibly closing both roadways (see Exhibit 1-4). The plan also shows portions of Swan Road to be acquired by the airport authority and future ground cargo operations located adjacent to and east of the present Swan Road alignment. Potential impacts to Alvernon Way and Swan Road were not addressed in the plan, but Pima County Department of Transportation staff is discussing realignment plans with TIA staff as a part of this study. Alvernon Way/Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 6 EXHIBIT 1-4 AIRPORT LAND USE PLAN Swan Road Alvernon Way Los Reales Road Hughes Access Road Alvernon Way/Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 6 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS – OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS 2.1 ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 2.1.1 Roadway Facilities Most of the public roadways within the study area are the responsibility of Pima County Department of Transportation and a few are within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City of Tucson. There are several unimproved rural roads that are not maintained by any jurisdiction and typically do not meet local design, construction, and maintenance standards. Pima County maintains a Major Streets and Scenic Routes Plan (MSSRP) that defines major streets and scenic routes and public right-of-way widths. The MSSRP is used to establish rights-of-way for arterials and collector roads and to determine setbacks for land development located adjacent to these roads. Portions of Alvernon Way, Swan Road, Los Reales Road, Hughes Access Road and Old Vail Connection Road are designated major routes on the Pima County Major Streets and Scenic Routes Plan. Portions of those roadways located within the City of Tucson are designated as arterials on the City Major Streets and Routes Map. 2.1.2 Regional Connectivity Exhibit 2-1 shows the existing arterial road network of the study area and includes a summary of existing daily traffic volumes in the study area. Swan Road is the only north-south roadway that provides access south of the study area, and Alvernon Way is the only north-south roadway that provides access north to the interstate system in central Tucson. Alvernon Way carries a higher volume of traffic than Swan Road and is used by traffic destined for Raytheon Missile Systems. Swan Road carries relatively low traffic volumes and provides access to the Los Reales Landfill, Granite Construction Swan Road Plant, several industrial businesses, and approximately fifty residential lots located south of Old Vail Connection Road. Los Reales Road, Hughes Access Road and Old Vail Connection Road all provide limited east-west access through and beyond the study area. Alvernon Way connects to Interstate 10 via a dedicated traffic interchange located approximately 2.5 miles north of Los Reales Road. The I-10/Alvernon Way interchange is a partial diamond interchange which accommodates all movements except for the westbound on-ramp. It is spaced approximately 0.6 miles east of the Palo Verde/I-10 interchange and approximately 2 miles west of the I-10/Valencia Road interchange. Valencia Road connects Alvernon Way to Interstate 19 via an interchange located approximately 4.5 miles west of Alvernon Way. Alvernon Way also continues north into central Tucson and provides direct connections to Golf Links Road and Aviation Parkway. Alvernon Way provides access to one of the main entrances to Raytheon Missile Systems on Hughes Access Road. This access is important for providing safe transport of sensitive munitions, material deliveries from I-10, connections to other Raytheon campuses such as the University of Arizona Science and Technology Park, and employees who live east of the main Raytheon campus. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 7 Opportunities and Constraints - Traffic Volumes N H KOLB RD VALENCIA RD Y IN TE RS TA LOS REALES RD TE KOLB RD SO 10 WILMOT RD S SWAN RD X BE N NOGALES HY N SA DREXEL RD ALVERNON WY S TUCSON BL A TE LOS REALES RD D RR IE V A PALO VERDE RD COUNTRY CLUB RD S PARK AV VALENCIA RD INT ERS T MISSION RD IRVINGTON RD S CAMPBELL AV 12TH AV S 6TH AV DREXEL RD 19 VALENCIA RD INTERSTATE 19 DREXEL RD MIDVALE PARK RD IRVINGTON RD HUGHES ACCESS RD INTERSTATE 19 OLD VAIL CONNECTION RD SO N H VALENCIA RD Y IN LOS REALES RD TE RS TA TE KOLB RD ALVERNON WY BE N S SWAN RD HUGHES ACCESS RD KOLB RD DREXEL RD 10 WILMOT RD D RR IE NOGALES HY N SA V XA S TUCSON BL A TE LOS REALES RD PALO VERDE RD COUNTRY CLUB RD S PARK AV VALENCIA RD INT ERS T MISSION RD IRVINGTON RD S CAMPBELL AV 12TH AV S 6TH AV DREXEL RD 19 VALENCIA RD INTERSTATE 19 DREXEL RD MIDVALE PARK RD IRVINGTON RD INTERSTATE 19 OLD VAIL CONNECTION RD Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-1 Alvernon Way provides access to the Hughes Sand and Gravel mining operations located south and east of the 90 degree bend in Alvernon Way/Hughes Access Road. Alvernon Way also provides access, via Country Club Road, to approximately 800 residential homes located in the unsubdivided area south of Old Vail Connection Road and west of Country Club Road. Swan Road connects indirectly to I-10 via Los Reales Road and Craycroft Road which has an interchange with I-10. The existing I-10 traffic interchange with Craycroft Road is a tight diamond interchange with one-way eastbound and westbound frontage roads extending between the interchanges. Swan Road extends north of Los Reales Road as a neighborhood collector to connect to Valencia Road and Benson Highway. Swan provides the only north-south access between Old Nogales Highway and Wilmot Road (see Exhibit 2-2). 2.1.3 Physical Features The following section describes the roadways within the study area, their cross-sections and speed limits. Traffic counts were obtained from the Pima County Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering website. Alvernon Way south of Los Reales Road is a County-maintained, paved 2-lane arterial road with one travel lane in each direction and no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The posted speed limit is 55 mph. Alvernon Way is classified as an Urban Minor Arterial (Federal Highway Code) from Los Reales Road to Hughes Access Road and right-of-way width is 200 feet. Traffic volumes (Pima County, October 2006) are approximately 15,000 vehicles per day. Alvernon Way, north of Hughes Access Road looking north Hughes Access Road east of Old Nogales Highway is a paved 2-lane arterial road with one lane in each direction and no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The posted speed limit is 55 mph. Hughes Access Road is classified as an Urban Minor Arterial (Federal Highway Code) from Nogales Highway to Alvernon Way and the right-of-way width is 200 feet. Traffic volumes (Pima County, October 2006) are approximately 15,000 vehicles per day. Right and left turn lanes occur at the south entrance to the Raytheon campus. The 1-mile section from Raytheon South Access Road to County Club Road is under City of Tucson jurisdiction but maintained by Pima County under an intergovernmental agreement with the City. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 9 Swan Road south of Los Reales Road is a paved 2lane arterial road with one lane in each direction and no curbs, gutters or sidewalks. The posted speed limit is 55 mph between Los Reales Road and Old Vail Road, and 50 miles per hour south of Old Vail Connection Road. The road ends in a cul-de-sac approximately 2 miles south of Old Vail Connection Road. Swan Road is classified as an Urban Collector from Los Reales to Old Vail Connection Road Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, looking south and right-of-way width is 100 feet. Traffic volumes (Pima County, October 2006) are approximately 2,600 vehicles per day south of Los Reales Road. A short section of Swan Road south of the Los Reales landfill falls under City jurisdiction, but is maintained by Pima County under an intergovernmental agreement with the City. Swan Road provides access to approximately 50 rural residential lots located south of Old Vail Connection Road. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 10 Regional Connnectivity ALVERNON WY BE N SO N HUGHES ACCESS RD VALENCIA RD HY IN LOS REALES RD TE RS TA T E 10 WILMOT RD RD DREXEL RD S SWAN RD N SA R IE V XA NOGALES HY INT ERS LOS REALES RD S TUCSON BL TAT E 19 VALENCIA RD PALO VERDE RD COUNTRY CLUB RD S CAMPBELL AV 12TH AV S 6TH AV DREXEL RD S PARK AV INTERSTATE 19 IRVINGTON RD INTERSTATE 19 OLD VAIL CONNECTION RD Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-2 Los Reales Road between Alvernon Way and Swan Road is a 2-lane arterial road with one lane in each direction and no curbs, gutters nor sidewalks. The posted speed limit is 50 mph. Los Reales Road is classified as an Urban Collector throughout the study area with a right-of-way width of 60 feet. Traffic volumes (Pima County, October 2006) are approximately 4,700 vehicles per day just east of Alvernon Way. East of Swan Road, Los Reales Road is planned to be realigned to accommodate future development of the Los Reales landfill. HY HY HY GA LESHY NO LES GALES GA NOGA SS NO NO S S HO HOOVER OVER RD RD RD S HOOVER COUNTRY RD RD CLUB RD CLUB UNTRY CLUB COUNTRY SS CO COUNTRY CT CT JOSEP HS CT CT JOSEPHS JOSEP SAINTJOSEP E E SAINT SAINT RD HOOVER S RD HOOVERRD S HOOVER RD HOOVER S HY ES HY SSHY GAL HY ALE ALE ES NOG NO GAL S S NOG RD RD RRD RD R WER NHO E HOWE NHO EIS EN NHO E EISE SS EIS EIS Old Vail Connection Road is an unpaved private road from Creeger Road to Wilmot Road with a right-of-way that varies from 60 feet to 90 feet wide. A short section of roadway is paved and countymaintained from Old Nogales Highway to Creeger Road. East of Creeger Road, the road crosses the main channel of the Franco Wash (see map below) and is often closed during and following storms, cutting off the residential areas east of the wash and south of the road. East of Country Club Road, the unpaved road continues within a right-of-way that varies from approximately 40 feet to approximately 120 feet. No speed limit signs are posted on this road in the vicinity of the project. No traffic counts are available for this road. West of Country Club Road, the road appears to be little used, and trash dumping was noted at numerous locations on or adjacent to the road. CT S CT ATHERINE ES K ATHERINE E KATHERINE CT SAINTKATHERIN E K E SAINT TRINITY EE TRINITY TRINITY TE TE TRINITY S EPP S EPPERSON ERSONLN LN LN S EPPERSON EPP ERSON S S VANES VANESSA SA LN SA LN S VANES E LN BANDANA LN E E BANDANA E ST BUCKET E BUCKETST WOODEN BUCKET E ST BUCKET E WOODEN ST T E SUMMITST E SUMMIT E ST S ST SUMMIT E SUMMITST SUMMIT E T E SUMMIT E SUMMIT S E E SUMMIT SUMMIT ST ST ST E SUMMIT S TT T S MIT ST SUM T MITST E S SUMMIT MIT E E SUM SUM E S COUNTRY CLUB RD S COUNTRY COUNTRYCLUB CLUB RD RD S COUNTRY CLUB RD CTUS LN LN SS CA CA CACTUS CTUS LN CTUS LN S S S PENROSE PENROSE LN S LN LN LN SS TERRY TE TERRY RRY LN LN LN AUDRIA LN S S AUDRIA LN AUDRIA LN LN EE E SS UUM U MM M MIIIT TT SS TTT S S SGREEN GREENDR DR DR S ST BUCKET WOODEN BUCKET E E ST BUCKET ST WOODEN E WOODEN S WY LLA WY CO TILLA OCOTILLA O GIANT GIANTOCOTI S S GIANT S EEOLD OLD CREEK OLD CREEK CREEKTR TR TR NYON LN CA LN CANYON OAK OAK CANYON SS OAK NYON CA HY HY HY SHY S LES GA GALE GA S NO NOGA S S ST SUMMIT STT SUMMITS EE SUMMIT ST SUMMIT E E EOLD OLDCREEK OLD CREEK CREEKTR TR TR E SSDESERT DESERT BRUSH BRUSH BRUSHLP LP LP LN BREEZE E LN BREEZE LN LN E BREEZE E BREEZE LN E LN PETALUMA LN PETALUMA E LN E PETALUMA RD CTION CONNE AIL CONNE E RD ON ONRD CTI CONNECTI VAIL V OLD OLD VAIL E RD CTION CONNE AIL E OLD RD RD CTION ON E ONRD RD ECTI CTION CONN CONNECTI V E AIL CONN OLD VAIL E OLD VAIL E E OLD V OLD E LN OAK S OAK LN CANYON CANYONLN OAKCANYON S LN OAK S EE FRAZIER FRA FRAZIER ZI ER RD RD RD SSCREEGER CREEGER CREEGERRD RD RD TO LLI CABA TO LLITO CABALLITO E DEL DEL CABA TA TADEL CITA CI PLA PLACI LLI E CABA E PLA MCKA RD RD IN RD MCKAIN E E E MCKAIN MCKA PL GHLAND HI S HI PL GHLANDPL HIGHLAND S PL S RD ER FRAZI RD ZI ER FRAZIER EE FRA RD ER RD FRAZI RD ON CTI CONNE VAIL RD ONRD E RD CONNECTI ON AIL CONNECTI VAIL CTION OLD OLD V E E OLD CONNE VAIL E S CREEGER RD S CREE CREEGER GER RD RD S CREEGER RD SS OO LLLLD D DDN N NO N OG O GAAA G ALLLLE EES E SSH H HYY H YY OLD VAIL CONNE CTI ON RD RD RD ON RD CONNECTI AIL CONNECTI VAIL ON CTION E E E OLD CONNE VAIL OLD V S TT ST E S TS SUMMITT SUMMI E E SUMMI Map showing Street System South of Old Vail Connection and West of Country Club Road Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 12 Raytheon South Access Road is a paved 2-lane road with one lane in each direction and is one of the two major access points to Raytheon Defense Manufacturing Facilities. This road is guarded and restricted to public use. The entrance is under surveillance by security guards at all times. The South Access Road carries approximately 6,800 vehicles per day in both directions. This entrance operates 24 hours per day. Country Club Road extends south from Hughes Access Road for approximately 2 miles and is maintained by the City of Tucson. The northernmost half-mile is paved and the remainder is unpaved. South of Old Vail Connection Road, Country Club Road, at Old Vail Connection Road, the road narrows significantly, as shown in the looking south photo at left. This road provides access to the unsubdivided residential areas located south of Old Vail Connection Road and west of County Club Road. No traffic counts are available for this road. 2.1.4 Turning Movement Counts Turning movement counts were collected during am and pm peak periods at the intersections of Alvernon Way and Los Reales Road, Hughes Access Road and Raytheon South Access Drive, and Hughes Access Road and Nogales Highway (see Exhibit 2-3). These data suggest that most of Raytheon’s traffic is coming from the north and east using Alvernon Way. These data also show that not all traffic using Alvernon Way and Hughes Access Road is directly associated with Raytheon. The turning movement counts indicate that most (80%) of the traffic arriving at the Raytheon plant in the am peak hour is arriving from the east and Alvernon Way, while only 20% is entering from the west on Hughes Access Road. Similarly, most (96%) of the traffic leaving the Raytheon plant is turning east on Hughes Access Road to Alvernon Way, while only 4% is turning west to Nogales Highway. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 13 Existing (2007) Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-3 Much of the traffic (approximately 85%) travelling south on Alvernon Way, south of Los Reales Road, is coming from Alvernon Way north of Los Reales Road rather than Los Reales Road (11%). Similarly, much of the traffic turning east onto Hughes Access Road from Nogales Highway is coming from the south (88%) rather than the north (12%). Of the traffic driving east on Hughes Access Road from Nogales Highway during the am peak period, most of the traffic (88%) is traveling east to Alvernon Way and only 12% is turning north into Raytheon. Of the traffic driving west on Hughes Access Road from Alvernon Way during the am peak period, just more than half (54%) of the traffic is turning north into Raytheon while the remainder (47%) is travelling east to Nogales Highway. In 2007, Pima County conducted a traffic signal warrant analysis for the intersection of Hughes Access Road and the South Entrance to Raytheon Missile Systems. Raytheon employs between 10,000 and 12,000 employees and this intersection serves as one of the main entrances to the plant. Existing traffic volumes meet the minimum requirements for a traffic signal under Warrant 2: Four-Hour Warrant. The pattern of right angle crashes at this intersection also justifies a traffic signal under Warrant 7: Crash Experience. Pima County recommended that a traffic signal be installed at this location. 2.1.5 Transportation Improvement Plans and Programs PAG 2030 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) The PAG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is the region’s long term transportation vision and it identifies transportation needs today and twenty years or more into the future. The RTP recommends transportation solutions and financial strategies and guides investment of regional transportation resources in our region’s roadway, bus, pedestrian, bicycle, aviation, freight and rail facilities over the next twenty to thirty years1. The 2030 RTP lists two projects in the study area that are planned for the period 2020-2030. The first project is the far parallel runway for the Tucson International Airport. The second project is extension of Swan Road as a new four-lane roadway from Old Vail Connection Road to Valencia Road. PAG Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) The PAG Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) is a rolling five-year schedule and budget of proposed transportation improvements that seeks to optimize the use of available federal, state and local funds and resources to serve the region’s multi-modal transportation needs. The TIP implements the long-range transportation (RTP). The only project listed in the 2008-2012 TIP is the widening of Valencia Road, from Alvernon Way to Kolb Road from four to six lanes with roadway design beginning in 2009. 1 Source: Pima County Southwest Infrastructure Plan, 2007, by Curtis Lueck & Associates Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 15 Pima County Development Impact Fee Program – CIP Projects Since 1996, Pima County has collected roadway development impact fees to help finance roadway needs created by new residential development. By law, impact fees can only be used to expand the roadway system, not maintain existing roads. Impact fees must be spent on roadway projects in proximity to the area in which they are collected. Impact fees that have been collected, but not yet spent, are programmed for specific roadway projects within each of the ten benefit areas. The Alvernon-Swan realignment is in the San Xavier benefit area. Current projects are: San Xavier Benefit Area Swan Road: Valencia Rd to Los Reales Rd (Complete) Swan Road: South of Old Vail Connection Rd Old Vail Connection Road: Nogales Hwy to Country Club Rd Public-Private Transportation Improvements [Development agreement with Diamond Ventures for Swan Road improvements] 2.1.6 Future Traffic Volumes The PAG travel forecasting model projects future regional traffic volumes based on future population and employment growth assumptions. The 2030 model assumes that Alvernon Way connects to Swan Road as a four-lane roadway and predicts that this new roadway would carry approximately 46,000 vehicles per day in 2030 based on development assumptions. The model also assumes that Alvernon Way remains south of Valencia Road connecting to Hughes Access Road and continues to carry approximately 12,000 vehicles per day. If this section of Alvernon Way was closed due to airport expansion, the forecast traffic volumes would need to be reassigned to the new Alvernon/Swan roadway alignment. The PAG 2030 traffic volume forecast is shown on Exhibit 2-1. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 16 2.2 LAND OWNERSHIP Land ownership on the corridor is summarized in Exhibit 2-4. The exhibit shows parcel boundaries, ownership and parcel numbers. Within the study area, large property owners include the Tucson International Airport, the City of Tucson, Granite Construction, and Cemex Construction. As previously described, there are several existing land uses in the area including the City of Tucson Los Reales Landfill, the United Sports Arizona Race Park, and the Granite Construction Swan Road Plant. These key land uses are shown on an aerial map in Exhibit 2-5. In addition, there are several other mining and processing operations located between Alvernon Way and Swan Road. The remaining vacant land is largely owned by the Tucson Airport Authority, the City of Tucson, and the State of Arizona. 2.2.1 Active Land Development The majority of the privately owned land is located on the north side of Los Reales near Alvernon Way and along the west side of Swan Road south of Los Reales. According to the Pima County Comprehensive Land Use Plan, all the privately held property within the study area is zoned Urban Industrial. To determine if any development activity has occurred on these parcels, information was obtained from Pima County Development Services and Planning and Zoning staff. According to interviews and research, the following activities have occurred: Sonoran Business Park – Parcel 140-41-133A Erler Development – Parcel 140-44-002A Swan Industrial Park – Parcel 140-44-0010 These properties are shown in Exhibit 2-4. The City of Tucson property south of the existing Los Reales Landfill (at the southeast corner of Swan Road and Los Reales Road) is held primarily for the expansion of the Los Reales Landfill to the south. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 17 Opportunities and Constraints - Active Land Development Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-4 Aerial Base Map of Study Area Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-5 2.3 FLOODPLAINS AND WASHES The project study area roadways cross the Airport Wash, Hughes Wash, and Rodeo Wash watersheds. The FEMA 100-Year Floodplain boundaries are shown in Exhibit 2-6. All alignments will cross the south and north fork of the Airport Wash, which both have FEMA 100-year floodplains. Exhibit 2-7 provides information on the name, type of drainage structure at the wash crossing and wash discharge (if available) in the study area. EXHIBIT 2-7 – MAJOR WASH CROSSINGS IN THE STUDY AREA Improvement ID # Name Drainage Structures Discharge (cubic feet per second) Alvernon Way Wash Crossings 1 2 Tributary to North Fork Airport Wash box culvert 671 North Fork Airport Wash culvert Not available North Fork Airport Wash box culvert 1871 Unnamed culvert Not available South Fork Airport Wash box culvert 3260 3 4 5 Swan Road Wash Crossings 6 7 8 9 10 11 Tributary to North Fork Airport Wash 4-48”corregated metal pipes Not available Tributary to North Fork Airport Wash 1-48” corrugated metal pipes Not available Tributary to North Fork Airport Wash 14-72”x44”Arch corrugated metal pipes Not available North Fork Airport Wash 15-72”x44” Arch corrugated metal pipes 1900 Tributary to North Fork Airport Wash 3-72”x44”Arch corrugated metal pipes Not available Tributary to South Fork Airport Wash 15-72”x44” Arch corrugated metal pipes 359 South Fork Airport Wash 15-72”x44” Arch corrugated metal pipes 3249 Unnamed 2-36” corrugated metal pipes Not available Tributary to South Fork Airport Wash 7-72”x44” Arch corrugated metal pipes 674 Unnamed 1-36” corrugated metal pipes Not available 12 13 14 15 Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 20 Floodplains and Washes Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 2-6 2.4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS An environmental screening of the study area was performed using the questionnaire format presented in the Pima County Roadway Design Manual, December 2003. This questionnaire is intended to provide early information about the intended effects of the project on the surrounding natural, physical, and cultural environment. The environmental screening questionnaire for this project is provided in Appendix A, and is summarized in this section as follows: 1) Cultural Resources – A search was made of the AZSITE Database, which is a consolidated informational network of recorded archaeological sites, historic properties, districts, and inventory surveys within the state of Arizona. It is designed to reduce the amount of research time required for class 1 surveys and to provide a database for research projects. Cultural resource screening included a review of State Historic Preservation Office files regarding properties listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Database searches did not reveal any historic structures or known cultural sites within the project limits, but the project area has not been fully surveyed for these resources. 2) Hazardous Materials - Database searches were performed using the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality databases. No hazardous materials were revealed within the project limits. It should be noted that some potential hazardous material generators are located outside of the project limit. If new right-of-way is required, a Phase I ESA Report (Innocent landowner defense) will be needed to determine the existence of contaminated land and any required remediation. 3) Clean Water Act Permitting - A review of the aerial mapping determined that several drainages will be crossed with a new alignment. It is assumed that some form of impact will occur to these potential Waters of the United States for culverts or bridge crossings; therefore a Nationwide Permit #14 for Linear Transportation Projects may be required for this project. There are two main permitting processes that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) use to document compliance with the Clean Water Act; these two process are called 1) Nationwide Permits (NWP) and 2) Individual Permits (IP). The NWP program was established by the Corp to reduce processing time of the Corps for projects that historically are known not to cause too much environmental impacts. Under the NWP program, project constituents must document how their project is in compliance with the standard general conditions of the permit before they will be issued a permit. Impact thresholds for Nationwide Permit 14 are: 0 to 0.1 acre impact – A formal permit application submittal to the Corps of Engineers is typically not required, however there is an obligation to keep in their files (and share with the Corps if asked) how they are in compliance with the conditions of the program. 0.1 to 0.49 acre impact - a Pre-construction notification (PCN) that is required if impacting more than a 0.1 of an acre to Waters of the U.S. Greater than 0.49 acre impact - an Individual Permit will be required. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 22 The Corps can request a full permit submittal on any project, no matter how small the impacts, if there is strong public opposition to the project, or if impacts to threatened or endangered species (Endangered Species Act) may be involved, or if cultural resources might be impacted by project components (National Historic Preservation Act). NWP typically take 4-6 months to obtain. An Individual Permit (IP) is required for linear transportation projects that impact more than 0.49 acres of Waters of the U.S. This is a much more lengthy process to document compliance with the Clean Water Act and will require several supporting technical reports to be prepared. These reports include: a NEPA –EA analysis, a alternative analysis report, a mitigation and monitoring report, as well as a public notice and possible public hearing if strong opposition is documented during the public comment period. Individual permits typically take 9 months to 1 year to obtain but can exceed 18 months on occasion due to opposition to the project. 4) Biological Resources – Databases for federal, state and county sensitive species were reviewed to determine the biological resources within the corridors. Initially, a review of Federally listed Threatened and Endangered species for Pima County were reviewed using the United States Fish and Wildlife Service database. Next, the Arizona Game and Fish Department online search tool was used to determine state sensitive species in Pima County. A summary of Arizona Game and Fish Department Sensitive Species that may occur in the project area are provided in Exhibit 2-7. Thirdly, the Pima County Priority Vulnerable Species list (part of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan) was reviewed to determine further sensitive species specific to Pima County. These species are summarized in Exhibit 2-8. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 23 EXHIBIT 2-7 – ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT SENSITIVE SPECIES LIST THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE ALVERNON SWAN ROAD RE-ALIGNMENT STUDY AREA IN PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA Common Name Species Birds Western Yellow-Billed Cuckoo Coccyzus americanus occidentalis Plant Pima pineapple cactus Coryphantha scheeria var robustispina Reptile Great plains narrow-mouthed toad Gastrophryne olivacea Source: Arizona Game and Fish Department EXHIBIT 2-8 – SPECIES LISTED IN THE PIMA COUNTY PRIORITY VULNERABLE SPECIES DOCUMENT THAT MAY OCCUR WITHIN THE ALVERNON SWAN RE-ALIGNMENT STUDY AREA Common Name Whiptail lizard Species Name Cnemidophorus burti Bell’s vireo Vireo bellii Desert box turtle Terrapene ornata luteola Rufous-winged sparrow Aimophila carpalis Tumamoc globeberry Tumamoca macdougalii Source: Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 24 2.5 UTILITIES Utility information was obtained via a request for information from utility companies within the study roadway network. A summary of utility information that was obtained is summarized in Exhibit 2- 9. Copies of the response letters are provided in the Appendix. There are extensive electric utility lines in the study area. On Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, there is a 138kV, 3-circuit transmission line on the west side of Swan Road, and a 14kV power line on the east side of the corridor, which extends approximately 0.46 miles south of Los Reales Road. View of Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, looking south. This views shows the 138,000 power lines on the west side of the road, and the 14,000 volt power lines on the east side of the road There is a 14kV power line on Los Reales Road, which extends approximately 0.26 miles west of Swan Road, and turns south to service the Tucson Raceway property. On Alvernon Way, south of Los Reales Road, there is 46kV, 2-circuit power lines on the east and west sides of the road, which continues to Hughes Access Road. There is also a 14kV power line on the east side of Alvernon Way, which terminates south of the connection with Hughes Access Road. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 25 View of Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, looking north. This views shows the gas pipeline indicators (yellow poles) Based on visual inspection, there is a gas pipelines that crosses Swan Road, approximately 0.29 miles south of Los Reales Road. The pipeline is shown by the yellow poles in the picture above. Information from Southwest Gas indicated that there is a 4” high pressure steel main along Los Reales Road, a 2” steel service and regulator station at 8101 S. Alvernon Way, and an easement on the southeast corner of Alvernon Way and Hughes Access Road. Response from Qwest communications indicated that Qwest has mostly aerial facilities and some buried facilities within the study area. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 26 EXHIBIT 2-9 – SUMMARY OF UTILITIES ON THE CORRIDOR, BASED ON RESPONSES FROM UTILITY COMPANIES Utility Company Southwest Gas Response Regarding Utilities on the Corridor 4” high pressure steel main along Los Reales Road 2” steel service and regulator station at 8101 S. Alvernon Way Comments Southwest Gas requires a minimum separation of two feet from HP feeders and any proposed structures and a minimum of 1-foot separation from distribution facilities and proposed structures. Easement on the southeast corner of Alvernon Way and Hughes Access Road Qwest Qwest has mostly aerial facilities and a small amount of buried facilities within the study area. Placing conduit and manholes within and through the proposed ROW or a public utility easement will be potentially required. It is likely that removal of these facilities will be required City of Tucson Water Department Referred request to mapping / GIS section Tucson Electric Power TEP has transmission and distribution lines in the project area the See maps that are included as an attachment to the report. TEP facility maps were provided showing the locations of overhead electric TEP power lines will need to be relocated to a location outside of any glide path designations Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 27 3. IDENTIFICATION OF ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS The Alvernon / Swan alignment alternatives were developed to provide an alternative access due to the planned construction of a new airport runway that will require the shifting of the existing Alvernon Way alignment between Los Reales Road and Old Vail Road. The alternatives were developed by a process that included the following steps: Identifying design criteria. Identifying design constraints in placing a road near the planned TIA runway. Developing roadway alignments to avoid right-of-way impacts to the extent possible. Placing the roadway to provide developable parcels to the extent possible. Identifying other constraints, such as drainage and right-of-way constraints and avoiding them to the extent possible. Preliminary alignment alternatives were developed and discussed with Pima County, and feedback from the preliminary review resulted in the development of three Alvernon Way / Swan Road alternative alignments. A no-build alternative was not considered due to the fact that the planned construction of the runway will require shifting Alvernon Way. 3.1 DESIGN CRITERIA 3.1.1 Roadway Design Criteria The development of alternatives was based on the following design criteria: Facility Type: 4-lane divided urban arterial Right-of-way width: 150 feet Design Speed: 60 mph (arterial facility) Other design criteria are provided in Appendix C. 3.1.2 Airport Design Criteria Special criteria were used in order to avoid conflicts with the planned airport runway. These constraints were obtained from guidelines for determining obstructions contained in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14, Part 77 (Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace). The roadway was also located outside of the Building Restriction Line, which is a Federal Aviation Administration defined distance from the runway centerline. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 28 3.2 DESCRIPTION OF ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVES The Alvernon Way / Swan Road realignment alternatives are graphically depicted on Exhibits 3-1 through 3-6. General Network Information All of the draft alternatives show a new t-intersection with Hughes Access Road. This connection is provided since Hughes Access Road is a primary access road to Raytheon Missile Systems and also serves as a hazardous materials route for trucks carrying explosives, hazardous materials, and air liquid shipments to Raytheon. Alignment Alternatives The alternative alignments for Alvernon / Swan realignment are described as follows: Alternative A – Swan Road Continuity Alignment with No Alvernon Way In this alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-1, Swan Road remains the principal roadway and curves to the east in order to avoid the planned future runway extension. Alvernon Way would be closed in the vicinity of the runway extension, however fragmented segments of Alvernon Way remain adjacent to Los Reales Road and Hughes Access Road to provide access to properties in these areas. Alternative B- Swan Road Continuity Alignment with an Alvernon Way Connection This alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-2, is similar to Alternative A with the addition of Alvernon Way connecting to Swan Road between Los Reales Road and the North Airport Fork Wash. The new tintersection would be approximately 1,600 feet south of Los Reales Road, and located to minimize impacts to parcels. Alternative C- Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Northern Swan Road Connection In this alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-3, Alvernon Way extends east, aligned relatively parallel to the future planned runway, and maximizes use of a City of Tucson utility easement. The road transitions to existing Swan Road south of the runway extension. Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, would be realigned to the west to form a t-intersection at Alvernon Way north of the Airport Fork Wash. Alternative D- Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Southern Swan Road Connection This alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-4, also aligns parallel to the planned runway but lies further south than Alternative C. Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road, would be realigned to the west to form a tintersection at Alvernon Way south of the Airport Fork Wash. Alternative E- Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment for Alternative Runway Location This alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-5, aligns parallel but further north of the runway to accommodate a larger range of alternative runway locations. This alternative was developed in response to correspondence from the Tucson Airport Authority indicating that more flexibility in the runway location should be assumed. Alternative F- Alvernon Way Tunnel This alternative, shown in Exhibit 3-6, is a tunnel on Alvernon Way under the runway. It involves a curvilinear alignment of Alvernon Way in order to align the tunnel with a 90 degree angle to the proposed runway. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 29 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-1 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-2 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-3 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-4 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-5 Swan-Alvernon Alignment Study Exhibit 3-6 4. COMPARATIVE IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS This section describes the impact assessment process, which considered the following assessment criteria: Traffic and Access impacts Right-of-way impacts Floodplain / drainage impacts Potential environmental impacts Utility impacts Planning level construction costs These assessment criteria are described in more detail in Exhibit 4-1 below: EXHIBIT 4-1 – ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Category What is Being Assessed? Traffic and Access Impacts What is the impact of the alternatives on traffic flow? How much “out of direction” travel is created? Right-of-Way / Land Ownership Impacts What are general right-of-way impacts? What are the impacts of the alternatives on planned developments? Floodplain / Drainage Impacts Would the alternative impact wash crossings in the project area? How close is the alternative to the FEMA 100-year floodplain boundary? Environmental Impacts What are potential environmental impacts? Utility Impacts What utilities may be impacted by the project? Planning Level Construction Costs What is the planning level construction cost? This cost does not include right-of-way cost. 4.1 TRAFFIC IMPACTS All of the alternatives except the tunnel alternative (Alternative F) will cause more circuitous travel for the traffic currently using Alvernon Way to reach Hughes Access Road. Exhibit 4-2 summarizes outof-direction travel from the intersection of Alvernon Way / Los Reales Road to Hughes Access Road at Alvernon Way. The distance between these two locations is 2.3 miles. As summarized in Exhibit 4-2, Alternative E has the most out-of-direction travel, comprising 3.6 additional miles, and Alternative F, the tunnel alternative, has the least out-of-direction travel, resulting in an additional 0.19 miles of travel. The other alternatives vary between 2 and 3 miles of out of direction travel, in one direction. The impacts of the out-of-direction local travel resulting from Alternatives A through E may be lessened by improving the Franco Wash crossing at Old Vail Connection Road, so that residents in this area will have all weather access to Nogales Highway. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 36 EXHIBIT 4-2 RELATIVE REGIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACTS Alternative Out-of- Direction Travel Relative Level of Traffic Impacts Miles (1 =Least, Comments 6 =Most) Alternative A 2.01 2 Alternative B 3.04 5 Alternative C 2.54 4 Alternative D 2.42 3 Alternative E 3.60 6 Alternative F 0.19 1 Alvernon Way connection to Swan Road is spaced only 1600 feet south of Los Reales Road, which may cause non-optimal signal spacing if traffic signals are required on Swan Road. It should be noted that there is a potential for new access to the Tucson International Airport if the new roadway alignment is located closer to the planned runway. This could serve as additional airport access or could provide opportunities for development related to the airport. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 37 4.2 RIGHT-OF WAY / LAND OWNERSHIP IMPACTS All of the build alternatives for the Alvernon / Swan realignment will require 150 feet of right-of-way (ROW) to construct. All of the alternatives involve right-of-way impacts. The right-of-way on Alvernon Way, south of Los Reales Road, is 200 feet. The right-of-way on Los Reales Road, between Alvernon Way and Swan Road varies between 60 and 100 feet. The right-of-way on Swan Road, south of Los Reales Road is 100 feet. All of the alternatives impact Tucson Airport Authority property. The right-ofway requirements for a four-lane divided urban cross section can vary between 150 and 300 feet. Alternative A, has right-of-way impacts to Swan Road, Los Reales Road, and within the Tucson Airport Authority property. Specific parcel impacts can vary, depending on the specific alignment of this alternative. However, because of the potential for between 5 and 14 parcels to be impacted, in addition to the Tucson Airport Authority right-of-way impacts, this alternative was ranked as having the highest potential impacts. Alternative B which uses Swan Road right-of-way for a significant length, has right-of-way impacts to Swan Road and within the Tucson Airport Authority property. This alignment also impacts 4 parcels. This alignment bisects the Tucson Raceway parcel (140-44-003A), but avoids impacts to the developed, northern section of the parcel. The Alvernon Way realignment, near Swan Road, is located between two parcels (140-44-002H and a parcel with active land development, 140-44-002A) and may have some impact on both of these parcels, which cannot be determined at this level of analysis. There are impacts on the Swan Road realignment to a City of Tucson parcel (140-46-0010). Alternatives C bisects 5 parcels (140-44-002G, 140-44-002H, 140-44-003A, 140-44-040, 140-460010) in addition to Tucson Airport Authority parcels. One of these parcels is the Tucson Raceway parcel, but similar to Alternative B, this alternative avoids impacts to the developed, northern section of the parcel. There are also right-of-way impacts to Swan Road, as the road transitions to the Swan Road alignment at both the north and south ends of the alternative. Alternative D has right-of-way impacts within the Tucson Airport Authority property. There are also right-of-way impacts to Swan Road, at the south end of the alternative. Alternative E, which extends the realignment of Alvernon Way further east, impacts 7 parcels in addition to the Tucson Airport Authority property. These parcels are: 140-41-1400 140-44-040 140-44-003A 140-44-0010 140-44-007A 140-46-0010 140-53-001B The property impacts include impacts to 1 parcel with active land development plans (140-44-0010). This alternative may also impact access to the Granite Construction company driveway (parcel number Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 38 140-53-001B). This alignment also has some right-of-way impacts to Swan Road, as the alternative transitions to Swan Road at the south end of the alignment. Alternative F, the tunnel alternative, bisects 2 parcels, in addition to Tucson Airport Authority property. These parcels are both owned by Hughes Sand and Gravel (parcel numbers 140-47-0020 and 140-47-0030). A comparison of right-of-way impacts can be summarized in Exhibit 4-3 as follows: EXHIBIT 4-3 – RELATIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPACTS Relative Level of Right-of-Way Impacts Alternative (1 =Least ROW impacts, 6 =Most ROW Impacts ) Alternative A 6 Alternative B 3 Alternative C 4 Alternative D 1 Alternative E 5 Alternative F 2 4.3 FLOODPLAIN / DRAINAGE IMPACTS The project study area is located within the Airport Wash, Hughes Wash, and Rodeo Wash watersheds. All the roadway alignments will require large structures in order for the roadway to be considered all weather roads, to cross the South Airport Fork Wash. A review of the aerial mapping determined that several drainages will be crossed with a new alignment. All alignments will cross the South and North Airport Fork Washes, which both have FEMA 100-year floodplains. Alternative A, however, has minimal impacts on the North Airport Fork Wash. It is assumed that some form of impact will occur to these potential Waters of the U.S. for culverts or bridge crossing; therefore a nationwide permit #14 may be required. If impacts to an individual 404 resource are more than 0.5 acres, then an Individual Permit will be required. The alternatives were assessed in relation to one another based on the number of wash crossings, and whether the alternative crossed the wash at an angle, which would likely require more drainage structures. Exhibit 4-4 summarizes these impacts. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 39 EXHIBIT 4-4 - RELATIVE WASH IMPACTS Comments Relative Level of Wash Impacts Alternative (1 =Least , 6=Most wash and floodplain Impacts) Alternative A 1 Impacts on North Fork Airport Wash. Impacts South Fork Airport Wash and tributary Alternative B 2 Impacts South Fork Airport Wash and tributary. Alvernon connection impacts North Fork Airport Wash tributary 3 Impacts North Fork Airport Wash and tributary at an angle, therefore a relatively larger drainage structures would be required. Also impacts South Fork Airport Wash and tributary Alternative D 5 Impacts North Airport Fork Wash and tributary at an angle, therefore a relatively larger drainage structures would be required. Also impacts South Fork Airport Wash and tributary Alternative E 4 Impacts North Fork Airport Wash at an angle, therefore a relatively larger drainage structures would be required. Also impacts South Fork Airport Wash and tributary 6 Impacts North and South Airport Fork Washes at an angle, therefore relatively larger drainage structures would be required. Hughes Access Road connection impacts tributary to South Fork Airport Wash Alternative C Alternative F 4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS As stated in previously (Chapter 2), there are several environmental categories that will need further analysis once project components are better defined. Some of these items may require additional coordination with agencies to secure a permit prior to construction activities. In particular, the use of federal funds, or impacts to federal lands would require a federal NEPA review process. In general, more surveys will need to be conducted to determine the potential for impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, and hazardous materials. Species that need to be surveyed in the study area are: Western Yellow-billed Cuckoo Pima pineapple cactus Great plains narrow-mouthed toad Whiptail lizard Bell’s vireo Desert box turtle Rufous-winged sparrow Tumamoc globeberry Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 40 Based on the need for additional survey work in many of the environmental categories, none of the alternatives rank relatively higher or lower to each other. Therefore, for the purposes of the assessment, all of the alternatives were scored as a “3”. These are summarized in Exhibit 4-5. EXHIBIT 4-5 – RELATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Relative Level of Environmental Impacts Alternative (1 =Least , 6 =Most environmental impacts) Alternative A 3 Alternative B 3 Alternative C 3 Alternative D 3 Alternative E 3 Alternative F 3 4.5 UTILITY IMPACTS The assessment of utility impacts was assessed based on the responses to the utility letter sent early in the project to utility providers in the area. As a limited response was received to the request, further research is required in this area during a future design concept phase. Based in the responses, a key utility impact is the power lines that are located on the west side of Swan Road. Because of the limited response to the utility requests, alternatives were rated similarly in this category although the impacts need to be assessed further in a design concept phase. Alternative A has the potential to impact the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines near Hughes Access Road and has the 138 kV power line on the west side of Swan Road, near Hughes Access Road. Alternative B has the potential to impact the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines near Hughes Access Road. The extension of Alvernon Way to Swan Road may impact the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines on Alvernon Way, the 14 kV power lines to the Tucson Raceway, and the 138 kV power line on Swan Road. The 138 kV power line may also be impacted by the Hughes Access Road relocation to Swan Road. This alternative also has the potential to impact the gas line which crosses Swan Road. Alternative C has similar potential impacts to those described for Alternative B above. Alternative D has the potential to impact the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines near Hughes Access Road. The extension of Alvernon Way to Swan Road may impact the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines on Alvernon Way, and the 138 kV power line on Swan Road. The 138 kV power line may also be impacted by the Hughes Access Road relocation to Swan Road. Alternative E has similar impacts to those described for Alternative D above. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 41 Alternative F has the potential to cross the 46 kV and 14 kV power lines on Alvernon Way at a number of locations, depending on the specific alignment chosen. There is also the potential to impact a 138 kV power line on Swan Road. EXHIBIT 4-6 – RELATIVE UTILITY IMPACTS Relative Level of Utility Impacts Alternative (1 =Least , 6 =Most utility impacts) Alternative A 3 Alternative B 3 Alternative C 3 Alternative D 3 Alternative E 3 Alternative F 3 Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 42 4.6 COSTS A summary of planning level costs by alternative is provided in Exhibit 4-4. The exhibit also shows the miles of new roadway needed for each alternative. A planning level cost per mile was developed for alternatives A through E, and was applied to the length of new roadway required. In this way, costs are comparable between alternatives. Cost estimates do not include right-of-way costs, or utility relocation costs, or drainage costs. Alternative F, the tunnel alternative, is the most expensive alternative, because of the cost of the tunnel structure, and infrastructure improvements associated with the tunnel. Alternative D is the least expensive alternative. The cost estimates are provided in more detail in Appendix C. EXHIBIT 4-4 – RELATIVE PROJECT COSTS Alternative Miles of New Roadway Needed (Assume 4-Lane divided roadway) A – Swan Road Continuity Alignment with No Alvernon Way 6.12 miles: Estimated Cost ($ Million) Relative Cost (1 =Least Cost, 6=Most Expensive) $29.5 2 $30.7 3 $31.7 4 $27.9 1 $32.5 5 $76.1 6 Swan Road: 3.45 Los Reales Road: 1.01 Hughes Access Road: 1.66 B- Swan Road Continuity Alignment with an Alvernon Way Connection to Swan 6.43 miles: Swan Road: 3.45 Hughes Access Road: 1.66 Alvernon Way: 1.32 C - Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Northern Swan Road Connection (options provided for Swan and Alvernon realignments) 6.69 miles: D – Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a southern Swan Road Connection 5.72 miles: Swan Road: 0.84 miles Hughes Access Road: 1.66 Alvernon Way: 4.19 miles Swan Road: 0.19 Hughes Access Road: 1.66 Alvernon Way: 3.87 E-Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment for Alternate Runway Location 6.59 miles: Swan Road: 0.33 Hughes Access Road: 1.88 Alvernon Way: 4.38 F – Alvernon Tunnel 3.31 miles: Alvernon Way: 3.31 (including 0.28 mile (1500 foot) tunnel. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 43 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A summary of the relative rankings of each project alternative in the assessment areas discussed above are summarized in Exhibit 5-1. The alternatives were evaluated relative to each other, with the highest score (6) given to the alternative that was the worst (e.g. had the highest level of impacts) in comparison to the other alternatives. EXHIBIT 5-1 – SUMMARY OF IMPACT SCORING BY ALTERNATIVE Alternative Category A Swan Road Continuity Alignment with no Alvernon Way B Swan Road Continuity Alignment with and Alvernon Way Connection C Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Northern Swan Road Alignment D Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Southern Swan Road Connection E Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment for Alternate Runway Location F Alvernon Way Tunnel Traffic Impacts 2 5 4 3 6 1 Right-of-Way / Active Land Development Impacts 6 3 4 1 5 2 Floodplain / Drainage Impacts 1 2 3 5 4 6 Environmental Impacts 3 3 3 3 3 3 Utility Impacts 3 3 3 3 3 3 Planning Level Costs 2 3 4 1 5 6 Total Score 17 19 21 16 26 21 1 = the least impacts, 5 =most impacts (e.g. the worst for that category). Note that costs are rated on a 1 through 6 scale, since there are 6 alternatives The analysis indicates that Alternatives A (Swan Continuity Alignment with no Alvernon Way connection) and Alternative D (Alvernon Way Continuity Alignment with a Southern Swan Road Connection) rank better in comparison to the other alternatives. However, both of these alternatives will result in out of direction travel for local residents and Raytheon employees and it may not accommodate the full range of Airport runway alternatives that was accommodated by Alternative E. The impacts of the out-of-direction local travel may be lessened by improving the Franco Wash crossing at Old Vail Connection Road, so that residents in this area will have all weather access to Old Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 44 Nogales Highway. At the design concept level of analysis, a consideration will be to upgrade Old Vail Connection Road to provide additional access in this area. The analysis indicates that Alternative F, the tunnel alternative, will provide a better level of local and regional traffic circulation, although at a much higher cost. It will avoid increases in out-of-direction travel for residents in the vicinity of the study area. Further research, through development of a design concept report, is needed to further define specific impacts, particularly in the areas of environmental, utility, and right-of-way impacts. Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study, October 2008 45 APPENDIX A ENVIRONMENTAL SCREENING QUESTIONNAIRE INTRODUCTORY INFORMATION Project Identification • Project Name: Alvernon Way / Swan Road Realignment Study • Pima County Project Manager: Jonathan Crowe Project Location and Limits • Location of project within Pima County: South of I-10 • Limits of project: From north end to south end: Los Reales Road (N) to Old Vail Road (S) From side to side: Alvernon Way to east of Swan Road Funding Source • Funding source anticipated for use in construction project? County funding: Yes No ____ Federal funding: Yes No ____ Other: Airport Funding Source: Federal Funding Primary Project Purpose • Primary purpose of project: Realign Alvernon Way to Swan Road Modernize roadway (e.g., resurface, restore, rehabilitate, reconstruct, add shoulders, or add auxiliary lanes): Yes No ____ Increase capacity: Yes No ____ Add bicycle lanes: Yes_ __ No ____ Improve safety: Yes No ____ Other: Relocate existing roadway system Existing Conditions within Project Limits • Roadway specifications? (Alvernon Way at Los Reales) Right-of-way: 200 feet (Alvernon Way) Pavement width: 35 feet (Alvernon Way) Number of through lanes in each direction: • Number of turning lanes? 1 Right-turn lanes: ____ Left –Turn Lanes: 1 Number of signalized intersections: ____ Number of unsignalized intersections: 1 • Existing parking (e.g., on-street)? Yes ____ No • Existing bicycle lanes: Yes __ No Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 • Existing sidewalk: Yes __ No • Existing transit stop: Yes __ No Other: Note: If no existing roadway, describe site conditions (e.g. undeveloped land, etc) Source: Project Components Anticipated specifications of the project? Amount of additional right-of-way to be acquired: Under 1 acre __1-5 acres ___5-10 acres __Over 10 acres __ To be Determined Change in the vertical or horizontal alignment Yes No __ New alignment: Yes No __ Pavement width to be added: Number of through lanes to be added: 2 Number of turn lanes to be added: __ To Be Determined Right-turn lanes ___ Left-turn lanes ___ Any associated parking (e.g., on-street): Yes No Bicycle lanes to be added: Yes No __ Sidewalk to be added: Yes ___No___To Be Determined Landscape to be Added: Yes ___No___To Be Determined Number of intersections to be signalized: ___ To Be Determined •Other: Source: Project Scope Phasing Is the project: A portion or phase of a unified development plan? Yes No __ One of a series of projects that may result in a cumulative set of environmental impacts on an identifiable area? Yes ____ No ____ Source: Pima Association of Governments 2030 Regional Transportation Plan Traffic Existing average daily traffic (ADT) in the project area? Street:___Alvernon Way ______________________________ADT: _15,041____ Street:___Swan Road ________________________________ ADT: _2,582_____ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Other :_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Projected ADT in the project area for the build year? Street:__Realigned Alvernon Way / Swan Road ______ ADT: ___46,400__ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Street:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 Other:_____________________________________________ADT: __________ Source: Land Uses • Existing adjacent land uses? Check all that apply and circle primary uses. Commercial (e.g. retail businesses, service businesses): Yes ____ No Institutional (e.g., schools, hospitals, social services agencies): Yes ____ No Existing adjacent land uses? Check all that apply Commercial (e.g., retail businesses, service Residential (e.g. single family houses, apartments, townhouses): Yes ____ No ____ Industrial (e.g. light industry, heavy industry): Yes No ____ Recreational (e.g. parks, sports fields: Yes No ____ Other: landfill, Tucson International Airport, materials, undeveloped land, native desert Source: Visual inspection, Aerials Express 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL CATEGORIES Drainage Will any storm water drain from the project discharge into detention or retention basins on site? Yes ____ No Source: Section 401/404 No ___ •Are any culverts likely to be installed, replace, or extended? Yes • Are there any bridges being upgraded, extended, or replaced? Yes No ___ Is there any bank protection required in the construction of this project? Yes No ___ Are there any wetlands within the project area? Yes ____ No Are there any riparian areas within the project vicinity? Yes No ___ Is it anticipated that there will be any discharge of dredged or filled materials into “waters of the United States”? Yes No ____ Source: Aerials Express 2007, NWI maps Floodplain • Is the project area within a 100-year floodplain delineated on the Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map? Yes ____ No If “yes,” will the project substantially modify the topography of the floodplain either by placement or removal of materials within the floodplain? Source: FEMA Flood Maps 04019C2850 Panel 2850 of 4700 http://msc.fema.gov/webapp/WCS Biological Resources • Are there listed threatened, endangered, proposed, and /or candidate species likely to be found in the project vicinity? Yes No ____ • Are listed special status species likely to be found in the project vicinity? Yes No • Are protected native plants likely to be found in the project vicinity? Yes No ____ • Are construction activities anticipated to remove/disturb any vegetation? Yes No____ • Is the project within the Conservation Land System? Yes ____ No • Is the project along a designated Scenic Route? Yes ____ No Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 Air Quality • Is the project in an: Attainment area? Yes No____ Nonattainment area? Yes ____ No__ __ If “yes,” what are the pollutants of concern? Maintenance area? Yes No____ If “yes,” what are the pollutants of concern? Source: ADOT azdot.gov/EEG-common/documents/files/air_and noise/ Noise • Are there sensitive noise receptors in the area? Yes____ No If “yes,” identify type of noise receptors and briefly describe: Residences: ___ Schools: ___ Hospitals: ___ Churches: ___ Parks: ___ Other: • When the project is completed and used as anticipated, is it likely to contribute to any exceedances of noise quality standards. Yes ____ No Source: Utilities • Will the construction include any utility involvement? Yes anticipated? To be determined Utility relocation: ___ Temporary disconnection of service: ___ Utility replacement: ___ No ___ If “yes”, what kind of work is Hazardous Materials • Is it likely that any hazardous wastes or hazardous substances in the past have been generated, treated, stored, released, discarded or disposed of on site or are any such wastes now accumulated on site? Y ____ N ____ Don’t know __ __ • Have any test borings been performed? Yes ____ No If “yes”, were any wastes discovered on the premises in the course of the test borings or excavation work for the project? Yes ____ No ____ Source: Molly Collins, City of Tucson working in collaboration with AZDEQ Historic Preservation • Are there any cultural resources (archaeological or historic) in the vicinity of the project that are listed on or eligible for the National Register of Historic Places? Yes ____ No • Are any of these sites considered “Priority Cultural Resources”? Yes____ No • If the answer is “yes,” to either or both the questions above, please list the resource(s)/site(s): Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 • Of those properties listed or eligible, are any located near enough to the project to be affected by the project location, construction, or anticipated future traffic? Yes ____ No If “yes,” please specify the properties and very briefly describe the anticipated effect. • Are there any structures likely to be 50 years old or older within or adjacent to the project area? Yes __No _ If “yes,” please list addresses below: Source: AZSITE CR database and SHPO files Visual Impact Is the project likely to affect noticeably the views from adjacent properties? Yes __No _ If “yes”, briefly describe: Is the project likely to cause a noticeable change in t he foreground, middle-ground, or background views from the road? Yes __ No _ Source: Visual Inspection Neighborhood/Social Impact • Is there likely to be any commercial or residential displacement due to the construction of this project? Yes No ___ • Are there likely to be any temporary changes in: Business access: Yes No ___ Parking: Yes ___ No Other: • Are there likely to be any permanent changes in: Traffic service: Yes No ___ Traffic circulation: Yes No ___ Parking: Yes __ No _ Other: Is the project likely to affect continuity in neighborhoods in the vicinity? Yes No ___ Source: Visual Inspection LOCAL JURISDICTION/AGENCY COORDINATION • Are there local jurisdictions and governmental agencies with whom coordination is anticipated or has begun? Yes No ____ If “yes,” who are they? City of South Tucson ___ City of Tucson Oro Valley ___ Pascua Yaqui Tribe ___ Tohono O’odham Nation ___ Town of Marana ___ Town of Sahuarita ___ Arizona Department of Environmental Quality Arizona Department of Transportation ___ Arizona Game and Fish Department Arizona State Land Department U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 U.S. Bureau of Land Management ___ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ___ U.S. Federal Highway Administration ___ U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Other ________________ Source: • Note any issues for coordination that have been identified to date: •Briefly describe coordination efforts planned or underway: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT • Has a Public Involvement Plan been developed for the project? Yes ___ No • Has a Citizen Advisory Committee been formed, or is one being formed? Yes ____ No • Have any public meetings been scheduled? Yes ___ No If “yes”, have any meetings been held to date? • Has any information useful to project development been identified though any public interaction to date? Yes ___ No If “yes”, briefly describe: Meetings with stakeholders, e.g. Raytheon, City of Tucson Is there any known controversy over this project to date? Yes ___ No If “yes”, briefly describe: Source: PERMITS • Anticipated permits and/or approvals? To be determined 404 Permit: ___ 401 Certification: ___ Sole Source Aquifer: ___ State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) clearance: ___ Nonpoint Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): ___ Other Completed by: Mark Turner, Senior Environmental Scientist, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: 11-7-2007 Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 APPENDIX B TYPICAL CROSS SECTION Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 APPENDIX C - DESIGN CRITERIA AND COST ESTIMATES ALVERNON WAY – SWAN ROAD REALIGNMENT KHA JOB No. 098022015 DESIGN YEAR TBD Standard Typical Section for 4-lane divided roadway, Figure 2-7, Pima County Department of Transportation Standard Typical Section. This typical section is provided in the Appendix, and includes 6 foot shoulders, four travel lanes (two are 12 wide, two are 13 feet wide), and one 24 foot mountable curbed median. Cross section DESIGN SPEED 60 mph (45mph posted) MAINLINE DESIGN VEHICLE WB-50 SIDE ROAD DESIGN VEHICLE Intermediate Semi-trailer SU Single Unit Commercial Truck ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION PCDOT Standard Figure 2-7 CLEAR ZONE MAINLINE CLEARZONE TBD MAINLINE RECOVERY AREA TBD SIDE ROAD CLEARZONE 10’ minimum (AASHTO 2004 p 319,387) SIDE ROAD RECOVERY AREA TBD SLOPES Mainline Min 4:1, 6:1 or Flatter Desirable (RDG chap. 3) HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT Mainline 10,000’ MIN RADIUS W/ NORMAL CROWN MIN RADIUS W/ MAX SUPERELEVATION 1500’ RUNOFF @ 4% (2 LANES ROTATED) 160’ MAX SUPERELEVATION 0.04’/ft (or 4%) MIN LENGTH OF CURVE TBD VERTICAL ALIGNMENT Mainline MAX GRADIENT 3% (AASHTO 2004, p 446 – Level 50mph) MIN GRADIENT 0.5%, to allow for drainage (per PCDOT request 11/13/2007) MIN VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH TBD MAX VERTICAL CURVE LENGTH SIGHT DISTANCE Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008 Crest VC: TBD’ (AASHTO, pg 272) K (max)=151 Sag VC: TBD’ (AASHTO, pg 277) ) K (max)=136 Calculated using L=KA, A=6 % max downgrade to max upgrade. Stopping Sight Distance: 570’ (AASHTO, pg 112) PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Project Location : Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative A Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADWAY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 89 131,500 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $623,000.00 $0.00 $1,972,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) 5010011 5010025 5010030 5041996 PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 24" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 36" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 42" DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (HEADWALL) 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $2,595,500.00 CU.YD. TON 35,000 46,660 35.00 98.00 $1,225,000.00 $4,572,680.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 $5,797,680.00 L.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH $120.00 $165.00 $190.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $936,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 3 TOTAL, ITEM 600 $2,212,200.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS WORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 4 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $400,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $650,000.00 ACRE 1,500.00 $0.00 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $1,291,160.00 $1,936,800.00 $1,291,200.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 $0.00 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 322,790 64,560 64,560 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $4,519,160.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $15,794,540.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $15,794,540.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $1,579,454.00 SUBTOTAL $17,373,994.00 Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $1,303,049.55 $347,479.88 $1,389,919.52 $347,479.88 $347,479.88 $347,479.88 $1,737,399.40 12% 15% $23,194,281.99 $2,783,313.84 $3,479,142.30 ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% Pavement Smoothness ($7,500 per lane mile) AC Quality Incentive at $1.50 per ton Flagging Services (Uniformed Officer) Alternative A Estimate-rev.xls TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 1 29,456,738.13 29,456,738.13 PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Project Location : Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative B Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADW AY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEW ALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 94 138,375 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $658,000.00 $0.00 $2,075,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 $2,733,625.00 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) 36,820 49,095 CU.YD. TON 35.00 98.00 $1,288,700.00 $4,811,310.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 5010011 5010025 5010030 5041996 PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 24" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 36" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 42" DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (HEADWALL) 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $6,100,010.00 L.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH $120.00 $165.00 $190.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $936,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 $0.00 1 1 3 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM TOTAL, ITEM 600 $2,212,200.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS W ORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 4 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $400,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $650,000.00 1,500.00 ACRE $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 $0.00 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEW ALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEW ALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( 339,650 67,930 67,930 SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $1,358,600.00 $2,037,900.00 $1,358,600.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $4,755,100.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $16,470,935.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $16,470,935.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $1,647,093.50 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $18,118,028.50 $0.00 $1,358,852.14 $362,360.57 $1,449,442.28 $362,360.57 $362,360.57 $362,360.57 $1,811,802.85 12% 15% $24,187,568.05 $2,902,508.17 $3,628,135.21 SUBTOTAL Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% Pavement Smoothness ($7,500 per lane mile) AC Quality Incentive at $1.50 per ton Flagging Services (Uniformed Officer) Alternative B Estimate-rev.xls TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 1 30,718,211.42 30,718,211.42 PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Project Location : Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative C Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADWAY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 97 142,775 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $679,000.00 $0.00 $2,141,625.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) 5010011 5010025 5010030 5041996 PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 24" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 36" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 42" DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (HEADWALL) 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $2,820,625.00 CU.YD. TON 37,990 50,655 35.00 98.00 $1,329,650.00 $4,964,190.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 $6,293,840.00 L.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH $120.00 $165.00 $190.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $936,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 3 TOTAL, ITEM 600 $2,212,200.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS WORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 5 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $500,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $750,000.00 ACRE 1,500.00 $0.00 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $1,401,800.00 $2,102,700.00 $1,401,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 $0.00 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 350,450 70,090 70,090 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $4,906,300.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $17,002,965.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $17,002,965.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $1,700,296.50 SUBTOTAL $18,703,261.50 Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $1,402,744.61 $374,065.23 $1,496,260.92 $374,065.23 $374,065.23 $374,065.23 $1,870,326.15 12% 15% $24,968,854.10 $2,996,262.49 $3,745,328.12 ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% Pavement Smoothness ($7,500 per lane mile) AC Quality Incentive at $1.50 per ton Flagging Services (Uniformed Officer) Alternative C Estimate-rev.xls TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 1 31,710,444.71 31,710,444.71 PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Project Location : Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative D Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADWAY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 83 123,120 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $581,000.00 $0.00 $1,846,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) 5010011 5010025 5010030 5041996 PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 24" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 36" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 42" DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (HEADWALL) 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $2,427,800.00 CU.YD. TON 32,765 43,685 35.00 98.00 $1,146,775.00 $4,281,130.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 $5,427,905.00 L.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH $120.00 $165.00 $190.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $936,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 3 TOTAL, ITEM 600 $2,212,200.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS WORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 4 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $400,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $650,000.00 ACRE 1,500.00 $0.00 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $1,208,800.00 $1,813,200.00 $1,208,800.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 $0.00 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 302,200 60,440 60,440 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $4,230,800.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $14,968,705.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $14,968,705.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $1,496,870.50 SUBTOTAL $16,465,575.50 Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $1,234,918.16 $329,311.51 $1,317,246.04 $329,311.51 $329,311.51 $329,311.51 $1,646,557.55 12% 15% $21,981,543.29 $2,637,785.20 $3,297,231.49 ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% Pavement Smoothness ($7,500 per lane mile) AC Quality Incentive at $1.50 per ton Flagging Services (Uniformed Officer) Alternative D Estimate-rev.xls TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 1 27,916,559.98 27,916,559.98 PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Project Location : Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative E Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADWAY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEWALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 96 141,625 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $672,000.00 $0.00 $2,124,375.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) 5010011 5010025 5010030 5041996 PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 24" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 36" PIPE, CORRUGATED METAL, 42" DRAINAGE STRUCTURE (HEADWALL) 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $2,796,375.00 CU.YD. TON 37,685 50,250 35.00 98.00 $1,318,975.00 $4,924,500.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 $6,243,475.00 L.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH $120.00 $165.00 $190.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $1,221,000.00 $936,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM 1 2 3 TOTAL, ITEM 600 $2,822,700.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS WORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 4 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $400,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $650,000.00 ACRE 1,500.00 $0.00 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $1,390,480.00 $2,085,750.00 $1,390,500.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 $0.00 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEWALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 347,620 69,525 69,525 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $4,866,730.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $17,399,280.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $17,399,280.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $1,739,928.00 SUBTOTAL $19,139,208.00 Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $1,435,440.60 $382,784.16 $1,531,136.64 $382,784.16 $382,784.16 $382,784.16 $1,913,920.80 12% 15% $25,550,842.68 $3,066,101.12 $3,832,626.40 ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% Pavement Smoothness ($7,500 per lane mile) AC Quality Incentive at $1.50 per ton Flagging Services (Uniformed Officer) Alternative E Estimate-rev.xls TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 1 32,449,570.20 32,449,570.20 PIMA COUNTY SWAN TO ALVERNON ALIGNMENT STUDY CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE Project No : Proj Manager : Project Location : Alvernon Way to Swan Road Realignment Study Project Description : Roadway Realignment Bid Advertisement Date : 01/01/10 Alternative F Mary Rodin Study ITEM No. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT 04/18/08 DATE: QUANTITY 2030301 2010011 2030401 2030901 2020025 2020029 2020048 2020053 ROADW AY EXCAVATION CLEARING AND GRUBBING DRAINAGE EXCAVATION BORROW REMOVAL OF CONCRETE SIDEW ALKS, DRIVEWAYS AND SLABS REMOVAL OF ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT REMOVAL OF STRUCTURE ( REMOVE ( CU.YD. ACRE CU.YD. CU.YD. SQ.FT. SQ.YD. EACH EACH UNIT PRICE 44 65,150 AMOUNT $14.00 $7,000.00 $10.00 $15.00 $5.00 $10,000.00 $0.00 $308,000.00 $0.00 $977,250.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 200 3030022 4090003 AGGREGATE BASE, CLASS 2 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE (MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL) $1,285,250.00 CU.YD. TON 17,340 23,115 L.SUM 1 L.SUM L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 2 35.00 98.00 $606,900.00 $2,265,270.00 TOTAL, ITEMS 300 & 400 500 6000' CUT AND COVER TUNNEL SYSTEM, COMPLETE SEE LAST LINE $2,872,170.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 500 6018101 6018102 6018103 REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( REINFORCED CONCRETE BOX CULVERT ( $0.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $312,000.00 $665,700.00 $610,500.00 $624,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 600 $1,900,200.00 TOTAL, ITEM 701 6080101 7041501 MISCELLANEOUS W ORK (SIGNS) PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7330630 7320420 7360300 7330408 REMOVE TRAFFIC SIGNALS PULL BOX (NO. 7) ROADWAY LIGHTING AT INTERSECTIONS TRAFFIC SIGNALS AND INTERCOM 8050003 SEEDING (CLASS II) $0.00 L.SUM L.SUM 1 1 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 1 1 $6,000.00 $400.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 $15,000.00 $5,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 703 - 709 $20,000.00 L.SUM EACH L.SUM L.SUM $0.00 $0.00 $100,000.00 $250,000.00 TOTAL, ITEM 730 $350,000.00 1,500.00 ACRE $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 800 9080201 9080081 9080109 9080296 9080298 9130051 CONCRETE SIDEWALK (C-05.20) CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (C-05.10) (TYPE G) CONCRETE SINGLE CURB ( CONCRETE SIDEW ALK RAMP ( CONCRETE SIDEW ALK RAMP ( RIPRAP (DUMPED) ( $0.00 159,920 31,984 31,984 SQ.FT. L.FT. L.FT. EACH EACH CU.YD. 4.00 30.00 20.00 750.00 750.00 115.00 $639,680.00 $959,520.00 $639,680.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL, ITEM 900 $2,238,880.00 ROADWAY TOTAL: $8,666,500.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 RCB CULVERT STA. #N/A TOTAL: $0.00 CONSTRUCTION COST SUBTOTAL $8,666,500.00 Miscellaneous Work 10% $866,650.00 SUBTOTAL $9,533,150.00 Maintenance/Protection of Traffic (7.5%) Water Supply / Dust Palliative (2%) Mobilization (8%) Erosion Control (2%) Quality Control (2%) Construction Survey / Layout (2%) Contingencies 7.5% 2.0% 8.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 10.0% $714,986.25 $190,663.00 $762,652.00 $190,663.00 $190,663.00 $190,663.00 $953,315.00 12% 15% $12,726,755.25 $1,527,210.63 $1,909,013.29 ROADWAY / STRUCTURES SUBTOTAL Design Engineering @ Construction Engineering @ 12% 15% 1500' CUT AND COVER TUNNEL SYSTEM, COMPLETE $60,000,000.00 TOTAL COST $ PROGRAMMED AMOUNT DIFFERENTIAL $ 76,162,979.17 76,162,979.17 APPENDIX D Responses to Utility Information Request Letter Alvernon/Swan Realignment Study, October 2008