The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Bill 8.A 07/12/2004y I 1. 4 d CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA AGENDA BILL ,, 4_ Jul 2 00 a Agenda Title Meeting Date: Discussion . and Determination of the Cross -Town July_ 12, 2004 Connecbion/H ghway 10.1 Interchange Local .Roadway Alignment Options, Weting "Time ❑ 3 :00 PM ® 7.:00 PM Category (check one) ❑ Consent Calendar ❑ PublieHearing_ ❑ New Business Unfinished Business ❑ `Presentation Department Director ` Contact Person Phone Number Plan Administration Pamela Tuft, AI Pam - laTUft ' (707) and Public Facilities Rick Skladzien, Susan Lackie (707)778 -4478 and Services Cast of Proposal Acebunt Number To Be Determined 0501204 Amount. Budgeted Name of'Fund: $1,3.11,000 Cross -Town Connector Attachments to.AEenda Packet Item Matrix illustrating four local alignment options Summary Statement "The. Council is requested to determine- the preferred location Tor a future local roadway alignment to connect Rainier Avenue to Petaluma Boulevard. North. The locations previously discussed. by the Council are Rainier North (original Plan Line), Rainier Village. Drive .(with local connection road), and Rainier South (major roadway with new Petaluma Boulevard North connection either at'-Shasta Avenue or in the vicinity of Cinnabar'Lane),. A matrix 'has been developed to provide a comparison of Tour alignments (see attached). Recommended City Council Action /Sugzested Motion City Council. to , direction on the local roadway alignment for the Rainier cross -town connector /interchange project. we by-Finance Director: Review . C't or ev A rov Cit: Vlana er: A"- Dale: Date: M a To 's Date: Revision # and Date Revised:_ File Coder 28 June 2004 # Kpf/Rainier \cc 7 -12 -04 local connectionLdoc CITY OF' PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA JULY 12, 2004 AGENDA REPORT .for DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION OF THE CROSS -TOWN CONNECTION / 1.01 INTERCHANGE ROADWAY ALIGN,MENT'.OPTIONS; C1P PRO.IECTNo. C501204 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Council is requested to determine the preferred location for a future local roadway alignment W.,connect Rainier Avenue to Petaluma Boulevard North. The locations previously discussed by the Council are Rainier North (original Plan Line), Rainier Village Drive (with focal connection road), and Rainier South (major roadway with new Petaluma' - Boulevard North connection either at, Shasta Avenue or in the vicinity of - Cinnabar. Lane). A matrix, has; been developed to provide a comparison of the four alignments (see attached). 2. BACKGROUND Following .the - approval of the original Rainier Avenue extension project, in 1994, the City adopted a. Precise Plan Line (October 1995) to identify the area needed to be set aside, as development occurs;. for the future alignment of the planned roadway. As projects continue to be proposed for entitlement or submitted for preliminary review ro (i.e. factory outlet `expansign', La 0.f Johnson at north end o.f Graylawn Avenue, Lands of Johnson located on the east side of Petaluma River' —north of Lynch Creek, DSL project on ;McD'oweh Blvd. North at Rainier, .Petaluma Boulevard North projects) there remains the 'issue of - where ,the: road will align, assuming' that Rainier remains in the General Plan as a future roadwayneed. In January 2004, the; Council heard. a presentation on a Cross -Town Mobility Enhancement Alternatives 'Analysis� Report. Th'i's work, effort was completed to expand upon 'the General Plan's Transportation Element research, and to conduct an initial. screening, of interchange alternatives, prepare conceptual geometric drawings, review the: alternatives with Caltrans as to their feasibility in relation to planned Highway improvements and to prepare preliminary capital, Qonsfruction cost `estimates (excluding - land acquisition and mitigation costs): -On April 19, 2004 the. Council reviewed preliminary analyses identifying three alignments: for improvements associated with extending Rainier Avenue westerly from McDowell Boulevard North to Petaluma Boulevard North; no action was taken. June 7, 2;004 the Council designated Rainier Avenue' as the preferred location .for. an interchange based on Alternative 1 preferred 'interchange configuration; and directed staffto, prepare an analysis of the'loca'l:roadway alignment options to connect Rainier . Avenue to Petaluma Boulevard North. Preliniinary analysis by the' consultant teams has identified, four, local. .aligriments for= improvement associated with extending' Rainier Avenue westerly from McDowell Boulevard North to Petaluma Boulevard North. 1. Rainier North (ori'ginal Plan Line) -2. 'RaimefVillage Drive (with. , local, connection road) 3. `Rainier South,(major roadway with,new. Petaluma Boulevard.North connection).. a. Shasta Avenue b. Cinnabar Lane Although the project was eventually �remoued. from the approved list of 'Capital- Improvemerit Projects, the Plan,,, Line reniained� as an adopted toun_cil, decision: Should an alignment be desired .other °than within the adopted Plan Line area, an, amendment to the Plan Line will be necessary to insure proposed projects respect set; aside, and /or,build to.ahe preferred project. 3. ALTERNATIVVES A. ,Designate .Rainier .North (original Plan Line) as the local roadway 'alignment to connect to; Petaluma Boulevard North B. .Designate Rainier Village Drive as the local _roadway alignment to connect to Petaluma Boulevard North. C. Designate _Raini'er South as the local. roadway alignment to: connect to Petaluma. Boulevard. North;either at, Shasta. Avenue or Cinnabar. Lane. D. D,ireci staff to analyze other options as the 'local. roadway alignment to connect to Petaluma Boulevard North: E. `Take no action (Plan 'Line would remain in place as origiiiall'y , adopted). 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS p ta i l. Improvement' Project- has been identified, for the cross -town connector. A, 'Ca Pursuant -to City Council direction, work will begin on completion of envi ronmental. review and preliminary design. 5. ' CONCLUSION : Specific direction on the preferred local' roadway alignment, will allow the City Manager and staff to provide direction. ,'; to pending devel'opmerit proposals, as to - -� preservation' of" anticipated right -of way `needs; to require- ,mitigation measures for participating in the fiscal, impacts for projected improvements; or, in some cases to require the 'construction of public improvements consistent with the anticipated roadway, alignment. 6. OUT.COME&OR PERFORMANCE - MEASUREMENTS' THAT WILL:IDENTI'FY SUCCESS OR COMPLETION: - Project-specific design work, environmental review., and .if necessary plan line amendments, will proceed, im accordance with Council direction. 7. RECOMMENDATION a As deemed appropriate, City Council to provide direction on the local roadway alignment for the 'Rainier cross -town connector /interchange project. Attachment: Matnk of optional local alignments • J Prepared for: City of Petaluma Technical Merteorand€tr? July 2, 2004 Prepared By: Patrick J. Flynn, PE, HDR Engineering, Inc. James A. ' Labanowski Jr. ;PE, HDR Engineering,, Inc. I'ntroduetion At the :request of the City Council and Mr. Michael Bierman, City Manager for the City of Petaluma, HDR conducted a comparison of potential. alternatives for the local connector element of the Rainier Avenue Crosstown Project. This technical memorandum includes a description of" the alternatives developed .through the initial screening process with:the City staff and HDR, as well as conceptual geometri c drawings and estimated construction costs for the various 'alternatives. This memo includes a. matrix identifying evaluation criteria used for the , screening of local connector alternatives and a preliminary evaluation of each of the alternatives.-. Traffic operations analysis was not conducted as a. part.` of :this study. The Fehr and Peers calculated "Transportation U "lity "" factor used in , a prior analysis of the alternatives was used for comparative,purposes. City of Petaluma 1 Local Connector Altemativei Analysis July 2, 2004 10 C hniaal W. , mo LocatConhector Alternatives The - consensus between the City staff and HDR on reasonable alternatives.is'the following: Plan, Line Alignment Alternative ■ Village Alignment Alternative Cinnabar, Alignment Alternative Shasta Alignment Alternative These scenarios are described in detail: be ginning on 'Page .6. Preliminary geometric drawings and estimates assume the limits, of 4he. local connector are delineated between the west side future freeway ramp intersection and the intersection, with Petaluma Boulevard, and the' east side ,future freeway ramp intersection and the intersection with McDowell, Boulevard: Drawings include three proposed developments in Proximity to the proposed alignment:;alternatives, The imatrix.on'P,ages 3 and 4.provides arelative comparison of the alternatives. The : Plan Line;Alignment is' the, alignment adopted by the City as' the precise plan line in' 1'995 and meets the City's design standards for the designation of a collector street. With° the exception of 1 horizontal curve 'in the Village Alignment, additional altern atives developed as a .part of this analysis °were designed to meet those same collector street standards. A ;copy of the City's street standards is attached on page 5. Other than on the Plan Line Alignment, no local access connections to Rainier Avenue were shown. It was .assumed that local developers proposing, new development would need to apply for access to the connector iri conformance with local. and; state access requirements. It' should be noted 'that: Caltrans °requires a mandatory minimum 410 feet (125 meters). between the freeway ramp and the intersection return for access control with their preferred reconnmended distance of 525 feet,: (160 meters). These requirements would need to be consid ered, when locating. access points to Rainier Avenue. 'Locating an access point closer to, !a freeway ramp than these distances -requires l, a forma ,design exception and; is not automatically ;granted by Various assumptions were made, and are sfafed,in the descriptions below; with regard to the appropriate; crossing: of the railroad tracks. Although it 'is possible to cross at- grade for any or all of these: alignment altematives PUC and SMART approval would be required and may represent, a significant, challenge. Both, agencies staff have indicated a strong .:reluctance to approve,:an at- gradei crossing unless an existing equivalent crossing in Petaluma .is eliminated. Each alternative did assume a bridge crossing of the Petalurna.River. City;ot Petaluma . 2 Local Connector AemativesUalysis July 2, 2004' ALTERNATIVES EVALUATION`1VIATRIX 0' Technical Memorancon <+ .,...,. % 2 3! < e5� ; ,,, ' '.; t. ,.,. .,. ;. A A §'•- u1. . .'r.�4: '3'` e: 'S' L .: gd . ._ ':� City of Petaluma Local Connector Alternatives Analysis 3 July 2, 2004 T 0 h 1 1, aka# 9 P tt?ri�d.ti? City of Petaluma Local'Connectc r:Altematives Analysis All 4 7uly<2, 1;28 Aces in Flood — Cinnabar (Grade S Separation) 0.77 Plain, 0.34 Acres Riparian 8.49 Acres 20 Propeities 2 — 4 Feet 23 Feet $54 Million r . Impact . ' Shasta 1.'28 Acres in Flood Plain 9.34 Acres ( At= Gracie 0.77 ' 20 Properties_ 2 - Feet N/A - $6:2 Million t Crossing) 0:34; °Acres Riparian Possible Re.locatigns Impact 'Estimated construction cost do- es not iriclude costs for and acquisition and relocations. Transportation, utility is rated: on a scale of zero (0) to one (1) with zero representing, the least utility °anc % one representing the most utility. City of Petaluma Local'Connectc r:Altematives Analysis All 4 7uly<2, E Technical Merriorandurp, 0 , City 0 Pew'uma Dvartmeni of Engine e nn.2 Sti6et Standards D.esd,p and Application, Guidelffi i ines Dt� 316)4 FRAiVitE AKI'f*W. OLU WHOP. p) Rs. till INT" 2 3 -Median width UA Tum Lam 10-0 - V-0- Y (1) NO lso NO Mah, TUM Lunc Y E-5 -NO W) Wicych; L4m YES mo:�.) NO NO YUIS YES Devio Spocd (kPjL)_ 45 33 CwLst Unc Radius 1 3 W-4 0) InwMWOM Spacing (4) 3w4 sir4r NIA Width YIN Y I YU Yl;_4 Planter Widih Y I Accou LIMITED vi., S Yi ry YEN $ N;A 4w, WO Triarle, Vo Aicrap I)Wl (O.W111'. 2SPM) .2ijim .,6.!Wxl lhan I.txx) TmMli ".Ta COnlLinulh N A PbTu UAtum lancs vulvba c_wvidvftd at �inte=ilonbi. to, ArttrW 1.*LILL 2. qj; - _riv Luc: 71#�' 1* cmitidcTed new sc?"Is am � '�(:' "*1jrW a t li n r 4, . rUITILIM Amcpivblo )k- %ta&qcmd %kith drjjOdWlVt C M44: 'i%mi CITY OYPETALU A MA DrvRrMwNq I%*"' ioi STREET V U STAP�DARDS Devign wd Application Buich Smith N T S City of Petaluma 5 Wcat'ConnectorAlternatives Analysis July 2, 2004 I � L Plan Line Alignment Alternative This alternative was developed as'the preferred alternative: for Rainier in the 1994 adopted, EIR and'adopted;by the City in 1-995 as the precise plan alignment: The geometries layout :is, slown on Ekhibit L. The significant difference between this current layout and the 1994 configuration is that Rainier Avenue is not elevated. over the_ freeway. Two options for crossing the ,existing railroad tracks were considered,in this evaluation: 1. Crossing of;the ,railr,oad at -grade 2. Crossing: of 'the railroad with° a grade separation (road structure) The ;vertical. ;profile .of this alignment for - a railroad grade separation .is not ideal'. The vertical clearance above -the .railroad would ; align , the structure approximately 35 .feet above the Petaluma River and would, }lave approach grades in ,excess of 6 percent. Provided below is a preliminary road profile ,for this' alignment, and although not ideal, it can. be designed to AASHTO Standards. The estimated cost for this alternative i's: $6.1. inillion'.for the at -grade crossing opP on and. $6.6 million', if a grade separation were' utilized. City of Petaluma 6 Local "Connector' Alternatives,Analysis July Q', 2004 •, • • i o c n.i,c lVe lara n L m Village Alignment Alternative This alignment immediately proceeds "away from -the :interchange in a horizontal curve that 'Migns :Rainier. parallel to the Petaluma, River. This 'first honzoi6l curve, adjacent . to the interchange; does, not meet the City's design standard for a collector road. without introducing a superelevation (,banked curve). After, paralleling the river, Rainier then turns west, crossing the river, and proceeds to ,intersect: with Fetaluma.'Boulevard. This alternative ;does provide -- for a .direct access into the proposed expansion of theFactory Outlets. This alternate .has 'the .majority of Rainier Avenue (West) located on the east side of the Petaluma River. The preliminary , geometric alignment .is provided in Exhib_ii , 2. This alignment assumed that,the railroad track would be crossed at- grade. The estimated' construction ,cost for this. alternative .>s:$5..Z million. City of,Petaluma . Local Connector, Alternatives Analysis July 2,:2004 • • • Techmical Memorandum .Cinnabar Alignment Alternative This configuration was developed as an alternative to the :Plan Line Alignment in Cross Town Mobility Eh hancemeizt Alternatives report prepared in'December 2003`(preu ously described as the South, Alignment). This -- alternat'ive'would align Rainier Avenue away from -the interchange_ in. a southwesterly direction and then turn to with .Cinnabar Avenue. Th'& geometric payout is shown in Exhibit 3. Two. options for the existing railroad tracks were again considered iii evaluation. of "this alternative: 1. ' 'Crossing 01 - he railroad at -grade I- Ciossing of te railroad with a grade separation (road structure), The estimated. cost for this alternative is $5.3 mill the at -grade crossing. option and,. $5. million if a gade:sepafation were utilized. Toc'hai,c .lOerh., ran dum Shasta Alignment Alternative This alignment is similar to the. Cinnabar Alignment,and proceeds,away'frorn the interchange in a southwestedy: direction.• This configuration would continue in a,southwesterly direction past Cinnabar Avenue and would turn to , align with Shasta Avenue. The preliminary geometric 1ayout;is provided,,in'Exhibit4". Evaluation Of this alternative only Considered an at-grade crossing of 'the ,railroad tracks Significant challenges to this alternative include a large excavation effort of.a hillside ,adjacent , to .Shasta 'Avenue and possible need for tall retaining walls. In addition ocbnsiderable R/`N impacts to r progjerties along Shasta Avenue may require; complete acquisition and /or .relocation , at great expense The estimated,construction cost for this alternative is.,S'6.2 million_. City of- .Petatuma LocaK, onnector,Alternadves Analysis