Traffic Improvement Plan University and Hospital ...

1

Traffic Improvement Plan

University and Hospital Institutional Area

Danbury, CT

Prepared for:

Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials

AUGUST, 2006

REVISED: APRIL, 2007

S E A Consultants Inc.Science/Engineering/Architecture

Cambridge, MassachusettsRocky Hill, Connecticut

Concord, New Hampshire2005277

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................3

1.1 STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................31.2 STUDY SCOPE...................................................................................................................................................3

2. EXISTING CONDITIONS.................................................................................................................................4

2.1 STUDY AREA....................................................................................................................................................42.2 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ..........................................................................................................................................42.3 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ...............................................................................................................................4

3. FUTURE CONDITIONS ....................................................................................................................................5

3.1 DANBURY HOSPITAL EXPANSION ....................................................................................................................53.2 WESTERN CONNECTICUT STATE UNIVERSITY EXPANSION ..............................................................................53.3 TRAFFIC GROWTH ...................................................................................ERROR! BOOKMARK NOT DEFINED.

3.3.1 Background Growth...............................................................................................................................63.3.2 Recommended Traffic Growth Rates .....................................................................................................7

4. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS...........................................................................................................................8

4.1 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................................................84.2 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVES ..........................................................................................8

4.2.1 Tamarack Avenue/Hospital Avenue Corridor .....................................................................................84.2.2 Garamella Boulevard/Osborne Corridor ...........................................................................................144.2.3 White Street .........................................................................................................................................204.2.4 Germantown Road/Sand Pit Road/Starr Road ..................................................................................29

5. OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS...............................................................................34

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX A .............................................................................................................. Figures 1 through 13APPENDIX B ............................................................... Opinion of Probable Construction Cost Worksheets

3

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Study Goals and ObjectivesThe Danbury Hospital and Western Connecticut State University (WCSU) are located nearthe downtown area of Danbury, approximately 2000 feet apart from each other. See Figure 1for a Locus Map. To access these facilities requires drivers to negotiate streets andintersections that were not designed to take on the current daily traffic they are nowreceiving. This creates roadway operational problems, potential safety hazards, and frustrateddrivers.

Both the Hospital and WCSU have plans for expansion of their facilities. WCSU plans toboth increase enrollment and construct additional on-campus housing. The Hospital plans toincrease patient capacity and expand the services it provides as it continues to grow into animportant regional hospital. These changes will contribute to the overall increase in trafficvolumes in the study area as well as the City in general.

In addition, residential neighborhoods experience high cut through traffic volumes andvehicle speeds making them unsafe. With traffic expected to increase by 1.5% per year overthe next 20 years, the traffic within the city is only expected to become worse. The goal ofthe study is to prepare recommendations for improvements to the roadways so they canhandle the current and future traffic they will see.

1.2 Study ScopeThis study looked at the problems of traffic volumes and roadway geometry presentlyoccurring in the City of Danbury, especially surrounding WCSU and the Danbury Hospital.The traffic can be improved by identifying roadways that serve as major collector routeswithin the City that need to be upgraded. Making improvements to the geometry of thesecollector routes would eliminate many of the existing and future traffic problems the Cityfaces. Some other improvements focused on were the safety of pedestrians and possiblechanges to streetscape conditions. The feasibility and cost of the improvements would thenbe evaluated.

4

2. EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 Study AreaDanbury, located in Southwestern Connecticut, has evolved from a small industrial centerinto an important employment and retail center. From 1990 to 2000, the population inDanbury rose from 65,585 to 74,848, the largest increase of any city in the state. Thetransportation system in the city is dominated by two major highways, Interstate 84 and U.S.Route 7. In this study, the downtown area surrounding the Danbury Hospital and WCSUwere explored further for possible improvements.

2.2 Traffic VolumesExisting traffic volumes were provided by the City of Danbury Engineering Division. Thecounts included Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) counts at several key locations within thestudy area and turning movement counts at sixteen intersections. The ATR count locationsand volumes are depicted on Figure 2 and the turning movement count data (existing andprojected) are included in the Transportation Improvement Alternatives section of this study.

2.3 Public TransportationThere are currently two forms of public transportation present within the city, the HousatonicArea Regional Transit (HART) bus system and the Danbury Branch Line of Metro-North.The train station is about 1 mile from the study area with bus connections available.

HART operates fifteen fixed bus routes in 10 Connecticut towns and three New York towns.The study area is served by several routes, with daily service, night/weekend service, and acommuter trolley with downtown service. These however are not taken advantage of bymost residents, with only 3.8% of the population using some form of public transportation in2000.

There are also 6 commuter lots located throughout the city of Danbury for the purpose ofencouraging car pooling and the use of pick up points for the bus services provided. It isunknown how many currently take advantage of this.

5

3. Future Conditions

3.1 Danbury Hospital ExpansionBased on the information provided by the Danbury Hospital it is difficult to determine theamount of traffic that the hospital contributes to the corridors and what amount of trafficincrease can be expected as the Hospital continues to grow into a regional hospital. We knowthat the hospital currently has 2100 parking spaces and plans to add another 600 associatedwith the Locust Street building project.

The addition of a parking garage and new building may not immediately result in substantialadditional traffic if existing uses in the hospital are simply relocated to the new building andif the new parking lot is used by patients and staff that currently park on the streets.However, over time as this new facility becomes increasing utilized, and as the Hospitaloffers new services (i.e. cardiac care), traffic volumes destined to the hospital will likelyincrease. Also, the potential exists to vertically expand the Shock building resulting in moreservice and patient capacity. At this point quantifying the increases from these potentialchanges as they relate to the project area corridors is not possible with the informationprovided.

3.2 Western Connecticut State University ExpansionThe University currently has about 4000 full time students and about 2000 part time students.Based on information provided by WCSU staff, they anticipate a growth in studentpopulation of about 1 % per year to year 2015 when total student population is estimated tobe 6537.

WCSU is currently constructing an 800 space parking garage off Osborne Street that, whencombined with the White Street garage and other surface parking, brings the total parkingcount at the mid-town campus to 1900 spaces. The new parking garage is not expected toincrease traffic destined to WCSU but will change traffic patterns in the immediate area ofthe garage.

WCSU also has plans to increase full-time student enrollment by about 12% by 2015 andonly minimally increase part-time student numbers. They also plan on adding additionalhousing units on campus. Garage and housing construction, and changes to enrollment maytend to buffer increases in overall campus-generated traffic. However, the desire for studentsto have off-site jobs and recreation activities may result in increased traffic for theseactivities from a larger population base.

Like Danbury Hospital it is difficult to quantify how much traffic on the corridors understudy is contributed from WCSU and how the University growth will add to those volumes.

6

3.3 Traffic Growth

3.3.1 Background GrowthTraffic growth rates in the project area need to be estimated to evaluate possible futuretransportation system needs. Traffic growth is typically estimated by determiningbackground growth in the region and specific trip generation associated with thedevelopment area being studied. In this case the Western Connecticut State University(WCSU) and the Danbury Hospital are the major traffic generators within the project area.This plan describes our approach to estimating future traffic volumes to be utilized for thedesign of recommended intersection and roadway improvements.

Traffic data for key roadway corridors in the study area were obtained to determine historicalchanges in Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes. ADT data associated with a each corridorwas obtained from a specific count location to be sure that year to year comparison wererepresentative of actual conditions. White Street, Locust Avenue, and Tamarack Avenue areall within the project area and North Street is located just to the northwest of the project area.North Street was included because it is a major arterial leading to portions of the project areaand the Danbury downtown.

Corridor ADT by Year1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2005

North Street - N of Balmforth 22,200 18,000 18,900 20,600 20,400

White Street - West of Eight/Cross 16,100 16,300 16,800 16,340

Locust Avenue - NW of Cleveland 15,000 12,300 13,200 12,800 14,400 12,580

Tamarack Avenue - N of Virginia 16,600 14,400 16,200 15,900

Tamarack Avenue - S of Virginia 13,300 11,400 12,900 12,200 13,256

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2005

Year

AD

T

North Street - N of Balmforth White Street - West of Eight/CrossLocust Avenue - NW of Cleveland Tamarack Avenue - N of VirginiaTamarack Avenue - S of Virginia

7

Based on the data presented above it is clear that after 1992 traffic volumes in the areadecreased significantly. However from 1995 until the present there has been a moderategrowth in traffic volumes. The annual growth rates per year (determined graphically fromthe data sets above) from 1995 to the present for each corridor are listed below.

Corridor Percent Growth Per Year

North Street - N of Balmforth 1.5 %White Street - West of Cross 1.0 %Locust Avenue - NW of Cleveland 1.9 %Tamarack Avenue - N of Virginia 2.1 %Tamarack Avenue - S of Virginia 0.9 %.

Computing a simple average from this data yields an average annual background growth rateof 1.48 % per year for the project area. Considering that most of the data shows a slightdecline traffic volumes in the last several years it may be reasonable to reduce the computedgrowth rates experienced from 1994 to the present. However, to be conservative for the basisof design it is recommended that a background growth rate of 1.5 % per year be used.

3.3.2 Recommended Traffic Growth Rates

There has been moderate background growth since 1994 but the growth currently seems to beon a slight downward trend. The Hospital and WSCU expansions contribution to the studyarea traffic volumes are impossible to calculate specifically, but with the expansions plannedand described in the previous section, it is likely that those facilities will contribute a largeportion of the background growth volume projected for study area corridors.

Considering the historical trend of an increase in traffic volumes (1994 - present), the currentdownward trend of traffic volumes (1998 - present), no information regarding major patientexpansions at the hospital, and the moderate growth of student population at the university itis reasonable to assume that the background growth rate is conservative enough to includeany Hospital or WCSU expansions that we know of at this time.

Accordingly, we recommend a traffic growth rate for evaluation of proposed designalternatives of 1.5 % per year for a 20 year design life of the project.

8

4. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS

4.1 No-Build Conditions

All of the study intersections were analyzed for future traffic conditions and noimprovements. Under these conditions they will all operate at a LOS D or lower, whichrepresents a decrease in operational efficiency and increased traffic delays.

The exceptions are the Germantown Road/Great Plain Road/Sand Pit Road and the ShepardRoad/Great Plain Road intersections which will operate at a LOS B. No improvements arerecommended for these intersections.

4.2 Transportation Improvement Alternatives

Conceptual-level plans of the Improvement Alternates discussed in the following sectionscan be found in Appendix A as Figures 3 through 24.

4.2.1 Tamarack Avenue/Hospital Avenue Corridor

4.2.1.1 Corridor DiscussionThe Tamarack Avenue/Hospital Avenue corridor is a fairly heavily traveled collector thatprovides good access to I-84 via Hayestown Road. There is currently an Average DailyTraffic (ADT) volume of about 13,000 vehicles per day using this corridor, and based onprojected growth in the area that volume will increase to an ADT volume of 17,000 vehiclesper day in 20 years.

The corridor is a two lane roadway with limited shoulders and passes through an area withmultifamily dwellings, a cemetery, and institutional uses. The roadway is narrow and welllined with roadside trees in many areas.

Intersection capacity in the corridor is fairly good (LOS B-C) for urban intersections but astraffic volumes increase LOS will continue to decline and delays will increase, eventuallybecoming unacceptable without geometric improvements including adding additional traveland turning lanes. The capacity restrictions along the corridor are limited to intersectionoperations. A two lane roadway with adequate shoulders is recommended for much of thecorridor except where additional lanes are required to improve intersection capacity;therefore full length widening to a four lane section is not warranted in this corridor.

9

An important consideration in this corridor is the cut through traffic using Virginia Avenue.It appears that the City is trying to reduce cut through traffic on these roadways byimplementing traffic calming measures but heavy traffic is still utilizing this corridor.

Improvements to the Hospital roadway corridor (Tamarack Avenue to Germantown Road)that will increase the capacity, including improved operations at the Hospital Roadintersection (particularly the southbound left turn from Tamarack Avenue to HospitalAvenue) must be made before additional traffic calming can be accomplished on VirginiaAvenue.

For traffic calming on Virginia Avenue to be successful the City must decide that HospitalAvenue will function as a higher class of roadway than Virginia Avenue and makeappropriate improvements to the Hospital Avenue corridor.

Upon draft review by City staff, the proposed improvements at the Tamarack Avenue andHayestown Avenue were determined to have a greater impact than is desired by the City atthis time. Additionally, City staff felt that intersection operations at the intersection ofTamarack Avenue and Hospital Avenue could be further improved with additional wideningof intersection approaches. Therefore, alternative improvement plans were also prepared.The following are S E A’s recommendations for intersection improvements in this corridor.

4.2.1.2 Tamarack Avenue/Hayestown AvenueTamarack Avenue at Hayestown Avenue is currently a signalized intersection with advancephasing for the Tamarack Avenue northbound approach. There are two-lane approaches in alldirections (one thru lane and one left turn lane for the Tamarack Avenue northboundapproach, one thru lane and one right turn lane for the Tamarack Avenue southboundapproach and one left turn lane and one right turn lane for Hayestown Avenue eastboundapproach).

The intersection currently operates at an acceptable LOS but operations will decline as trafficvolumes increase and will operate at a LOS F in the future year if no geometricimprovements are implemented.

10

Existing Traffic Volumes Future Traffic Volumes

31309

Driveway

42111

454

465

347 1

235

208

5

Hayestown Ave.Ta

mar

ack

Ave

.Ta

mar

ack

Ave

.424112

Driveway

56815

613

628

468 1

317

281

7

Hayestown Ave.

Tam

arac

kA

ve.

Tam

arac

kA

ve.

Intersection capacity analysis was completed and is summarized below:

Analysis Condition LOS – Overall (Lane Group)

Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (C-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (B-C)

Proposed geometric improvements to allow the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOSinclude:

Add a second left turn lane for the Tamarack Avenue northbound approachAdd a second left turn lane for the Hayestown Avenue eastbound approach

Proposed improvements are depicted on Figure 3A.

Alternatively, the following improvements can be made to provide for better trafficoperations with less significant impact to the immediate neighborhood.

Extend the existing left turn lane for the Tamarack Avenue northbound approach

Proposed improvements for the alternate design are depicted on Figure 3B.

No analysis of intersection operations for the alternate design was performed. Therefore,future LOS for this geometry has not been determined.

11

4.2.1.3 Tamarack Avenue/Virginia Avenue Ext.Tamarack Avenue at Virginia Avenue Extension is currently a stop controlled intersection(Virginia Avenue Extension) with single lanes for all approaches. Due to the heavy trafficvolumes on Tamarack Avenue, the Virginia Avenue Extension approach currently operates ata LOS D in the PM peak hour. When future traffic volumes are applied to this intersectionthe operations are at LOS F for the Virginia Avenue Extension approach.

Traffic signal warrants were completed (based on the PM peak hour data only) and the PeakHour Warrant was satisfied. Considering that geometric improvements will not correct thecapacity problems and the left turning vehicles from Tamarack Avenue to Virginia AvenueExtension are relatively high, a traffic signal may be warranted at this location.


1845

Virginia Ave. -Ext.

629 4

439

172

Tam

arac

k A

ve.

2497

Virginia Ave. -Ext.

850 5

593

232

Tam

arac

k A

ve.

Assuming a traffic signal will be installed at this location a capacity analysis was completedand is summarized below:


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (E-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (A-D)

Proposed geometric improvements include:

Add a left turn lane on Tamarack Avenue southbound.

If the City desires to reduce traffic volumes on Virginia Avenue Extension a traffic signalmay not be consistent with this goal. The traffic signal will improve operations at theintersection and make turning movement easier and may actually increase volumes as aresult. Additional traffic calming restriction on Virginia Avenue along with capacity

12

improvements at The Hospital Road intersection may redirect traffic enough where a signalis not required at this location.

Crosswalks and pedestrian phasing is required at this location. Proposed improvements aredepicted on Figure 4.

Due to the limited impact of the proposed improvements, no alternate geometricimprovement plan has been prepared for this intersection.

4.2.1.4 Tamarack Avenue/Hospital Avenue and Hospital Avenue/Locust AvenueTamarack Avenue at Hospital Avenue and Hospital Avenue/Locust Avenue are twosignalized intersections operating off one traffic signal controller. There are two laneapproaches on Hospital Avenue at the Locust Street intersection (one thru lane and one rightturn lane northbound and one thru lane and one left turn lane southbound) and all otherapproaches have a single lane approach.

The intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS but operations will decline as trafficvolumes increase and will operate at a LOS D to LOS F in the design year if no geometricimprovements are implemented.

13


98238

Hospital Ave.

562

202

387

57

Tam

arac

kA

ve.

132321

759

273

523

77

44244

Locust Ave.

322 48

306

319

Hos

pita

l Ave

.

59760

435 65

413

431

Hospital Ave.

Tam

arac

kA

ve.

Locust Ave.

Hos

pita

l Ave

.



Tamarack Avenue/Hospital AvenueExisting Geometry/Current Volumes B (A-C)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes D (C-D)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)

Hospital Avenue/Locust AvenueExisting Geometry/Current Volumes C (A-C)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (B-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)

14

Proposed geometric improvements to allow the intersections to operate at an acceptable LOSinclude:

Adding a left turn lane to Tamarack Avenue southboundMaking the Hospital Avenue at Locust Avenue northbound approach right turn lane aright/thru laneProviding two thru lanes between Locust Avenue and Tamarack AvenueProviding appropriate departure lanes on Tamarack northbound of Hospital Avenue

Lengths of vehicle queues on the lanes between the signals must be carefully evaluated toensure that lane queues will not block operations at the intersections. Crosswalks andpedestrian phasing is required at this location. Proposed improvements are depicted onFigure 5A.

Alternatively, the following improvements can be made to provide for better trafficoperations.

Adding a left turn lane to Tamarack Avenue southboundMaking the Hospital Avenue at Locust Avenue northbound approach right turn lane aright/thru laneWidening the section of Hospital Avenue between Tamarack Avenue and LocustAvenue to four lanes, two northbound and two southbound.



4.2.2 Garamella Boulevard/Osborne Corridor

4.2.2.1 Corridor DiscussionThe Garamella Boulevard/Osborne Street corridor bisects the study area and provides a keyeast-west connection to downtown, I-84 and other major arterials. There is currently an ADTvolume of about 11,000 vehicles per day using this corridor (at Osborne Street east of LocustAvenue) and based on projected growth in the area that volume will increase to an ADTvolume of 15,000 vehicles per day in 20 years. The corridor is primarily a two lane roadwaywith limited shoulders and passes through an area with multifamily dwellings andinstitutional uses.

Intersection capacity in the corridor is moderate (LOS B-D) for urban intersections but astraffic volumes increase Levels of Service (LOS) will continue to decline and delays willincrease eventually becoming unacceptable (LOS F) without geometric improvementsincluding adding additional travel and turning lanes. The capacity restrictions along thecorridor are limited to intersection operations. A two lane roadway with adequate shouldersis recommended for much of the corridor except where additional lanes are required to

15

improve intersection capacity; therefore full length widening to a four lane section along thiscorridor is not warranted.

Upon draft review by City staff, the proposed improvements were determined to have agreater impact than is desired by the City at this time. Therefore, alternate improvementplans were also prepared. The following are S E A’s recommendations for intersectionimprovements in this corridor.

4.2.2.2 Garamella Boulevard/Maple Avenue and Garamella Boulevard/BalmforthAvenue/Osborne Street

Garamella Boulevard/Maple Avenue and Garamella Boulevard/Balmforth Avenue/OsborneStreet are two signalized intersections (coordinated) associated with the Maple Avenue/Balmforth Avenue one way circulator. Maple Avenue is a two lane, one way roadwaysouthbound and Balmforth Avenue is a two lane, one way road northbound. The GaramellaBoulevard approaches to Maple Avenue are two lanes (eastbound is one thru lane and onethru/right turn lane and westbound is one thru lane and one left turn lane). The GaramellaBoulevard to Balmforth Avenue is two lanes (one thru lane and one left turn lane) and theOsborne Street approach is two lanes (one thru lane and one right turn lane).The intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS, but operations will decline astraffic volumes increase and they will operate at a LOS D to LOS E in the design year, withsome lane groups at LOS F, if no geometric improvements are implemented.

16

Existing Traffic Volumes

451177

GaramellaBlvd.M

aple

Ave

.O

ne-W

ay

45874

62 518

342

Map

le A

ve.

One

-Way

Osborne St.

113

550

155

528505

73495

Future Traffic Volumes

608239

GaramellaBlvd.M

aple

Ave

.O

ne-W

ay

618100

84 700

462

Map

le A

ve.

One

-Way

Osborne St.Bal

mfo

rth

Ave

.O

ne-W

ay

153

743

209

713682

99668



Garamella Boulevard/Maple AvenueExisting Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes E (B-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (B-D)

17

Garamella Boulevard/Balmforth StreetExisting Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes D (B-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (C-D)

Proposed geometric improvements to allow the intersections to operate at an acceptable LOSinclude:

Adding a second through lane for the Garamella Boulevard westbound approach toMaple AvenueModifying the right turn lane on the Osborne westbound approach to BalmforthAvenue to be a shared through/right laneAdding a second right turn lane for the Osborne Street westbound approach toBalmforth Avenue.

Lengths of vehicle queues on the lanes between the signals must be carefully evaluated toensure that lane queues will not block operations at the intersections. Crosswalks andpedestrian phasing is required at this location. Proposed improvements are depicted onFigure 6A.


Widening the section of Garamella Boulevard between Maple Avenue and BalmforthAvenue to four lanes

o On the westbound section, the left lane shall be an exclusive left turn lane; theright lane shall be a thru lane

o On the eastbound section, the left lane shall be an exclusive left turn lane; theright lane shall be a thru lane

Modifying the right turn lane on the Osborne westbound approach to BalmforthAvenue to be a shared through/right laneAdding a left turn lane for the Osborne Street eastbound approach to EllsworthAvenue



4.2.2.3 Osborne Street/Hospital Avenue/DrivewayThe Osborne Street/Hospital Avenue/Parking Structure Driveway is currently a signalizedintersection with advance phasing for the Osborne Street westbound approach. There aresingle lane approaches in all directions except for the eastbound approach on Osborne Streetwhere there is a two lane approach (one left turn lane and one thru/right lane). Theintersection currently operates at an adequate LOS even when additional traffic from the new

18

parking structure (estimated) is added but operations will decline as traffic volumes increaseand will operate at a LOS E in the design year if no geometric improvements areimplemented.


3841424

Osborne St.Hos

pita

l Ave

.

28247863

71 21 39

277

18 27

5155986381

645139

150 82 107

374

78 37

WC

SUD

rivew

ay

Osborne St.Hos

pita

l Ave

.W

CSU

Driv

eway

The future traffic volumes shown above include an estimated additional 40 vehicles for eachapproach/departure associated with the new parking garage.



Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (C-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)

When applying future traffic volumes to the intersection, including volume from the WCSUgarage, the westbound and northbound approaches operate at LOS F with significant delaysdue to the overall lack of lane capacity. Proposed geometric improvements to allow theintersection to operate at an acceptable LOS include:

Adding an exclusive left turn lane on the Osborne Street westbound approachAdding an exclusive right turn lane on the Hospital Avenue southbound approach.

Crosswalks and pedestrian phasing is required at this location. Proposed improvements aredepicted on Figure 7A.

19


Adding an exclusive right turn lane on the Hospital Avenue southbound approach



4.2.2.4 Osborne Street/Locust AvenueOsborne Street at Locust Avenue is currently a signalized intersection with advance phasingfor the Osborne Street westbound appro`ach. There are two lane approaches in thesouthbound, eastbound and westbound approaches (one thru/right turn lane and one left turnlane southbound and westbound and a thru/left turn lane and a right turn lane eastbound).The intersection currently operates at a LOS D and operations will decline as traffic volumesincrease to a LOS F in the design year if no geometric improvements are implemented.


77339134

Osborne St.Locu

st A

ve.

106354

61

24 441

167

54 314

120

104458181143

47882

33 595

226

73 424

162

Locu

st A

ve.

Osborne St.Locu

st A

ve.

Locu

st A

ve.



Existing Geometry/Current Volumes D (B-E)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (C-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes D (C-D)

20

When applying future traffic volumes to the intersection the westbound and southboundapproaches operate at LOS F with significant delays due to the overall lack of lane capacity.Proposed geometric improvements to allow the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOSinclude:

Adding an exclusive left turn lane to the Osborne Street approach southboundWidening the locust street approach westbound to provide two lanes (one thru leftlane and one thru right lane)Widening the Osborne Street approach northbound to provide five total lanes (onethru right lane, one thru lane, one exclusive left turn lane, and two ingress lanesWidening the Locust Street approach eastbound to provide an additional ingress lane.



Adding an exclusive right turn lane to the Osborne Street Approach southbound,resulting in a three-lane approach (one thru lane, one exclusive left turn lane, and oneexclusive right turn lane)



4.2.3 White Street

4.2.3.1 Corridor DiscussionThe White Street corridor is a heavily traveled arterial with significant pedestrian activityassociated with WCSU. Considering the large number of pedestrian/vehicle conflicts,accidents and “near misses” that have plagued this corridor for many years, safety ofpedestrians in the corridor is a major design consideration. There is currently an ADTvolume of about 26,000 using this corridor and based on projected growth in the area thatADT volume will increase to 35,000 in 20 years.

Intersection capacity in the area is average for urban intersections but as traffic volumesincrease Levels of Service (LOS) will continue to decline and traffic delays will increase,eventually becoming unacceptable without geometric improvements such as addingadditional travel and turning lanes.

Due to the heavy traffic volumes currently using White Street, and considering the increasein traffic volumes anticipated in the future design year, two lanes in each direction, fromBalmforth Avenue to Federal Road, is recommended. Dedicated turning lanes will be

21

required at many high volume side streets and at all signalized intersections as described inthe following sections. These improvements will accommodate the heavy traffic flow at anadequate LOS.

There are several options for providing four travel lanes. All the options should include acenter median. This will provide a center refuge island which allows pedestrians to crossonly one direction of traffic at a time. Openings in the raised median should be provided atcritical locations to allow left turns into driveways and possibly U turn movements to accesskey destinations along the segment of roadway where the median is proposed. The medianopenings should be fully developed left turn bays and be placed only where required to allowaccess to heavily traveled driveways.

A raised median will allow for landscaping in the center of the roadway, emphasizing theinstitutional character of the area and providing motorists with a clear visual cue that the roadis not just a major arterial but passes through an area with high pedestrian activity as well.

The median island should be wide enough (16 feet) to allow development of a turning lanecompletely within the median area (12 foot turning lane 4 foot island). This will provide fortwo through lanes in each direction that are not impeded by left turning movements. Thisimprovement will allow the signalized intersections to operate effectively as traffic volumesincrease.

Options to implement these improvements in a phased approach should be considered. Sinceconstruction of the median island is an essential part of all alternatives and roadway volumeshave not increased to a point where two lanes in each direction is absolutely essentialconstruction of a roadway with one lane in each direction and a raised median island may bea good interim step. This will improve operations by providing dedicated left turning lanesand controlling turning movements to controlled location. This will also enhance pedestriansafety by providing a safe refuge area in the middle of the corridor.

However, in the event that future widening to four lanes becomes necessary, the medianwould require that widening occur on both sides of the road. Therefore, careful considerationshould be given to future capacity requirements as well as potential property impacts whenconsidering the installation of a landscaped center median.

22

Upon draft review by City staff, the proposed improvements were determined to have agreater impact than is desired by the City at this time. Therefore, alternate improvementplans were also prepared. The alternative intersection designs include a provision to widenWhite Street to two lanes in each direction from Balmforth Avenue to Meadow Street. Thefollowing are S E A’s recommendations for intersection improvements in this corridor.

Proposed improvements are depicted on Figures 9 through 13.

4.2.3.2 White Street/Moss AvenueWhite Street at Moss Avenue is currently a stop controlled intersection (Moss Avenue) withsingle lanes for all approaches. Due to the heavy traffic volumes on White Street, the MossAvenue approach currently operate at a LOS F in the PM peak hour.

Traffic signal warrants were completed (based on the PM peak hour data only) and the PeakHour Warrant was satisfied.


39636

White St.Mos

s A

ve.

43835

23 19

53859

White St.Mos

s A

ve.

581127

31 26

One option under consideration is to make Fifth Avenue a one-way street in the northbounddirection and reassign all Fifth Avenue southbound and White Street to Fifth Avenue leftturning traffic to Moss Avenue. This reconfiguration will allow the use of a wider City street(Moss Avenue) for access to Osborne Street destinations from the White Street corridor.

23

Accordingly, all southbound traffic on Fifth Avenue and left turning traffic from White Streetto Fifth Avenue were reassigned to Moss Avenue.


39636

White St.Mos

s A

ve.

177835

73 41

53859

White St.Mos

s A

ve.

2391127

98 55

Assuming a new traffic signal will be installed at this location a capacity analysis wascompleted and is summarized below:


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes D (B-E)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (C-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)


Widening to two lanes in each direction on White StreetAdding an exclusive left turn lane on White Street at Moss Avenue



Widening White Street to four laneso The eastbound approach includes a thru/left turn lane and a thru laneo The westbound approach includes a thru lane and a thru/right turn lane



24

4.2.3.3 White Street/Fifth Avenue/Bates PlaceWhite Street at Fifth Avenue is currently a stop controlled intersection (Fifth Avenue) withsingle lanes for all approaches. Due to the heavy traffic volumes on White Street, the FifthAvenue and Bates Place approaches currently operate at a LOS F in the PM peak hour.

Traffic signal warrants were completed (based on the PM peak hour data only) and the PeakHour Warrant was satisfied. Considering that the new parking garage will add traffic volumeto Fifth Avenue, geometric improvements will not correct the capacity problems, there is ahigh volume of traffic turning left from White Avenue to Fifth Avenue and that there isheavy pedestrian activity in the area a traffic signal may be warranted at this location.


345501

White St.

Bat

es P

l.Fi

fth A

ve.

134663

1

1 0 1

50 0 22

467431

White St.

Bat

es P

l.Fi

fth A

ve.

181895

1

1 0 1

68 0 30

Assuming a traffic signal will be installed at this location a capacity analysis was completedand is summarized below:


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes F (C-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)

Proposed geometric improvements include: (These improvements to Fifth Avenue shouldbe implemented only if the proposed Moss Avenue improvements described in theprevious section are not implemented.)

Widening to two lanes in each direction on White StreetAdding an exclusive left turn lane on White Street at Fifth Avenue


25

Alternatively, the following improvements can be made to provide for better trafficoperations with less significant impact to the immediate neighborhood. (Theseimprovements to Fifth Avenue should be implemented only if the alternate MossAvenue improvements described in the previous section are implemented.)

Widening White Street to four laneso The eastbound approach includes a thru/left turn lane and a thru/right laneo The westbound approach includes a thru/left lane and a thru/right turn lane



4.2.3.4 White Street/Eighth Avenue/Parking GarageWhite Street at Eighth Avenue is currently a signalized intersection with advance phasing forthe White Street eastbound approach. There is a two lane approach eastbound (one thru/rightturn lane and one left turn lane), a two lane approach on Eighth Avenue (one right turn laneand one thru/left turn lane) and single lanes for all other approaches. The intersectioncurrently operates at an acceptable LOS but operations will decline as traffic volumesincrease and will operate at a LOS D in the design year if no geometric improvements areimplemented.


1051076

White St.

WC

SUG

arag

eEi

ghth

Ave

.

32518

77

45 27 74

30 39 14

1468910343

699104

61 37 100

41 53 19

White St.

WC

SUG

arag

eEi

ghth

Ave

.


26


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes B (A-C)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes D (A-E)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes B (B-C)

The westbound and northbound approaches operate at LOS E with significant delays due tothe existing single lane approaches. Required geometric improvements to allow theintersection to operate at an acceptable LOS include the addition of a left turn lane on WhiteStreet westbound into the parking garage. However, to be consistent with the overallcorridor improvements, the concept developed for this intersection includes:

Widening to two lanes in each direction on White StreetAdding an exclusive left turn lane on White Street at Eighth AvenueAdding an exclusive right turn lane on Eighth Avenue southbound

Crosswalks and pedestrian phasing is required at this location.

An additional pedestrian signal could be installed in the location of the pedestrian bridgewhere there is significant pedestrian activity in the corridor. This pedestrian signal would becoordinated with the Eighth Avenue traffic signal and would be called concurrently with theEighth Avenue side street phase.

The need for two lanes in each direction is further justified by the installation of thispedestrian signal considering the potential delays associated with significant pedestriancrossings. Proposed improvements are depicted on Figure 10A.


Widening White Street to four laneso The eastbound approach includes a thru/left turn lane and a thru laneo The westbound approach includes a thru lane and a thru/right turn lane

Adding an exclusive right turn lane on Eighth Avenue southbound

Additionally, the pedestrian signal described in the proposed improvements could beinstalled as part of the alternate design.



27

4.2.3.5 White Street/Locust Avenue/Wildman StreetWhite Street at Locust Avenue/Wildman Street is currently a signalized intersection withadvance phasing for the White Street westbound approach and northbound/southbound leftturn approaches. There are two lane approaches in all directions (one thru/right turn lane andone left turn lane for Locust Avenue, Wildman Street and White Street westbound and athru/left turn lane and a thru/right turn lane for White Street eastbound).

The intersection currently operates at an adequate LOS but operations will decline as trafficvolumes increase and will operate at a LOS E in the design year if no geometricimprovements are implemented.


90475198

White St.

Wild

man

St.

Locu

st A

ve.

15555

29

103

337

217

41 340

211

12264126720

74939

139

455

293

55 459

285

White St.

Wild

man

St.

Locu

st A

ve.



Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes E (B-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (B-C)

When applying future traffic volumes to the intersection the westbound and southboundapproaches operate at LOS E with significant delays due to the overall lack of lane capacity.Proposed geometric improvements to allow the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOSinclude:

Widening to two lanes in each direction on White Street west of Meadow StreetAdding an exclusive left turn lane on Locust Avenue southboundAdding an exclusive right turn lane on Wildman Street northbound to provide a threelane approach (one left turn lane, one thru lane, and one right turn lane)

28



Widening White Street to four lanes with three lane approaches in both directions atLocust Street



4.2.3.6 White Street/Federal RoadWhite Street at Federal Road is currently a signalized intersection with advance phasing forthe Federal Road eastbound approach. There are two lane approaches in all directions (onethru lane and one left turn lane for the White Street eastbound approach, one thru lane andone right turn lane for the Federal Road approach and one thru lane and one right turn lanefor the White Street westbound approach).

The intersection currently operates at an acceptable LOS but operations will decline as trafficvolumes increase and will operate at a LOS D (approaches LOS F) in the design year if nogeometric improvements are implemented.


136530

White St.Fede

ral R

d.

391543

383

151

184716

White St.Fede

ral R

d.

528733

571

204


29


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (B-D)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes E (B-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (B-C)

When future traffic volumes are applied to the intersection the eastbound and southbound leftturn approaches operate at LOS F and E, respectively. Proposed geometric improvements toallow the intersection to operate at an acceptable LOS include:

Widening White Street to four lanes west of Federal Road with a three lane approacheastbound (two exclusive left turn lanes and one thru lane)Widening the northeastern leg of the intersection to provide two ingress lanesModifying the Federal Road approach southbound to provide a left/right turn lane andan exclusive right turn lane

Proposed improvements are depicted on Figure 12A.


Modifying the left turn lane on White Street eastbound to provide a thru/left turn laneWidening the eastern leg of the intersection to provide two ingress lanes, includingthe widening of the existing bridge crossing the railroad



4.2.4 Germantown Road/Sand Pit Road/Starr Road

4.2.4.1 Corridor DiscussionThe Germantown Road/Sand Pit Road corridor provides a key east-west connection from theDanbury Hospital/WCSU area to I-84 and Federal Road to and from the east. There iscurrently an ADT volume of about 11,000 vehicles per day using this corridor and based onprojected growth in the area the ADT volume will increase to 15,000 vehicles per day in 20years.

The corridor is primarily a two lane roadway with limited shoulders and passes through anarea that is primarily commercial and industrial. Sand Pit Road and Starr Roads are windingtwo lane roadways with two all way stop controlled intersections, inconsistent roadway widthand a lack of access control for driveways. A new signal is planned for the Sand PitRoad/Starr Road/Beaverbrook Road intersection. Germantown Road and the first section of

30

Sand Pit Road (near Germantown Road) have a well defined roadway cross section and nostop controlled intersections.

Intersection capacity at the signalized intersections in the corridor is good (LOS B-D) and astraffic volumes increase Levels of Service (LOS) will decline but not significantly enough torequire geometric improvements. A two lane roadway with a consistent width, a welldefined edge of pavement or curb line and improved access, and adequate shoulders isrecommended for much of the corridor except where additional lanes are required to improveintersection capacity as noted below.

Plans are in place for improvements by ConnDOT to the Starr Road/Federal Roadintersection.

Upon draft review by City staff, the proposed improvements were determined to have agreater impact than is desired by the City at this time. Therefore, alternate improvementplans were also prepared. The following are S E A’s recommendations for intersectionimprovements in this corridor.

4.2.4.2 Germantown Road/Osborne Street/Hospital AvenueGermantown Road/Osborne Street/Hospital Avenue is currently a stop controlled intersection(Hospital Road approach) with single lanes for all approaches. The Hospital Avenueapproach splits into two intersections around a large island area with two way traffic on bothsides of the island. Traffic turning right onto Hospital Avenue uses the south side of theisland and traffic turning left from Hospital Avenue uses the north side of the island.

The angle of the southern leg of the intersection allows a fairly straight through left turn lanewhich could be a potential conflict with southbound traffic on Germantown Road/OsborneStreet. Left turns from Hospital Avenue to Germantown Road use the north side of theintersection. The left turns currently from Hospital Road to Germantown Road operate at aLOS D in the PM peak hour but when future traffic volumes are applied to this intersectionthe left turn operations drop to a LOS F.

Traffic signal warrants were completed (based on the PM peak hour data only) and PeakHour Warrant was satisfied. Considering that geometric improvements will not correct thecapacity problems, the left turning vehicles from Hospital Avenue to Germantown Road arerelatively high, that improvements to Hospital Road and associated traffic calming onVirginia Avenue may direct additional traffic to this intersection a traffic signal may bewarranted at this location.

31


Hospital Ave.G

erm

anto

wn

Rd.

16359

57 595

82 363

Osb

orne

St.

Hospital Ave.

Ger

man

tow

nR

d.

22080

77 803

111

490

Osb

orne

St.

Assuming a traffic signal will be installed at the north side of the island a capacity analysiswas completed and is summarized below:


Existing Geometry/Current Volumes C (C-C)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes E (D-F)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes C (A-C)


Restricting all Hospital Avenue right turns to the south side of the intersection andnarrow that approach width consistent with a one way right turn rampConstructing a “T” type intersection on the north side of the islandAdding a left turn lane on the Osborne Street northbound approach



Restricting all egress from Hospital Avenue to the south side of the islandRestricting all ingress to Hospital Avenue to the north side of the islandModifying the southern leg of the intersection to provide one thru lane

32

Modifying the Hospital Avenue approach to the south of the island to provide for twolanes of one-way traffic with a two lane approach at the intersection with OsborneStreet (one left turn lane and one right turn lane)Modifying the Hospital Avenue approach to the north of the island to provide for onelane of northbound trafficModifying the middle leg of the intersection between Osborne Street andGermantown Avenue to provide one southbound lane and two lanes on thenorthbound approach (one left turn lane and one thru lane)Modifying the Germantown Avenue approach southbound to provide a one lanesouthbound approach with a thru/right turn lane



4.2.4.3 Germantown Road/Great Plain Road/Sand Pit Road andShepard Road/Great Plain Road

Germantown Road/Great Plain Road/Sand Pit Road and Shepard Road/Great Plain Road aretwo signalized intersections operating off one traffic signal controller or are coordinated.Except Shepard Road where there is a single lane approach, there are a two lane approacheson all intersection legs (Sand Pit Road has a right turn lane and a left turn lane, GermantownRoad has one thru lane and one right turn lane, Great Plain Road northbound has one thrulane and one left turn lane, Great Plain southbound has one left turn lane (for Sand Pit Road)and one thru/right turn lane). The intersections currently operates at an acceptable LOS andoperations will decline as traffic volumes increase but will not decrease to a point where anunacceptable LOS is realized in the design year..

33


Shepard Rd.

Gre

at P

lain

Rd.

2184

127

411

23 191

182262

Sand Pit

356

468

195

80

Ger

man

tow

nR

d.

Shepard Rd.

Gre

at P

lain

Rd.

28113

171

555

31 258

246354

Sand Pit

481

632

263

108

Ger

man

tow

nR

d.



Germantown Road/Great Plain Road/Sand Pit RoadExisting Geometry/Current Volumes A (A-B)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes B (A-B)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes N/A

Great Plain Road/Shepard RoadExisting Geometry/Current Volumes B (A-B)Existing Geometry/Future Volumes B (A-C)Proposed Geometry/Future Volumes N/A

No lane additions are recommended for this intersection.

34

5. OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS

Budgetary level opinions of probable construction costs have been developed for theimprovements depicted on Figures 3 through 13 (Appendix A). These opinions wereprepared based 2006 dollar values. Several sources were used to develop the costs, includingthe ConnDOT Weighted Unit Price Report, 2005.

A summary of probable costs is presented below. Detailed cost tables are included inAppendix B. The costs include construction related costs and contingencies only. Designand permitting costs are not included. Right-of-way acquisition costs are also not included.

Probable Construction Costs for Proposed ImprovementsIntersection Probable Cost (2006 dollars)

Tamarack Avenue & Haystown Avenue 932,000Tamarack Ave & Virginia Avenue Extension 653,000Tamarack Avenue & Hospital Avenue & Locust Avenue 1,701,000Garamella & Maple and Garamella & Balmforth & Osborne 1,443,000Osborne Street & Hospital Avenue 1,103,000Osborne Street & Locust Avenue 1,663,000White Street & Moss Avenue 1,091,000White Street & Fifth Avenue & Bates Place 1,692,000White Street & Eight Avenue & parking garage 1,508,000White Street & Locust Street & Wildman Street 1,358,000White Street & Federal Road 1,374,000Germantown Road & Osborne Street & Hospital Avenue 1,327,000

Probable Construction Costs for Alternate ImprovementsIntersection Probable Cost (2006 dollars)

Tamarack Avenue & Haystown Avenue 785,000Tamarack Ave & Virginia Avenue Extension 653,000Tamarack Avenue & Hospital Avenue & Locust Avenue 1,500,000Garamella & Maple and Garamella & Balmforth & Osborne 1,530,000Osborne Street & Hospital Avenue 850,000Osborne Street & Locust Avenue 530,000White Street & Moss Avenue 1,645,000White Street & Fifth Avenue & Bates Place* N/AWhite Street & Eight Avenue & parking garage 1,640,000White Street & Locust Street & Wildman Street 1,310,000White Street & Federal Road 1,327,000Germantown Road & Osborne Street & Hospital Avenue 1,855,000

*Included in cost estimate for White Street & Moss Avenue

Appendix A

.

)

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/20/2007 10:12:31 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Tamarack_Hayestown.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

FIGU

RE

3A

TAM

AR

AC

K A

VE

NU

E &

HA

YE

STO

WN

RO

AD

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

NA

UG

US

T 2006

MS

V

HAYESTO

WN R

D.

TAMARACK AVE.

)

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/20/2007 9:33:51 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Tamarack_Hayestown with city comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

3B

TAM

AR

AC

K A

VE

NU

E &

HA

YE

STO

WN

RO

AD

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

PAIN

TED

ISLAN

D

)

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 11:31:28 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Tamarack_Virginia.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 4A

TAMA

RAC

K AVEN

UE & V

IRG

INA A

VENU

EE

XTE

NS

ION

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

)

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 11:35:26 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Tamarack_Hospital_Locust.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

V

FIGU

RE

5A

TAM

AR

AC

K A

VE

. & H

OS

PITA

L AV

E. &

LOC

US

T AV

E.

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

PLOT DATE= 4/20/2007 9:34:46 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Tamarack_Hospital_Locust-city.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

AG

B

CM

C

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

CM

C

FIGU

RE

5B

TAM

AR

AC

K A

VE

. & H

OS

PITA

L AV

E. &

LOC

US

T AV

E.

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 11:56:19 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Garamella_Maple_Balmforth.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 6A

GA

RA

ME

LLA B

LVD

. & M

AP

LE A

VE

. & B

ALM

FOR

TH A

VE

.

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

MAPLE AVE.

BALMFORTH AVE.

GAR

AMELLA BLVD

.

OSBO

RNE ST.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 11:54:21 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Garamella_Maple_Balmforth-city.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

AG

BFIG

UR

E 6B

GA

RA

ME

LLA B

LVD

. & M

AP

LE A

VE

. & B

ALM

FOR

TH A

VE

.(C

ITY-P

RE

FER

RE

D D

ES

IGN

)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 11:57:06 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Hospital_Osborne.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 7A

HO

SP

ITAL A

VE

NU

E &

OS

BO

RN

E S

TRE

ET

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

PAIN

TED

ISLAN

D

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/19/2007 10:47:12 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Hospital_Osborne with city comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

AG

BFIG

UR

E 7B

HO

SP

ITAL A

VE

NU

E &

OS

BO

RN

E S

TRE

ET

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 12:55:07 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Osborne_Locust.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

AG

BFIG

UR

E 8A

OS

BO

RN

E STR

EE

T & LOC

US

T AV

EN

UE

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

OSBORNE ST.

LOCUST AVE.

GR

AN

ITE CU

RB

PLOT DATE= 4/19/2007 10:52:36 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Osborne_Locust with city comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

8B

OS

BO

RN

E STR

EE

T & LOC

US

T AV

EN

UE

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 2:02:13 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Moss_White.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 9A

MO

SS AVEN

UE & W

HITE STR

EET

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

FIFTH AVE.

MOSS AVE.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/19/2007 10:54:03 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Fifth_White with city comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

AG

BFIG

UR

E 9B

MO

SS AVEN

UE & W

HITE STR

EET

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 2:03:11 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Fifth_White.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 10A

WH

ITE STR

EET & E

IGH

TH AVEN

UE

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

WH

ITE S

T.

EIGHTH AVE.LE

GE

ND

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/20/2007 9:55:05 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Locust_White_Eighth with comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

10B

WH

ITE STR

EET & E

IGH

TH AVEN

UE

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

.

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 1:55:08 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Locust_White_Eighth.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 11A

WH

ITE ST. & LO

CU

ST AVE. & EIG

HTH

AVE.

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

WH

ITE S

T.

LOCUST AVE.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/20/2007 9:55:05 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Locust_White_Eighth with comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

11B

WH

ITE ST. & LO

CU

ST AVE. & EIG

HTH

AVE.

(CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DE

SIG

N)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

FEDERAL RD.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 2:19:09 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-White_Federal.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 12A

WH

ITE STR

EET & FED

ER

AL RO

AD

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

FEDERAL ROAD

WH

ITE STR

EET

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/19/2007 10:48:37 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-White_Federal with city comments.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

12B

WH

ITE STR

EET & FED

ER

AL RO

AD(C

ITY-P

RE

FER

RE

D D

ES

IGN

)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

.

.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/18/2007 2:22:19 PM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Germantown_Hospital_Osborne.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

MS

V

BA

S

----

AG

B

AU

GU

ST 2006

MS

VFIG

UR

E 13A

HO

SP

ITAL A

VE

. & O

SB

OR

NE

ST. &

GE

RM

AN

TOW

N A

VE

.

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

HOSPITAL ROAD

OSBORNE STREET

GERMANTOWN AVE.

LEG

EN

D

0

SC

ALE

: 1"=100'S

CA

LE IN

FEET

100200

300

PLOT DATE= 4/19/2007 10:57:35 AM USER= CHRIS CHAMBERLAND FILENAME= G:\_clients\Danbury CT\Traffic Study\_05277-Germantown_Hospital_Osborne with city.dwg

CO

NC

OR

D, N

EW

HA

MPSH

IRE

RO

CKY H

ILL, CO

NN

EC

TICU

TC

AMBR

IDG

E, M

ASS

ACH

USETTS

STO

NE

HA

M, M

ASSA

CH

USETTS

AU

GU

STA

, MA

INE

Draw

n by

Designed by

Scale

Date

Job No.

Approved by

Checked by

AS

NO

TED

2005277

CM

C

CM

C

AG

B

AG

B

APR

IL 2007

FIGU

RE

13B

HO

SP

ITAL A

VE

. & O

SB

OR

NE

ST. &

GE

RM

AN

TOW

N A

VE

. (CITY

-PR

EFE

RR

ED

DES

IGN

)

DA

NB

UR

Y TRA

FFIC IM

PR

OV

EM

EN

T PLA

N

Appendix B

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Tamarack Ave. and Hayestown Ave.

Item # Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price CostROADWAY ITEMS

1 Sidewalk 10759 S.F. $11.00 $118,351.202 Full Depth Construction** 941 S.Y. $41.00 $66,823.903 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 4260 S.Y. $15.00 $63,900.004 Drainage Upgrade 38319 S.F. $1.00 $38,319.005 Drainage New 9280 S.F. $3.00 $27,840.006 Curb (Granite) 1345 L.F. $45.00 $60,520.507 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.008 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $104,730.92

Subtotal (Roadway Items) $590,066.52

10 Maintenance and Protection of Traffic (12%, incl. trafficperson) $70,80811 Mobilization (7.5%) $44,25512 $5,901

$120,964

$711,030

$41,305INCIDENTALS (21%) $123,914

UTILITY RELOCATION (8%) $47,205RIGHT OF WAY (NOT INCLUDED) N/A

$923,000

**Full Depth Construction includes earth excavation, 4 inch bituminous concrete,subbase, removal of curbing, removal of concrete

ALL COSTS IN 2006 DOLLARS

LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL

Construction Staking (1.0%)

Subtotal (Lump Sum Items)

Subtotal (Roadway and Lump Sum Items)

CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Tamarack Ave. and Hayestown Ave.





$102,848

$604,547

$35,119INCIDENTALS (21%) $105,357


$785,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Tamarack Ave. and Virginia Ave.





$85,498

$502,560

$29,194INCIDENTALS (21%) $87,583


$653,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Tamarack Ave. and Virginia Ave.





$85,498

$502,560

$29,194INCIDENTALS (21%) $87,583


$653,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Tamarack Ave., Hospital Ave. and Locust Ave.



Subtotal (Roadway Items) $1,086,925.00


$222,820

$1,309,745

$76,085INCIDENTALS (21%) $228,254


$1,701,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Tamarack Ave., Hospital Ave. and Locust Ave.





$196,083

$1,152,588

$66,955INCIDENTALS (21%) $200,866


$1,497,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Garamella Blvd. and Maple Ave. and Balmforth Ave.



Subtotal (Roadway Items) 895,848.00


$183,649

$1,079,497

$62,709INCIDENTALS (21%) $188,128


$1,402,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Garamella Blvd. and Maple Ave. and Balmforth Ave.



Subtotal (Roadway Items) 975,709.00


$200,020

$1,175,729

$68,300INCIDENTALS (21%) $204,899


$1,527,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Hospital Ave. and Osborne St.





$144,546

$849,650

$49,357INCIDENTALS (21%) $148,072


$1,103,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Hospital Ave. and Osborne St.





$111,285

$654,137

$38,000INCIDENTALS (21%) $113,999


$850,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Osborne St. and Locust Ave.


1 Sidewalk 24850 S.F. $11.00 $273,350.002 Full Depth Construction 5620 S.Y. $41.00 $230,420.003 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 5700 S.Y. $15.00 $85,500.004 Drainage Upgrade 51320 S.F. $1.00 $51,320.005 Drainage New 23100 S.F. $3.00 $69,300.006 Curb (Granite) 3110 L.F. $45.00 $139,950.007 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.008 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $185,688.00



$217,876

$1,280,684

$74,397INCIDENTALS (21%) $223,190


$1,663,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS


PROJECT TOTAL



CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Osborne St. and Locust Ave.


1 Sidewalk 5240 S.F. $11.00 $57,640.002 Full Depth Construction 305 S.Y. $41.00 $12,505.003 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 2000 S.Y. $15.00 $30,000.004 Drainage Upgrade 17050 S.F. $1.00 $17,050.005 Drainage New 2735 S.F. $3.00 $8,205.006 Curb (Granite) 655 L.F. $45.00 $29,475.007 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.008 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $58,914.00



$68,969

$405,403

$23,550INCIDENTALS (21%) $70,651


$527,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS


PROJECT TOTAL



CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Moss Ave. & White St.





$142,937

$840,192

$48,808INCIDENTALS (21%) $146,424


$1,091,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Moss Ave. & White St.





$215,080

$1,264,248

$73,442INCIDENTALS (21%) $220,325


$1,642,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of White St. and Fifth Ave.


1 Sidewalk 18580 S.F. $11.00 $204,380.002 Landscaped Island* 1020 S.F. $15.00 $15,300.002 Full Depth Construction** 3100 S.Y. $41.00 $180,995.003 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 5450 S.Y. $15.00 $81,750.004 Drainage Upgrade 49010 S.F. $1.00 $49,010.005 Drainage New 27920 S.F. $3.00 $83,760.006 Curb (Granite) 4030 L.F. $45.00 $181,350.007 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.008 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $185,829.00



$221,659

$1,302,923

$75,688INCIDENTALS (21%) $227,065


$1,692,000

*Landscaped Island includes granite curbing, shrubery at 5 feet off-center, cutting of pavement and topsoil.



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of White St. and Eighth Ave.


1 Sidewalk 15600 S.F. $11.00 $171,600.002 Landscaped Island* 1390 S.F. $15.00 $20,850.002 Full Depth Construction** 2760 S.Y. $41.00 $158,970.003 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 4140 S.Y. $15.00 $62,100.004 Drainage Upgrade 37250 S.F. $1.00 $37,250.005 Drainage New 24820 S.F. $3.00 $74,460.006 Curb (Granite) 3570 L.F. $45.00 $160,650.007 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.008 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $166,756.00



$197,474

$1,160,760

$67,430INCIDENTALS (21%) $202,290


$1,508,000




LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of White St. and Eighth Ave.





$214,980

$1,263,664

$73,408INCIDENTALS (21%) $220,224


$1,641,000




LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of White St. and Locust Ave.





$177,855

$1,045,441

$60,731INCIDENTALS (21%) $182,193


$1,358,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of White St. and Locust Ave.





$171,585

$1,008,585

$58,590INCIDENTALS (21%) $175,770


$1,310,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of White St. and Federal Rd.





$179,940

$1,057,694

$61,443INCIDENTALS (21%) $184,328


$1,374,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of White St. and Federal Rd.





$119,508

$702,472

$40,807INCIDENTALS (21%) $122,422


$912,000



LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction CostIntersection of Germantown St. & Hospital Ave.


1 Sidewalk 6240 S.F. $11.00 $68,640.002 Landscaped Island* 9830 S.F. $41.00 $403,030.003 Full Depth Construction** 20 S.Y. $15.00 $18,000.004 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 2430 S.Y. $13.50 $32,805.005 Drainage Upgrade 21830 S.F. $3.00 $65,490.006 Drainage New 840 S.F. $45.00 $37,800.007 Curb (Granite) 1220 L.F. $45.00 $54,900.008 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.009 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $85,107



$173,877

$1,022,059

$59,373INCIDENTALS (21%) $178,118


$1,327,000




LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Opinion of Probable Construction Cost (City -Preferred Alternative)Intersection of Germantown St. & Hospital Ave.


1 Sidewalk 12400 S.F. $11.00 $136,400.002 Landscaped Island* 9765 S.F. $41.00 $400,365.003 Full Depth Construction** 460 S.Y. $15.00 $39,450.004 Mill and Overlay (4-Inches) 4125 S.Y. $13.50 $55,687.505 Drainage Upgrade 37100 S.F. $3.00 $111,300.006 Drainage New 4140 S.F. $45.00 $186,300.007 Curb (Granite) 1550 L.F. $45.00 $69,750.008 New Traffic Signal 1 EA $147,900.00 $147,900.009 Minor Items (20% of Roadway Items) $149,358



$242,968

$1,428,178

$82,965INCIDENTALS (21%) $248,894


$1,855,000




LUMP SUM ITEMS

PROJECT TOTAL




CONTINGENCY (7%)

Traffic Improvement Plan University and Hospital ...

Documents

Transcript of Traffic Improvement Plan University and Hospital ...