Work Zone Mobility and Safety Program
Work Zone Impacts Assessment: A Process to Manage Work Zone Safety and Mobility Impacts of Road Projects > Table of Contents

Appendix A – Overview of the Key Elements Included in the Project Report (PR) for the SR 41 Project

The following provides an overview of the different sections in the SR 41 PR.

Section 1 – Introduction

This section of the PR provided an introduction to the SR 41 project.

Section 2 – Recommendation

This section of the PR provided a recommendation on the preferred improvement alternative.

Section 3 – Background

This section of the PR outlined the history and set the precedent for the project.

Section 4 – Need and Purpose

This section of the PR provided a technical discussion on the:

  • Problem, deficiencies, and justification including discussions on capacity and safety issues that justify the need for the capacity improvements;
  • Compliance with the regional and systems planning efforts for the corridor;
  • Current year, construction year, and design year traffic analyses and projections; and
  • Accident history for the project location.

Section 5 – Alternatives

This section of the PR provided a discussion on the different improvement alternatives that were considered for the project. A total of four build alternatives and one "no build" alternative were considered, out of which one preferred build alternative was recommended. The following issues were considered and identified for the preferred alternative:

  • Future Use of Construction Staging Lane. The preferred alternative proposed to construct a northbound traffic lane in the median to facilitate the construction of the auxiliary lanes. The PR identified that once construction was completed, this additional lane would be delineated as a wide inside shoulder, which could be converted to a traffic lane in the future if needed.
  • Utilities. The PR contained a ROW data sheet that identified various utilities located along the project limits. All of the utilities crossed the state facility at local road crossings (Alluvial Avenue, Nees Avenue, etc.), and therefore, the PR stated that no utility relocations were expected.
  • Tree Planting. The PR proposed a separate planting project following the SR 41 highway construction contract. The planting project would contain replacement planting as well as new planting.
  • Erosion Control. The PR identified that the SR 41 project would require erosion control since earthwork operations were involved and water quality discharge requirements were to be maintained.
  • Impacts on the Sugar Pine Trail. The PR identified that the Sugar Pine Trail would be impacted during construction, but no temporary or permanent adverse effects would result. This facility is a pedestrian/bicycle trail and provisions were established to preserve the safe and convenient movement of bicycle travel through the construction site. For example, an illuminated pedestrian opening under the falsework at Nees Avenue overpass would be provided during construction. The PR also noted that after construction, the trail would be returned to its original condition.
  • Right of Way Data (ROW) Sheet. The ROW data sheet documented utility locations, necessary land acquisition and costs, and other ROW information.
  • Construction Cost Estimate. The PR estimated a construction cost estimate of $12,547,000 for the preferred alternative, including costs for construction, structures, and right of way.

Section 6 – Considerations Requiring Discussion

This section of the PR identified considerations and issues that would need to be addressed as part of the project. The following issues were considered and noted in the PR:

  • Hazardous Waste. Caltrans environmental staff conducted a hazardous waste field inspection. They determined that the project had no potential hazardous waste involvement.
  • Value Analysis. A Value Analysis study was not conducted because the project did not meet the District's criteria for warranting Value Analysis studies.
  • Resource Conservation. The PR stated that all measures would be taken to minimize the consumption, destruction, and disposal of nonrenewable resources. Any asphalt-concrete pavement removed during construction that was suitable for recycling would be used as part of the new structural section. Design of the project maximized the use of existing guard railing, electroliers, signs, and signposts.
  • Right of Way (ROW) Issues. The PR noted that additional ROW would be required from the land adjacent to the northbound off ramp to Friant Road. This acquisition would be required to accommodate the added ramp lanes. The ROW Data Sheet provided detailed information on parcel acquisition costs and other ROW information.
  • Environmental Issues. The PR identified the project to be Categorically Exempt under Class 1 of the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines. The project would be Programmatic Categorically Excluded under the National Environmental Policy (NEPA) Act. The Categorical Exemption/Programmatic Categorical Exclusion was provided as an attachment to the PR.
  • Air Quality Conformity. An air quality study was completed for the project. The PR noted that since the SR 41 project is included in a conforming Transportation Improvement Plan for Fresno County, it is exempt from a Regional Emissions analysis.
  • Title VI, Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) Considerations. The PR identified that owing to the proposed widening at the intersection of the SR 41 northbound off-ramp with Friant Road, a pedestrian refuge area would need to be created to protect low mobility pedestrians crossing at this location. Any new ramped curbs at the Friant Road intersection would be in compliance with the ADA requirements.

Section 7 – Other Considerations as Appropriate

This section of the PR discussed other issues that would be appropriate for consideration. The following additional issues were discussed:

  • Public Hearing Process. The PR noted that a public information meeting with an open house format was held in the community of Pinedale. The majority of the comments favored the project proposal.
  • Other Agreements. The PR noted that cooperative agreements with the Fresno Metropolitan Flood Control District (FMFCD) and the City of Fresno would need to be amended. These agreements address issues like storm water run-off drainage, freeway maintenance in the City of Fresno, Sugar Pine Trail maintenance, and traffic signal synchronization of selected intersections located on Friant Road.
  • Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for Use During Construction. The PR included a TMP Checklist as an attachment, and noted that the TMP would continue to be updated during the design phase. Initial delay analyses and lane closure charts were prepared as part of this preliminary TMP. These were then refined and updated during design to develop the final TMP. The TMP elements identified in the PR included public information, motorist information strategies, incident management, and construction strategies. Due to the potential for traffic delays during construction, the PR noted that every effort would be made to inform motorists. Construction sequences that would affect traffic operations would be made public so that alternate routes could be taken. The media would be used to keep the traveling public informed of construction progress, information pertaining to delays, closures, and major changes in traffic patterns. As part of incident management, Construction Zone Enhanced Enforcement Program (COZEEP) would be required. Nighttime work would limit traffic disruptions. A majority of the construction work could be done behind temporary barriers and without lane closures. When required, the northbound off ramp to Friant Road would be closed only during nighttime hours or weekends with advance notice posted. The northbound on ramp from westbound Herndon Avenue might be closed for an extended amount of time, and traffic might be diverted to use the northbound on ramp from eastbound Herndon Avenue or the two northbound on ramps from Friant Road.
  • Stage Construction. The PR noted that staged construction would be provided in order to minimize impacts to the traveling public. Two through lanes would be provided during construction for the entire duration of the project. Two construction stages were identified, along with specific traffic handling strategies for each stage.
    • Stage 1 would construct a traffic lane in the median of SR 41 from the El Paso Avenue under-crossing to just north of the Friant Road under-crossing. Traffic handling would consist of placing temporary barrier railing along the left edge of traveled way and having reduced lane and shoulder widths. Retaining wall construction would begin in Stage 1 to allow placement of the auxiliary lanes in Stage 2. Stage 1 would also include widening the northbound off ramp to Friant Road, for which, the outside ramp shoulder would be closed and temporary barrier railing placed on it.
    • Stage 2 would construct the two auxiliary lanes to be built as part of the project (i.e., the first auxiliary lane from Herndon Avenue to Friant Road, and the second auxiliary lane from Alluvial Avenue to Friant Road). Traffic handling for Stage 2 would consist of placing temporary barrier railing along the right edge of traveled way and shifting the traffic lanes to the left. Two traffic lanes would remain open with a reduced outside shoulder width.

    After completion of the two auxiliary lanes, the median lane to be constructed as part of Stage 1 (from El Paso Avenue to Friant Road) would be converted to a wide inside shoulder, which could be converted to a traffic lane in the future (if needed).

  • Graffiti Control. The PR noted that the urban areas of Fresno County are considered to be graffiti-prone, and that protective graffiti coating would be used on the architecture treatment for the retaining walls. Landscaping features would also be used to hide the retaining wall and discourage graffiti.

Section 8 – Programming

This section of the PR identified the funding sources for the project and documented where the project was listed in the State's transportation improvement program(s). The project was listed on the 2002 State Highway Protection Program (SHOPP) candidate list for funding in the 2003/04 fiscal year under the program code 20.20.201.310 (Operational Improvements). The project was also selected to be included in the Traffic Congestion Relief Program (TCRP). This section also provides a yearly capital and support cost breakdown and a project schedule.

Section 9 – Reviews

This section of the PR listed the staff reviews completed along with the review dates.

Section 11 – Project Personnel

This section listed the key personnel involved in the project along with contact phone numbers.

Section 12 – List of Attachments

This section provided a list of all the attachments accompanying the PR, namely:

  • Project Location Map;
  • Typical Cross Sections;
  • Layouts;
  • Cost Estimate;
  • Right of Way Data Sheet;
  • Environmental Categorical Exemption/Exclusion; and
  • Traffic Management Plan Checklist.

previous | next
Office of Operations