4.0 - ENGINEERING ISSUES REPORT
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Sepu
Engine
Prepared
Prepared
HNTB Co
in collabo
Novembe
lveda P
eering Iss
for:
by:
rporation
oration with P
er 2012
Pass Cor
ues Repo
Parsons Brinc
rridor S
ort
kerhoff, EMI,
ystems
, IBI Group, a
s Planni
nd V&A
ing Studdy
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SepulvedaEngineeri
Tableo1 Intro
2 Corri
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.3
2.3.1
2.3.2
2.3.3
2.4
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
2.5
2.5.1
2.5.2
2.5.3
2.6
2.6.1
2.6.2
3 Next
Appendix
Appendix
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
ofContenoduction .......
idor System C
At‐Grade Van
1 Key Eng
2 Rough‐O
3 Issues fo
At‐Grade Fre
1 Key Eng
2 Rough‐O
3 Issues fo
Aerial Viaduc
1 Key Eng
2 Rough‐O
3 Issues fo
Tolled Highw
1 Key Eng
2 Rough‐O
3 Issues fo
Fixed‐Guidew
1 Key Eng
2 Rough‐O
3 Issues fo
Toll Tunnel a
1 Key Eng
2 Issues fo
t Steps ..........
x 1: Conceptu
x 2: Higher Sp
or Systems Plport
nts.....................
Concepts ......
n Nuys/Sepul
gineering Elem
Order‐of‐Mag
or Further Inv
eeway Manag
gineering Elem
Order‐of‐Mag
or Further Inv
ct Managed L
gineering Elem
Order‐of‐Mag
or Further Inv
way Tunnel ....
gineering Elem
Order‐of‐Mag
or Further Inv
way Light Rail
gineering Elem
Order‐of‐Mag
or Further Inv
and Rail Tunn
gineering Elem
or Further Inv
.....................
ual Drawings
peed Buses
anning Study
.....................
.....................
lveda Bouleva
ments ............
gnitude Costs
vestigation an
ged Lanes ......
ments ............
gnitude Costs
vestigation an
Lanes .............
ments ............
gnitude Costs
vestigation an
.....................
ments ............
gnitude Costs
vestigation an
l or Heavy Ra
ments ............
gnitude Costs
vestigation an
el ..................
ments ............
vestigation an
.....................
y
......................
......................
ard Bus Rapid
......................
s ....................
nd Analysis ...
......................
......................
s ....................
nd Analysis ...
......................
......................
s ....................
nd Analysis ...
......................
......................
s ....................
nd Analysis ...
il Tunnel .......
......................
s ....................
nd Analysis ...
......................
......................
nd Analysis ...
......................
.....................
.....................
d Transit (BRT
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
T) ...................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
P
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
Page 1
....... 2
....... 2
....... 2
....... 4
....... 4
....... 6
....... 6
....... 8
....... 8
....... 9
..... 10
..... 12
..... 12
..... 13
..... 14
..... 16
..... 18
..... 19
..... 20
..... 22
..... 23
..... 24
..... 25
..... 27
..... 29
..... 30
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SepulvedaEngineeri
1 INTRThis
key e
been
cons
task
Plan
This
Char
geot
study
conc
2 CORThe s
and
Conc
2.1 ATh
G
M
M
Ex
Th
B
p
Se
d
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
RODUCTIOreport presen
engineering e
n developed t
sultant teams
orders for th
ning Charrett
report provid
rrette 2, high‐
echnical asse
y that need fu
cepts are inclu
RRIDOR SYsix concepts a
2 are mainly
cepts 4 throug
At-Grade Vahe proposed
reen Line and
MetroLink Stat
MetroLink/Am
xposition LRT
he at‐grade B
us on Should
rovision of tra
epulveda Bou
escribed belo
or Systems Plport
ON nts refined co
elements for e
through work
working on t
e Sepulveda
te 1 and 2.
des a summar
‐level, concep
essments, con
urther invest
uded in the A
YSTEM COare presented
at‐grade or s
gh 6 incorpor
n Nuys/Sepat‐grade BRT
d Crenshaw/L
tion to the no
mtrak, Orange
T, and Jefferso
BRT service tr
er operations
affic signal pr
ulevard, Van N
ow.
anning Study
orridor system
each concept
king sessions w
the Transport
Pass Corridor
ry description
ptual cost est
nstructability
igation and a
Appendix.
ONCEPTSd in further d
urface alterna
rate major su
pulveda BouT provides a c
LAX Light Rail
orth. Interme
Line Sepulve
on Boulevard
aveling along
s across Sepu
riority, and qu
Nuys Bouleva
y
m concepts, r
t and issues n
with Metro p
tation Plannin
r Systems Pla
n of the conce
imates, inform
issues, and is
nalysis. In ad
etail in the fo
atives, Conce
bsurface (tun
ulevard Busonnection be
Transit (LRT)
diate stops a
eda Station, W
.
g existing road
lveda Pass on
ueue jump lan
ard, and San F
rough‐order‐o
eeding furthe
planning staff,
ng, Demand M
nning Study,
epts and any
mation on ke
ssues uncove
ddition, conce
ollowing secti
ept 3 is an aer
nnel) compon
s Rapid Traetween Centu
) line on the s
re proposed
Wilshire Boule
dways will be
n I‐405 (in bo
nes at selecte
Fernando Roa
of‐magnitude
er study. The
, input from t
Modeling, and
and from inp
changes resu
ey design elem
red during th
eptual drawin
ions. In gene
rial viaduct al
nents.
ansit (BRT) ury Boulevard
south to the S
at Nordhoff S
evard (Wests
e enhanced by
th directions
ed intersectio
ad. These enh
P
e cost estimat
e concepts ha
the other
d Environmen
put received a
ulting from
ments,
he course of t
ngs for the
ral, Concepts
ternative, an
d station with
San Fernando
Street, Van N
ide Subway),
y the provisio
), and the
ons along
hancements a
Page 2
tes,
ave
ntal
at
his
s 1
d
the
o
uys
on of
are
SepulvedaEngineeri
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure
or Systems Plport
e 1. Con
anning Study
ncept 1 At‐Gr
y
rade Van Nuyys/Sepulveda BRT Map
P
Page 3
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.1.1
2.1.
2.1.
2.1.
2.1.2
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
1.1 Concept The prim
intersect
propose
operatio
reconfig
1.2 GeotechNo unco
Concept
1.3 Construc
No nega
1 may pr
and abili
and tran
Rough-OrdThe majorit
estimates w
cases where
data from s
by Metro p
The unit co
quantified b
typical unit
economies
characterist
mile, where
costs were
and a 30 pe
to account
See the Sep
discussion o
specific ass
estimates.
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
Design Elememary engineer
tion striping m
d BRT service
ons on I‐405 (t
uration of the
nical Assessmommon geote
1.
ctability Issuetive construc
resent improv
ity to phase in
nsit signal prio
der-of-Magnity of the unit
were provided
e unit costs w
similar project
ersonnel.
sts used for t
by a cost per
factor. Whe
of scale. The
tics of the con
eas some con
adjusted acco
ercent conting
for the prelim
pulveda Pass C
on the costing
umptions and
anning Study
ents
ents ring design el
modifications
e and signing
the north sid
e Orange Line
ment echnical issue
s ctability issues
ved construct
ntersection a
ority.
tude Costs cost factors u
d by the Metr
were not prov
ts and indust
his study rep
mile unit and
re appropriat
e cost estimat
ncept. For ex
cepts were e
ordingly. Last
gency was ap
minary nature
Corridor Syst
g methodolog
d adjustment
y
ements assoc
s associated w
and striping a
e of the Sepu
e Sepulveda s
s are anticipa
s are anticipa
tability due to
nd vehicle im
used to devel
ro Cost Estim
vided by Metr
ry resources,
resent the co
d major featu
te, the unit co
tes have also
xample, the ty
nvisioned to
tly, unit costs
pplied to each
e of this feasib
ems Planning
gy, unit cost v
s applied to d
ciated with C
with queue ju
associated w
ulveda Pass).
station
ated for the ro
ated for Conc
o its limited c
mprovements
lop the rough
ating Departm
ro and the de
, which were
oncepts at a v
res such as tr
osts have bee
been adjuste
ypical Metro
have fewer s
s were develo
h concept’s to
bility level ass
g Study Prelim
values, gener
develop the r
Concept 1 are
ump improvem
ith the bus on
This concept
oadway facili
ept 1, on the
construction n
associated w
h‐order‐of‐ma
ments. There
esign team re
reviewed and
very high leve
ransit station
en adjusted to
ed to reflect t
rail project h
stations per m
oped to reflec
otal applied u
sessment.
minary Cost R
ral assumptio
rough‐order‐o
P
traffic signal
ments for the
n should
t also assume
ties required
contrary, Co
needs, lower
with queue jum
agnitude cost
e were certai
lied up availa
d approved fo
el; alternative
s are assigned
o reflect
the physical
has a station e
mile and the u
ct program co
nit cost in ord
eport for a fu
ns, and conce
of‐magnitude
Page 4
and
e
es the
for
ncept
cost
mps
t
n
able
or use
es are
d a
every
unit
osts
der
ull
ept
e cost
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.1.2
2.1.
2.1.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
2.1 Capital CThe majo
estimate
S
a
A
S
The ro
$162M
.2.2 Vehicle
Vehicl
Transit
perfor
sizes r
compo
option
lane fa
transm
transm
(differ
Based
(refurb
service
new ve
.2.3 Operat
Opera
mainte
2013,
Based
part of
year.
or Systems Plport
Cost Estimate or componen
e are:
Shoulder imp
accommodat
Boulevard
At‐grade BRT
Modifications
Priority treat
Sepulveda Bo
ough‐order‐of
M.
e Cost Estimae costs assoc
t service. A p
rmed as part o
eflect the pro
onent associa
ns reflect the
acility across S
mission of exis
mission that c
ing from curr
on the above
bished compa
e, and from $
ehicles respe
tions and Mainting and main
enance cost f
and average
on these inp
f Concept 1, t
anning Study
nts of the con
provements o
te shoulder ru
T Station
s at the Oran
ments, inters
oulevard and
f‐magnitude c
ate iated with Co
lanning‐level
of the Deman
ovision of BRT
ated with the
need for BRT
Sepulveda Pa
sting vehicles
an maintain 4
rent fleet) tha
e consideratio
ared to new v
$4M to $78M
ctively.
ntenance Cosntenance cos
figures as rep
weekday pas
uts, average
the at‐grade S
y
cept used to
on the northb
unning buses
ge Line statio
sections modi
Van Nuys Bo
capital cost es
oncept 1 inclu
calculation fo
nd Modeling t
T service acro
vehicle cost e
T service to m
ass. The first f
s in Metro’s fl
45 mph and t
at can mainta
on, vehicle co
vehicle purcha
for the high r
t Estimate t estimates w
orted in the M
senger mile r
annual opera
Sepulveda Bo
develop the
ound and sou
from Ventura
on
ifications, and
ulevard
stimate for C
ude vehicles f
or both a low
task order. Th
oss the Sepulv
estimates, is
aintain a 45 m
fleet option re
leet with a m
the other is fo
ain 45mph acr
osts for Conce
ase) for the e
range of BRT
were develope
Metro Propos
results from t
ating costs for
oulevard BRT,
rough‐order‐
uthbound I‐40
a Boulevard t
d queue jump
Concept 1 is a
for the propo
w and high ran
he low and hi
veda Pass. Th
fleet type. Tw
mph speed in
eplaces the e
ore powerful
or the purcha
ross the Sepu
ept 1 range fr
estimated low
service, for r
ed using the o
sed Budget fo
the demand m
r BRT operati
, were estima
P
‐of‐magnitude
05 to
to Sepulveda
p lanes along
nticipated to
sed Bus Rapid
nge fleet size
igh range flee
he second
wo different f
n the manage
engine and
l engine and
ase of new ve
ulveda Pass.
rom $2M to $
w range of BR
refurbished an
operating and
or Fiscal Year
modeling effo
ons included
ated at $96M
Page 5
e cost
be
d
was
et
fleet
d
hicles
$37M
T
nd
d
orts.
as
per
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.1.3
2.2 AC
in
A
o
ge
lim
o
A
La
d
d
la
p
w
ea
la
Th
A
m
ei
a
lo
40
ac
fr
B
vi
la
la
th
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Issues for Further inq
and operate
undertaken
shoulder op
transit signa
At-Grade Freoncept 2 wou
nterchange in
venue, I‐405
ccupancy toll
eneral purpos
mit freeway w
nly be one m
t the point w
a Grange Ave
irection of tra
irect access r
anes to US‐10
rovided for a
westbound on
astbound on
anes via a dire
he southern D
venue, just so
managed lanes
ither be unde
connection f
ocal streets (B
05) would be
ccess to adjac
rontage roads
RT vehicles u
ia direct acce
anes of I‐405
ane on and of
he managed l
or Systems Plport
Further Inveuiries and inv
e the roadwa
n to understan
perations and
al priority me
eeway Manauld implemen
the north to
is proposed t
(HOT) lanes
se lanes wou
widening. No
anaged HOT
here the man
nue), one of
avel) to a con
amp connect
01 serving traf
reas east of I‐
US‐101 or co
US‐101 woul
ect access ram
Direct Access
outh of Santa
s in the medi
er or over I‐40
or managed l
Beloit Avenue
converted to
cent properti
s).
tilizing the I‐4
ss ramps. The
using a new u
ff ramps. Stan
anes could al
anning Study
stigation andvestigation w
ay facilities pr
nd each agen
d intersection
easures.
aged Lanesnt managed la
the I‐105 int
to consist of f
in each direc
ld be to main
orth of US‐101
lane in each d
naged lanes t
the managed
necting road
tion to US‐101
ffic with origi
‐405). As suc
ontinue north
d have the op
mp connectio
Ramp conne
a Monica Bou
an of I‐405 w
05). Ramps o
lanes traffic t
e on the west
o one way str
es (other des
405 managed
e proposed d
undercrossing
ndard in‐lane
lso be provide
y
d Analysis ith Caltrans a
oposed for th
ncy’s particula
signal, signin
s ane operation
erchange in t
five general p
tion. A possi
ntain the four
1 and south o
direction.
ransition from
d lanes will be
way using dir
1 would prov
ns or destina
ch, traffic goin
hbound on I‐4
ption of direc
n.
ection is prop
levard. In thi
with a structur
on the outside
o the adjacen
side of I‐405
eets, but kep
sign options m
d lanes are pro
esign would a
g and then ac
ingress and e
ed at standar
and other mu
he new BRT s
ar requiremen
ng and stripin
ns in the cent
the south. Be
purpose (GP)
ble exception
r lane section
of Santa Mon
m two lanes t
e dropped or
rect access ra
vide a connect
ations west of
ng northboun
405 dependin
ctly entering t
osed to be co
is scenario, ra
re to La Grang
e of each side
nt local street
and Cotner A
pt at their exis
may allow for
oposed acces
allow buses t
ccess the man
egress from t
rd Caltrans int
nicipal agenc
ervice will ne
nts for implem
ng changes fo
ter lanes of I‐4
etween US‐10
lanes and two
n to the provi
in the southb
ica Boulevard
to one lane (a
added (depe
amps. At the
tion from the
f I‐405 (no co
nd on I‐405 w
ng on lane sel
the I‐405 sout
onstructed at
amps would c
ge Avenue (co
e of the freew
ts. As design
Avenue on th
sting elevatio
two‐way traf
ss to the Oran
o travel unde
naged lanes o
he general pu
tervals. Simi
P
cies that main
eed to be
menting bus
r queue jump
405 from the
01 and La Gra
o managed, h
ision of five
bound directi
d, there woul
at US‐101 and
nding on the
north end, a
e I‐405 manag
nnections
would be able
ection and tr
thbound man
La Grange
connect the
onnection co
way would pro
ed, the adjac
e east side of
on to maintain
ffic on the
nge Line Busw
er the northb
on I‐405 via ce
urpose lanes
larly, addition
Page 6
ntain
on
p and
e I‐5
ange
high
ion to
d
d at
ged
to go
affic
naged
uld
ovide
cent
f I‐
n
way
ound
enter
to
nal
SepulvedaEngineeri
ac
al
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
ccess to the m
lso be provide
Figure
or Systems Plport
managed lane
ed via additio
e 2. Con
anning Study
es (north and
onal direct acc
ncept 2 At‐Gr
y
south of the
cess ramps.
rade Freeway
two‐lane Sep
y Managed La
pulveda Pass
anes
P
section) coul
Page 7
d
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.2.1
2.2.
2.2.
2.2.
2.2.2
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
.1.1 ConceThe pr
lane o
majori
existin
the Se
The sin
of tolli
constr
constr
the we
associa
requir
Line, a
lanes t
direct
crossin
anticip
.1.2 Geotec
No unc
Conce
.1.3 ConstrConstr
mainli
to imp
Consid
constr
Rough-OrdSee Section
used when
Systems Pla
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
pt Design Elerimary design
perations fro
ity of the dist
ng HOV lane, w
pulveda Pass
ngle lane sect
ing equipmen
ruction of the
ruction of dire
est, and at La
ated with the
e additional r
additional righ
to the west, a
access ramps
ng Sepulveda
pated to rema
chnical Assescommon geo
pt 2.
ructability Issuruction of th
ne construct
pact traffic op
derable traffic
ruction activit
der-of-Magnin 2.1.3 of this
developing t
anning Study
anning Study
ents
ments elements for
m approxima
tance betwee
with a core se
s from the US
tions require
nt for manage
two‐lane seg
ect access ram
Grange Aven
e single lane o
right‐of‐way f
ht of way will
and additiona
s from the US
Pass. The pr
ain within the
ssment otechnical issu
ues e direct acce
ion required
perations on I
c control and
ties.
tude Costs report for a b
he rough‐ord
Preliminary C
y
r this concept
ately the I‐5 in
en I‐5 and I‐10
egment of tw
‐101 to La Gr
signing and s
ed lane opera
gment of the
mps to conne
nue, as well a
operations. C
for two of the
be required
al right‐of‐way
S‐101 will join
roposed direc
e existing I‐40
ues are antici
ess ramp str
to accommo
‐405 and all a
mitigation m
brief discussio
der‐of‐magnit
Cost Report fo
t include the
n the north to
05 would be a
wo‐lane opera
range Avenue
striping chang
ations. Design
managed lan
ect to the Ora
s the signing,
Construction o
e three propo
to shift the n
y will be requ
n the two‐lane
ct access ram
05 right‐of‐wa
pated for the
ructures and
odate the dire
adjacent and
measures are
on of the met
tude costs or
or a more in‐d
implementat
o the I‐105 in
a single lane c
ation (in each
e.
ges, as well as
n elements re
nes concept w
nge Line, US‐
, striping and
of the direct a
osed locations
orthbound m
uired to widen
e section of m
ps at La Gran
ay envelope.
e roadway fac
any associat
ect access fa
intersecting
expected to b
thodology an
the Sepulved
depth discuss
P
tion of manag
the south. T
conversion of
direction) ac
s the installat
equired for th
would require
‐101 to and fr
tolling eleme
access ramp w
s. At the Ora
mainline I‐405
n I‐405 where
managed lane
nge Avenue ar
cilities require
ted I‐405 fre
cilities is exp
roadway fac
be required d
nd assumption
da Pass Corrid
sion.
Page 8
ged
The
f the
cross
tion
e
e
rom
ents
will
nge
5
e the
es
re
ed for
eeway
pected
ilities.
during
ns
dor
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.2.
2.2.
2.2.
2.2.3
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
.2.1 CapitaThe m
cost es
C
a
T
t
The ro
$1.6B
$1.1B
.2.2 Vehicle
Vehicl
BRT se
lower
(refurb
BRT se
.2.3 Operat
Opera
mainte
weekd
Pass C
costs f
lanes,
Issues for Further traf
particularly
as for the si
or Systems Plport
l Cost Estimatajor compon
stimate are:
Direct Access
Construction
and tolling eq
The incorpora
the Sepulved
ough‐order‐of
with $0.5B be
attributed to
e Cost Estimae costs assoc
ervice is the s
range of BR
bished and ne
ervice, again f
tion and Maintting and ma
enance cost
day passenge
Corridor Syste
for BRT opera
were estimat
Further Inveffic analysis is
y at the two to
ingle lane sec
anning Study
te ents of the co
s Ramps at th
of express la
quipment;
ation of the B
a Pass (Van N
f‐magnitude c
eing attribute
the highway
ate ciated with Co
same for both
RT service ac
ew vehicles re
for refurbishe
tenance Cost intenance co
from the Me
r miles result
ems Planning
ations includ
ted $138M pe
stigation ands needed to b
o one lane tra
ctions to the n
y
oncept used t
e Orange Line
nes which wo
BRT improvem
Nuys and Sepu
capital cost es
ed to the tran
y based comp
oncept 2 are
h concepts. A
cross Sepulve
espectively) a
ed and new ve
Estimate ost estimates
etro Proposed
ts from the d
Study. Based
ed as part of
er year.
d Analysis better underst
ansition point
north of US‐1
to develop th
e Busway, US
ould include r
ments from C
ulveda Boule
stimate for C
nsit‐only com
onents.
the same as
As noted for C
eda Pass is e
and from $4M
ehicles respe
s were devel
d Budget for
demand mod
d on these in
f Concept 2, t
tand expecte
ts at US‐101 a
101 and south
he rough‐orde
S‐101, and La
restriping, ph
Concept 1 for
vard).
Concept 2 is a
ponents of th
for Concept 1
Concept 1, ve
estimated fro
M to $78M fo
ectively.
oped using t
r Fiscal Year
deling efforts
puts, average
the at‐grade
ed managed la
and La Grang
h of La Grange
P
er‐of‐magnitu
Grange Aven
hysical barrier
areas outside
nticipated to
he concept an
1, as the prop
ehicle costs fo
om $2M to
r the high ran
the operating
2013 and av
for the Sepu
e annual ope
freeway man
ane operation
e Avenue, as
e Avenue.
Page 9
ude
nue
rs,
e of
be
nd
posed
or the
$37M
nge of
g and
verage
ulveda
rating
naged
ns,
well
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.3 ATh
40
fo
ar
ce
b
A
B
w
ov
d
G
A
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Aerial Viaduhe highway v
05 between t
our managed
rea of the I‐40
enter running
ound directio
ccess to the h
oulevard, at U
would begin at
ver US‐101 w
estinations w
range Avenu
venue.
or Systems Plport
ct Managedviaduct propo
the US‐101 to
lanes (two in
05 freeway.
g columns, ut
ons.
highway viad
US‐101 and a
t Burbank Bo
with direct acc
west of I‐405,
e where an a
anning Study
d Lanes sed for Conce
o the I‐10. Th
n each directio
As designed,
ilizing 5 feet o
uct is propose
southern acc
ulevard wher
cess ramp con
travel across
erial T‐ramp
y
ept 3 is an ele
e conceptual
on) and woul
the structure
of inside shou
ed in three lo
cess point at
re it would co
nnections to U
the pass and
would provid
evated guidew
l aerial viaduc
ld be constru
e would be su
ulder from th
ocations, nort
La Grange Av
onnect to the
US‐101 for tr
d south to the
de connection
way above th
ct structure w
cted in the m
upported by 1
he exiting nor
th of US‐101 a
venue. The el
existing over
avelers with o
e proposed te
ns to local str
Pa
he median of
would consist
median/should
10 foot wide
th and south
at Burbank
evated struct
rcrossing, pas
origins or
erminus at La
eets via La Gr
age 10
the I‐
of
der
ture
ss
range
SepulvedaEngineeri
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure
or Systems Plport
e 3. Con
anning Study
ncept 3 Aeria
y
al Viaduct Managed Lanes
Pa
age 11
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.3.1
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.2
2.3.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
.1.1 ConceThe pr
associa
Grange
design
.1.2 Geotec
While
requir
accura
structu
.1.3 Constr
Constr
expect
Consid
constr
Rough-OrdSee Section
used when
Systems Pla
.2.1 Capita
The m
cost es
C
G
T
t
The ro
$2.3B
$2.2B
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
pt Design Elerimary design
ated direct ac
e Avenue. Co
ned, are antic
chnical Assesno uncomm
ed for Conce
ately portray
ure of this siz
ructability Issuruction of th
ted to impac
derable traffic
ruction activit
der-of-Magnin 2.1.3 of this
developing t
anning Study
l Cost Estimatajor compon
stimate were
Construction
Grange Aven
Direct Access
The incorpora
the elevated
ough‐order‐of
with $0.13B b
attributed to
anning Study
ents
ments elements for
ccess structur
onstruction o
ipated to req
ssment mon geotech
ept 3, geolog
y any geotec
e.
ues he aerial via
ct traffic ope
c control and
ties.
tude Costs report for a b
he rough‐ord
Preliminary C
te ents of the co
:
of a four‐lan
ue;
s Ramps at Bu
ation of the B
viaduct struc
f‐magnitude c
being attribut
the highway
y
r this concept
res and ramp
f the propose
uire addition
nical issues
gic and seism
chnical or se
duct and as
erations on I‐
mitigation m
brief discussio
der‐of‐magnit
Cost Report fo
oncept used t
e elevated gu
urbank Avenu
BRT improvem
cture (Van Nu
capital cost es
ted to the tra
y based comp
t is the aerial
ps at Burbank
ed direct acce
nal right‐of‐wa
are anticipat
mic issues sh
eismic issues
ssociated dire
‐405 and all
measures are
on of the met
tude costs or
or a more in‐d
to develop th
uideway betw
ue, US‐101 an
ments from C
uys and Sepulv
stimate for C
ansit‐only com
onents.
viaduct struc
Boulevard, U
ess locations,
ay.
ted for the
hould be ana
associated
ect access r
connecting
expected to b
thodology an
the Sepulved
depth discuss
he rough‐orde
ween Burbank
nd La Grange
Concept 1 for
veda Bouleva
Concept 3 is a
mponents of t
Pa
cture and
US‐101 and La
as currently
roadway fac
alyzed in dep
with an ele
amp structu
roadway fac
be required d
nd assumption
da Pass Corrid
sion.
er‐of‐magnitu
k Avenue and
Avenue; and
areas outside
ard).
nticipated to
the concept a
age 12
a
cilities
pth to
evated
res is
ilities.
during
ns
dor
ude
d La
e of
be
and
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.3.
2.3.
2.3.3
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
.2.2 VehicleVehicl
propos
costs f
$37M
range
.2.3 Operat
Opera
transp
Issues for If Concept 3
An aerial via
adjacent to
particularly
Sepulveda P
Additional e
feasibility o
ability to pr
interchange
Further traf
required at
understand
somewhat
exit points t
exit points t
Lastly, a hi
Widening P
seismic ass
be expecte
regarding s
or Systems Plport
e Cost Estimae costs assoc
sed BRT servi
for the lower
(refurbished
of BRT servic
tion and Maintting and main
portation dem
Further Inve3 is progresse
aduct is antic
the I‐405 fre
y challenging c
Pass Widenin
engineering is
of using a sing
rovide the ne
e to provide t
ffic analyses n
the proposed
d the operatio
more challen
to the viaduc
that could be
ghway viadu
Project, and
essment of in
ed that any
eismic issues
anning Study
ate ciated with Co
ice is the sam
range of BRT
and new veh
e, again for r
tenance Cost ntenance cos
mand modelin
stigation anded, communit
cipated to cre
eeway and co
coming on th
g Project.
ssues for furt
gle column str
eded clearan
the connector
needs to be p
d access and
onal feasibility
ging for Conc
t facility, as c
e provided fro
ct concept w
was ultimate
ndividual con
further study
.
y
oncept 3 are
me for all conc
T service acro
hicles respec
efurbished an
Estimate t estimates w
ng efforts wer
d Analysis ty based impa
eate visual qu
mmunity imp
e heels of the
ther analysis a
ructural appr
ces from exis
r from northb
performed to
egress locatio
y of the conce
cept 3 than fo
compared to t
om the adjace
was considere
ely withdraw
ncepts was no
y on this co
the same as
cepts. As not
oss Sepulveda
ctively) and fr
nd new vehic
were not calcu
re not undert
acts would ne
ality impacts
pacts during c
e current con
and investiga
oach for the
sting structur
bound I‐405 t
determine th
ons to the ele
ept. Traffic m
or Concept 2,
the potential
ent general pu
ed in the EIR
n due to sei
ot completed
oncept would
s for Concept
ted for Conce
a Pass is estim
rom $4M to $
cles respective
ulated for Co
taken for this
eed to be ana
to residents
construction m
nstruction of t
ation include a
aerial viaduct
es within the
to eastbound
he traffic dem
evated viaduc
management
due to the li
for intermed
urpose lanes
R for the I‐40
ismic safety
d as part of th
d result in s
Pa
1, 2, and 4 a
ept 1 and 2, ve
mated from $2
$78M for the
ely.
ncept 3, as
Concept.
alyzed and ass
and business
may prove to
the I‐405
analyzing the
t structure, a
e US‐101
US‐101.
mand and cap
ct to better
may be
mited entry a
diate entry an
under Conce
05 Sepulveda
concerns. W
his study, it w
imilar conclu
age 13
as the
ehicle
2M to
e high
sess.
ses
o be
e
nd
pacity
and
nd
ept 2.
a Pass
hile a
would
usions
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.4 TC
tw
cr
o
in
Th
th
lo
te
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Tolled Highwoncept 4 wou
wo lanes of h
ross section c
n a lower leve
nclude both a
he tunnel alig
hrough the Sa
oosely followi
erminus of th
or Systems Plport
way Tunnel uld construct
ighway traffic
consisting of e
el, or two sep
utos and bus
gnment would
anta Monica M
ng the I‐405
e tunnel wou
anning Study
a bored tunn
c in each dire
either a single
parate bores w
es. A graphic
d begin near
Mountains, th
roadway (app
uld be located
y
nel under the
ction. The to
e bore with tw
with two lane
c depicting Co
the I‐405/US
hen south‐so
proximately 9
d near La Gran
Santa Monic
olled tunnel c
wo lanes on a
es in each bor
oncept 4 is sh
‐101 intercha
utheast throu
9 miles). Simi
nge Avenue.
ca Mountains
oncept is ant
an upper leve
re. Traffic in
hown on the f
ange and wou
ugh Century C
ilar to Concep
Pa
that would c
ticipated to ha
el and two lan
the tunnel w
following pag
uld extend so
City east of an
pt 2, the sout
age 14
carry
ave a
nes
would
ge.
uth
nd
thern
SepulvedaEngineeri
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure
or Systems Plport
e 4. Con
anning Study
ncept 4 Tolled
y
d Highway Tuunnel
Pa
age 15
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.4.1
2.4.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
.1.1 ConceThe pr
portal
the US
for tra
101 tu
portals
second
single
Figure
vertica
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
pt Design Elerimary design
structures ne
S‐101 intercha
ffic coming fr
unnel portal c
s with flyover
d would be in
tunnel.
e 5. Typical cro
al egress poin
anning Study
ents
ments elements for
ear US‐101 an
ange, one for
rom US‐101 t
onnections, t
r ramps (direc
ndependent t
oss‐section: S
nts.
y
r Concept 4 a
nd La Grange
r traffic comin
o the west. T
the first conn
ct access ram
unnels to I‐40
Single bore tu
are the tunne
Avenue. Tw
ng to and from
Two concepts
ects I‐405 an
mps) to a singl
05 and US‐10
unnel (stacked
l structure an
o tunnel port
m I‐405 to the
s were develo
d US‐101 wit
e, large bore
01 that would
d roadway) a
Pa
nd the tunnel
tals are neede
e north and o
oped for the U
h the tunnel
tunnel, and t
later join int
lternative wit
age 16
ed at
one
US‐
the
to a
th
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.4.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure 6. T
emergency
.1.2 Geotec
Site sp
orient
widely
while e
The ali
potent
Northr
fault r
slope s
furthe
evalua
In add
include
topple
design
be des
tunnel
tunnel
structu
Additio
Evalua
or Systems Plport
Typical cross‐s
y egress.
chnical Assespecific geolog
ation of majo
y varying grou
establishing a
ignment is loc
tially active fa
ridge Hill in 1
upture, seism
stability at po
r evaluation.
ated during de
ition to seism
e oil field rela
e (which could
n must consid
signed to acco
l connects to
l crosses a fau
ure may be co
onal informat
ation Memora
anning Study
section: twin
ssment ical and envir
or seismic fau
und water in t
a desired align
cated in a sei
aults in the ar
994 and San
mic shaking, li
ortals as well
Potential dis
esign.
mic hazards, o
ated hazards,
d impact port
er the geoha
ommodate th
portals, shaft
ult that has p
onsidered to
tion regarding
andum (Metr
y
tunnel altern
ronmental co
lts, historical
the study cor
nment profile
smically activ
rea. Two of th
Fernando in 1
quefaction an
as liquefactio
placements a
other geologic
expansive an
tals and to a l
zards describ
he anticipated
ts and cross p
otential for a
accommodat
g geotechnica
o, June 20, 20
native with cr
onsiderations
oil fields, fav
rridor levels re
e for the selec
ve region and
hese faults ha
1971. Therefo
nd landslides
on potential o
along the exis
c hazards that
nd collapsible
esser extent,
bed above. Fo
d seismic mov
passages. In e
an abrupt disp
te the movem
al issues can
012).
ross passage c
such as locat
vorable geolo
egime are of
cted route.
d there are nu
ad major eart
ore seismic h
need to be e
of portal struc
sting faults ne
t exist in the
e soils, and la
, ventilation s
or example, t
vements, esp
extreme case
placement), a
ment.
be found in t
Pa
connections f
tions and
ogical formatio
great import
umerous
thquakes – No
azards such a
evaluated. Se
ctures will req
eed to be
project area
ndslides/rock
shafts). The t
unnel joints m
pecially where
es (e.g., if the
an oversized
he Geotechn
age 17
for
ons,
ance
orth
as
eismic
quire
k
unnel
must
e the
ical
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.4.
2.4.2
2.4.
2.4.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
.1.3 Constr
Constr
retriev
machi
constr
S
s
T
c
t
T
4
T
e
a
S
d
Rough-OrdSee Section
used when
Systems Pla
.2.1 Capita
The m
cost es
A
T
A low
alignm
assum
mile tu
cost es
$12.9B
.2.2 Vehicle
Vehicl
propos
or Systems Plport
ructability Issuructability iss
val of the tun
ne for a single
ructability issu
Siting accepta
staging areas
The need to s
northbound I
construction
the bored tun
The southern
405 freeway
portal.
The removal,
excavated so
approximatel
Siting of vent
densely deve
der-of-Magnin 2.1.3 of this
developing t
anning Study
l Cost Estimatajor compon
stimate are:
A large diame
Tunnel porta
range and hig
ment, with the
ed economy
unnel from w
stimate for Co
B.
e Cost Estimae costs assoc
sed BRT servi
anning Study
ues ues associate
nel boring ma
e, large‐bore
ues include, b
able portal lo
s required to l
separate traff
I‐405 and wes
of diverging c
nnel.
n tunnel porta
mainline lane
transport an
il resulting fro
ly 7.6 million
tilation plants
eloped urban
tude Costs report for a b
he rough‐ord
Preliminary C
te ents of the co
eter bore tun
ls and approa
gh range estim
e low range co
of scale asso
which the cost
oncept 4 rang
ate ciated with C
ice is the sam
y
ed with Conce
achine, the la
tunnel. Furt
but are not lim
ocations at ea
launch and re
fic in the nort
stbound US‐1
cut‐and‐cove
al connection
es to create s
nd identificati
om the bored
cubic yards.
s and associat
environment
brief discussio
der‐of‐magnit
Cost Report fo
oncept used t
nel; and
aches on eith
mate were de
ost represent
ciated a tunn
s were based
ged from a lo
Concept 4 are
me for all conc
ept 4 are mai
aunch, retriev
her detail on
mited to the f
ch end of the
etrieve the tu
thbound tunn
101, which is
er portal boxe
s at La Grang
ufficient spac
on of locatio
d tunnel cons
ted appurten
t.
on of the met
tude costs or
or a more in‐d
to develop th
er end of the
eveloped for
ting a 20 perc
nel of this leng
d). The rough
ow range of $
e the same a
cepts. As not
nly surroundi
val and use of
these and ot
following item
e tunnel to pr
unnel boring m
nel into two d
expected to r
ed sections th
ge may requir
ce in the med
ns in which to
struction, whi
ant tunnel st
thodology an
the Sepulved
depth discuss
he rough‐orde
e tunnel.
the tunnel po
cent reductio
gth (as comp
h‐order‐of‐ma
10.4B to a hig
as for Concep
ted for Conce
Pa
ing the launc
f a tunnel bor
ther
ms:
rovide sufficie
machine.
directions,
require
hat will interfa
re shifting of t
dian for a tun
o deposit the
ich is estimat
ructures with
nd assumption
da Pass Corrid
sion.
er‐of‐magnitu
ortions of the
n to reflect a
ared to a 1 to
agnitude capi
gh estimate o
pt 1 and 2, a
ept 1 and 2, ve
age 18
h and
ring
ent
ace
the I‐
nel
ed at
hin a
ns
dor
ude
e
n
o 2
tal
of
as the
ehicle
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.4.
2.4.3
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
costs f
$37M
range
.2.3 Operat
Opera
mainte
averag
Sepulv
operat
tunnel
Issues for Further ana
favorable co
reduce traff
Tunnel and
to determin
adjacent to
In addition,
Concept 4 t
facilities. A
determine t
better asse
and egress
or Systems Plport
for the lower
(refurbished
of BRT servic
tion and Maintting and main
enance costs
ge weekday p
veda Pass Cor
ting costs for
l, were estima
Further Invealysis is neede
onstruction s
fic impacts an
tunnel porta
ne to minimiz
the tunnel a
as noted for
than for Conc
As noted for C
the traffic de
ss (tunnel and
locations.
anning Study
range of BRT
and new veh
e, again for r
tenance Cost ntenance cos
reported in t
passenger mil
rridor System
BRT operatio
ated $127M p
stigation anded regarding
taging schem
nd lane closu
al constructio
ze the impact
nd tunnel po
Concept 3, t
cept 2, due to
Concepts 2 an
mand and ca
d local street
y
T service acro
hicles respec
efurbished an
Estimate t estimates w
the Metro Pro
es results fro
s Planning St
ons included a
per year.
d Analysis possible port
mes that woul
res.
n near existin
s to foundatio
rtals.
raffic manage
o the limited e
d 3, further t
pacity require
) operational
oss Sepulveda
ctively) and fr
nd new vehic
were develope
oposed Budge
om the deman
udy. Based o
as part of Con
tal configurat
d minimize ri
ng structures
ons of the ex
ement is som
entry and exis
traffic analyse
ed at the pro
feasibility of
a Pass is estim
rom $4M to $
cles respective
ed using the o
et for Fiscal Y
nd modeling e
on these inpu
ncept 4, the t
ions in order
ight‐of‐way re
will require a
xisting structu
mewhat more
st points to th
es needs to be
oposed portal
f the concept
Pa
mated from $2
$78M for the
ely.
operating and
Year 2013 and
efforts for the
ts, average a
tolled highwa
to examine
equirements
additional ana
ures that are
challenging f
he tunnel
e performed
locations to
and the acce
age 19
2M to
e high
d
d
e
nnual
ay
and
alyses
for
to
ess
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.5 FC
an
Sy
so
St
A
V
M
tr
w
o
Th
w
M
C
to
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
ixed-Guideoncept 5 pro
nd the Los An
ylmar/San Fe
outh. Fifteen
tarting at the
ntelope Valle
entura Boule
Monica Mount
ravel south on
would continu
r Green Line a
here are two
would run at g
Monica Mount
entury Aviati
o run entirely
or Systems Plport
way Light Rposes a rail li
ngeles Airport
rnando Metr
stations are p
Sylmar Metr
ey tracks befo
vard where it
tains to a por
n Westwood
e south to Se
at the Centur
options asso
grade in the S
tains, and the
on Station ne
y in a tunnel c
anning Study
Rail or Heavne connectin
t. The line wo
olink station
proposed wit
rolink station,
ore turning so
t would enter
rtal location s
Boulevard to
epulveda Bou
ry Aviation St
ciated with th
an Fernando
en run in an a
ear LAX. Conc
configuration,
y
vy Rail Tunng the San Fer
ould extend a
in the north t
h station spa
, the rail align
outh onto Van
r a tunnel por
south of Santa
Overland Av
levard where
ation.
his concept, C
Valley, trave
at‐grade confi
cept 5B is a h
, following th
nel rnando Valley
approximatel
to the Centur
cing that is ge
nment would
n Nuys Boulev
rtal and trave
a Monica Bou
venue. From
e it would con
Concept 5A is
l in a tunnel c
iguration thro
eavy rail align
e same alignm
y with the We
y 28 miles an
ry Aviation St
enerally 2 mi
run parallel t
vard and trav
el underneath
ulevard. The
Overland Ave
nnect to the M
s a light rail al
configuration
ough West Lo
nment that h
ment.
Pa
est Los Angele
nd connect th
tation to the
les apart.
to the existing
veling south to
h the Santa
rail line woul
enue, the line
Metro Crensh
lignment that
n under the Sa
os Angeles to
as been assu
age 20
es
e
g
o
d
e
haw
t
anta
the
med
SepulvedaEngineeri
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure
or Systems Plport
e 7. Con
anning Study
ncept 5 Fixed
y
d Guideway Liight Rail or Heeavy Rail Tun
Pa
nel
age 21
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.5.1
2.5.
2.5.
2.5.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
.1.1 ConceThe m
track
include
underg
a main
.1.2 Geotec
As dis
such a
geolog
are ne
route.
The ali
potent
Northr
fault r
slope s
furthe
evalua
In add
include
topple
design
be des
tunnel
tunnel
structu
Additio
Evalua
.1.3 Constr
The co
for Co
would
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
pt Design Elemajor design
and necessar
es dual bor
ground statio
ntenance faci
chnical Assescussed for C
as locations a
gical formatio
ecessary to co
ignment is loc
tially active fa
ridge Hill in 1
upture, seism
stability at po
r evaluation.
ated during th
ition to seism
e oil field rela
e (which could
n must consid
signed to acco
l connects to
l crosses a fau
ure may be co
onal informat
ation Memora
ructability Issuonstructability
oncept 4, with
require the s
anning Study
ents
ments components
ry associated
re tunnels a
on. Both Con
lity.
ssment oncept 4, sit
and orientatio
ons, widely va
onsider when
cated in a sei
aults in the ar
994 and San
mic shaking, li
ortals as well
Potential dis
he design of t
mic hazards, o
ated hazards,
d impact port
er the geoha
ommodate th
portals, shaft
ult that has p
onsidered to
tion regarding
andum (Metr
ues y issues assoc
h the excepti
siting of a new
y
associated w
d facilities sy
and necessar
cept 5A and
te specific ge
on of major s
arying groun
establishing
smically activ
rea. Two of th
Fernando in 1
quefaction an
as liquefactio
placements a
he tunnel.
other geologic
expansive an
tals and to a l
zards describ
he anticipated
ts and cross p
otential for a
accommodat
g geotechnica
o, June 20, 20
ciated with C
ion of the fre
w maintenanc
with Concept
ystems and a
ry associated
Concept 5B h
eological and
seismic faults
d water in th
a desired alig
ve region and
hese faults ha
1971. Therefo
nd landslides
on potential o
along the exis
c hazards that
nd collapsible
esser extent,
bed above; fo
d seismic mov
passages. In e
an abrupt disp
te the movem
al issues can
012).
oncept 5 are
eeway conne
ce and yard s
t 5A include
at‐grade stati
d facilities a
have also assu
environmen
s, historical o
he study corr
gnment profi
d there are nu
ad major eart
ore seismic h
need to be e
of portal struc
sting faults ne
t exist in the
e soils, and la
, ventilation s
r example tu
vements, esp
extreme case
placement), a
ment.
be found in t
very similar
ections. How
shop facility.
Pa
at‐grade ligh
ions. Conce
and systems
umed the nee
ntal considera
oil fields, favo
ridor levels re
ile for the sel
umerous
thquakes – No
azards such a
evaluated. Se
ctures will req
eed to be
project area
ndslides/rock
shafts). The t
nnel joints m
pecially where
es (e.g., if the
an oversized
he Geotechn
to those disc
wever, this co
age 22
ht rail
pt 5B
s and
ed for
ations
orable
egime
ected
orth
as
eismic
quire
k
unnel
ust
e the
ical
ussed
ncept
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.5.2
2.5.
2.5.
2.5.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
It sho
constr
mitiga
Rough-OrdSee Section
used when
Systems Pla
.2.1 Capita
Based
concep
an at‐g
approx
assum
and th
concep
A
A
A
A low
alignm
assum
magni
$8.3B
“heavy
.2.2 Vehicle
Vehicl
overal
.2.3 OperatOpera
mainte
averag
Sepulv
operat
or Systems Plport
uld also be
ruction of LR
tes some of t
der-of-Magnin 2.1.3 of this
developing t
anning Study
l Cost Estimaton direction
pt option and
grade configu
ximately Sant
ed to operate
he heavy rail c
pt used to de
At‐grade light
At‐grade tran
Dual bore tun
Underground
A maintenanc
range and hig
ment, with the
ed economy
tude capital c
for the light r
y rail” concep
e Cost Estimae cost associa
l per mile cap
tion and Maintting and main
enance costs
ge weekday p
veda Pass Cor
ting costs for
anning Study
noted that
RT facilities,
the identified
tude Costs report for a b
he rough‐ord
Preliminary C
te from Charret
d a heavy rail
uration on eit
ta Monica Bo
e in a tunnel
concept optio
velop the rou
t rail
nsit stations
nnels
d transit statio
ce facility
gh range estim
e low range co
of scale asso
cost estimate
rail concept o
pt option.
ate ated with the
pital costs dis
tenance Cost ntenance cos
as reported i
passenger mil
rridor System
the two rail o
y
Metro has e
including 20
risks associa
brief discussio
der‐of‐magnit
Cost Report fo
tte 2, cost est
concept opti
her side of th
ulevard. The
configuration
ons include 14
ugh‐order‐of‐
ons
mate were de
ost represent
ciated a tunn
e for Concept
option to a hig
e proposed ra
cussed above
Estimate t estimates w
in the Metro
es results fro
s Planning St
options (LRT a
extensive exp
foot diame
ated with Con
on of the met
tude costs or
or a more in‐d
timates were
on. The light
he tunnel from
e “heavy rail”
n for the entir
4 stations. Th
‐magnitude co
eveloped for
ting a 20 perc
nel of this leng
5 ranged fro
gh estimate o
il service for
e.
were develope
Proposed Bu
om the deman
udy. Based o
and heavy ra
perience wit
ter transit ra
ncept 4.
thodology an
the Sepulved
depth discuss
developed fo
t rail option w
m Ventura Bo
concept opti
re length. Bo
he major com
ost estimate
the tunnel po
cent reductio
gth. The roug
m a low rang
of $13.6B to $
Concept 5, ar
ed using the o
dget for Fisca
nd modeling e
on these inpu
il) included as
Pa
h the design
ail tunnels, w
nd assumption
da Pass Corrid
sion.
or a light rail
would operate
oulevard to
on (5B) is
oth the light r
mponents of t
are:
ortions of the
n to reflect a
gh‐order‐of‐
e of $7.4B to
$17.5B for the
re included in
operating and
al Year 2013 a
efforts for the
ts, average a
s part of Conc
age 23
n and
which
ns
dor
e in
ail
he
e
n
e
n the
d
and
e
nnual
cept
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.5.3
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
5, rang
for hea
Issues for Constructio
require righ
reaches the
somewhat
of the track
portal dime
configuratio
minimize rig
Siting of a n
highly deve
or Systems Plport
ged from an e
avy rail opera
Further Inveon of the port
ht of way acq
e minimum co
less, dependi
k center to ce
ensions and sh
ons in order t
ght‐of‐way re
new maintena
eloped urban
anning Study
estimated $14
ations.
stigation andtal location w
uisitions. The
over required
ng on ground
nter of 39’. F
hape. Furthe
to examine fa
equirements a
ance and yard
area.
y
42M per year
d Analysis ill require lay
e portal woul
d for tunnels w
d conditions.
Further geolo
er analysis is n
avorable cons
and reduce tr
d shop facility
r for light rail
ydown areas t
d be a flared
which is gene
The box wou
ogic studies w
needed regar
struction stag
raffic impacts
y may be cha
operations to
that may imp
box construc
erally one tun
uld flare to re
would determ
rding possible
ging schemes
s and lane clo
llenging with
Pa
o $188M per
pact property
ction until it
nel diameter
each the full w
ine the actua
e portal
that would
osures.
in the corrido
age 24
year
and
r, or
width
al
or’s
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.6 TC
th
se
Th
n
n
o
fr
n
10
Th
n
C
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Toll Tunnel aoncept 6 wo
hrough the Sa
ervice.
he proposed
orthern port
ear Century B
ne lane in ea
rom eastbou
orthbound I‐
01, south acr
he private sh
orthern term
entury Aviati
or Systems Plport
and Rail Tuuld be very s
anta Monica M
highway tun
al at approxi
Boulevard. Fr
ach direction.
nd US‐101,
405. The hig
oss Sepulved
huttle/rail tu
minus at the V
on Station th
anning Study
nnel similar to Con
Mountains an
nnel would b
imately Rosco
rom Roscoe B
A second lan
while a nort
ghway tunne
a Pass and to
unnel would
Van Nuys Me
at roughly pa
y
ncepts 4 and
nd also includ
be longer tha
oe Boulevard
Boulevard to
ne would be
thbound lan
l would cons
o the southern
be shorter t
etroLink Stati
arallels I‐405.
5, as it cons
des a second
an that prop
d and the so
US‐101 the h
added in the
e would exi
sist of two la
n portal near
than that pro
ion and a slig
sists of a bore
tunnel for a p
posed for Co
uthern porta
highway tunne
e southbound
t to westbo
nes in each d
r LAX.
oposed for C
ghtly more d
Pa
ed highway t
private shutt
oncept 4, wit
al in the LAX
el would cons
d direction co
und US‐101
direction from
Concept 5, w
direct route t
age 25
tunnel
le/rail
th the
area,
sist of
oming
from
m US‐
with a
to the
SepulvedaEngineeri
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Figure
or Systems Plport
e 8. Con
anning Study
ncept 6 Toll T
y
Tunnel and Prrivate Shuttlee/Rail Tunnel
Pa
age 26
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.6.1
2.6.
2.6.
2.6.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Key Engine
.1.1 ConceThe pr
tunnel
LAX. A
Roscoe
101 in
comin
The m
structu
system
.1.2 Geotec
As dis
consid
fields,
corrido
profile
As not
numer
seismi
at port
evalua
during
Other
hazard
and th
In extr
geolog
regard
Memo
.1.3 Constr
In add
applica
portal,
(north
requir
or Systems Plport
eering Eleme
pt Design Elerimary design
l portal struc
A single tunn
e Boulevard a
terchange, on
g from US‐10
major design c
ure, tunnel p
ms and a main
chnical Assesscussed for
derations suc
favorable g
or levels regi
e for the selec
ted, the alignm
rous potentia
c shaking, liq
tals as well as
ation. Potenti
g the design o
geologic haza
ds, expansive
he private shu
reme cases, s
gic and seism
ding geotechn
orandum (Me
ructability Issuition to the c
able to Conce
, traffic in the
bound 405 o
e the constru
anning Study
ents
ments n elements fo
ctures near R
nel portal can
and Century B
ne for traffic
01 to the west
components
portals, tunne
ntenance and
ssment Concepts 4
h as location
geological fo
me are neces
cted routes.
ments are loc
ally active fau
uefaction and
s liquefaction
al displaceme
of the tunnels
ards previous
and collapsib
uttle tunnel d
pecial design
ic conditions
nical issues ca
tro, June 20,
ues onstructabilit
ept 6. Howev
e northbound
r westbound
uction of cut a
y
or Concept 6
Roscoe Boule
n accommod
Boulevard po
coming to an
t.
associated w
el stations, lig
d yard shop fa
4 and 5, sit
ns and orient
rmations, w
ssary to cons
cated in a seis
lts in the area
d landslides n
n potential of
ents along the
s.
sly noted also
ble soils, and
esigns must c
and structur
that exist in t
an be found in
2012).
ty issues note
ver, under Co
d tunnel need
US 101) whil
and cover tra
6 for the high
evard, US‐101
ate both ent
ortals, but two
nd from I‐405
with the priva
ght rail track,
acility.
te specific g
tation of maj
idely varying
sider when es
smically activ
a and seismic
need to be ev
portal struct
e existing fau
o apply to Con
landslides/ro
consider the g
res may be ne
the corridor.
n the Geotech
ed for Concep
ncept 6, at th
s to separate
e still in the t
nsition box st
hway tunnel
1 and Centur
tering and ex
o portals are
to the north
ate shuttle tu
, necessary a
geological an
jor seismic fa
g ground wa
stablishing a
ve region and
c hazards such
valuated. Seis
ures will requ
ults need to b
ncept 6, such
ock topple. Bo
geohazards d
ecessary to ac
Additional in
hnical Evalua
pts 4 and 5, w
he US 101 hig
e into the two
tunnel. This i
tructures of v
Pa
structure an
ry Boulevard,
xiting traffic a
needed at th
and one for t
unnel is the t
associated fac
nd environm
aults, historic
ater in the
desired align
there are
h as fault rup
smic slope sta
uire further
e evaluated
as oil field re
oth the highw
described abo
ccount for the
nformation
tion
which are also
ghway tunnel
o destinations
s expected to
varying width
age 27
nd the
, near
at the
he US‐
traffic
tunnel
cilities
mental
cal oil
study
nment
ture,
ability
elated
way
ove.
e
o
s
o
s and
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.6.
2.6.
2.6.
2.6.
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
would
standp
the tu
for thr
box st
analys
expect
.1.4 Rough
See Se
assum
Sepulv
depth
.1.5 CapitaConce
from a
near C
locate
LAX ar
for Co
A low
alignm
assum
magni
$30.8B
.1.6 Vehicle
Vehicl
overal
.1.7 Operat
Opera
mainte
Propos
from t
Study.
Conce
or Systems Plport
create challe
point. At the
nnel would n
rough traffic c
ructure and s
sis is needed t
ted temporar
h-Order-of-Magection 2.1.3 of
ptions used w
veda Pass Cor
discussion.
l Cost Estimatpt 6 consists
approximately
Century Boule
d in either a l
rea, with dest
ncept 5.
range and hig
ment, with the
ed economy
tude capital c
B to $38.7B.
e Cost Estimae cost associa
l per mile cap
tion and Maintting and ma
enance costs
sed Budget f
the demand
Based on th
pt 6 were est
anning Study
enges from a
US 101, at th
eed to be con
continuing in
similar issues
to determine
ry and perma
gnitude Costsf this report f
when develop
rridor System
te of a bored hi
y Roscoe Bou
evard. Conce
large, single‐b
tinations and
gh range estim
e low range co
of scale asso
cost estimate
ate ated with the
pital costs dis
tenance Cost intenance co
s for bus serv
for Fiscal Yea
modeling eff
hese inputs, a
timated $104
y
constructabil
he La Grange A
nfigured to al
the tunnel. T
as stated abo
the specific r
nent right of
s for a brief dis
ping the roug
s Planning St
ghway tunne
ulevard to the
pt 6 also inclu
bore tunnel, o
operating ch
mate were de
ost represent
ciated a tunn
e for Concept
e proposed ra
cussed above
Estimate ost estimates
vice and ligh
ar 2013 and
forts for the
average annu
4M per year.
lity, right of w
Avenue and S
llow ingress a
This will also c
ove would ne
requirements
way impacts
cussion of th
gh‐order‐of‐m
udy Prelimina
el through the
e southern en
udes a private
or a twin bore
aracteristics
eveloped for
ting a 20 perc
nel of this leng
6 was estima
il service for
e.
s were devel
t rail operat
average we
Sepulveda P
al operating
way, and main
Sepulveda Bo
and egress wh
create a need
eed to be add
s for each por
due to tunne
e methodolo
magnitude cos
ary Cost Repo
e Santa Monic
nd of the Stud
e shuttle serv
e tunnel from
as for the “he
the tunnel po
cent reductio
gth. The roug
ated to have a
Concept 6, ar
oped using t
ions as repo
eekday passe
Pass Corridor
costs for the
Pa
ntenance of t
oulevard port
hile also allow
d for a transit
ressed. Furth
rtal and the
el constructio
gy and
sts or the
ort for a more
ca Mountains
dy corridor at
vice that wou
m Sylmar to th
eavy rail” opt
ortions of the
n to reflect a
gh‐order‐of‐
a low range o
re included in
the operating
rted in the M
nger miles r
Systems Pla
rail compone
age 28
traffic
als,
wing
ion
her
on.
e in‐
s
LAX,
ld be
he
tion
e
n
of
n the
g and
Metro
esults
anning
ent of
SepulvedaEngineeri
2.6.2
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
Issues for As noted fo
that may im
box constru
one tunnel
private shu
analysis is
constructio
traffic impa
Another co
tunnel port
to the foun
As noted fo
concepts th
analyses ne
proposed p
the concept
Lastly, simi
maintenanc
developed
or Systems Plport
Further Inveor Concepts 4
mpact propert
uction until it
diameter, or
uttle tunnel,
needed rega
n staging sch
acts and lane
onstructability
tals and tunne
dations of the
or Concept 3
hat have lim
eed to be per
portal location
t and the acc
lar to Conce
ce and yard
urban area.
anning Study
stigation and4 and 5, const
ty and requir
t reaches the
r somewhat le
the box wou
arding possib
hemes that w
closures.
y issue with
el facilities ne
e existing nei
3 and 4, traff
ited entry a
formed to de
ns to better a
ess and egres
ept 5, the pri
shop facility,
y
d Analysis truction of th
re right of wa
e minimum co
ess, dependin
uld flare to r
le portal con
would minim
concept 6, s
ear existing st
ghboring stru
fic managem
nd exit point
etermine the
assess (tunne
ss locations.
ivate shuttle
which may
he portal loca
y acquisitions
over required
ng on ground
reach the ful
nfigurations i
mize right‐of‐w
similar to Co
tructures, and
uctures.
ment is somew
ts to the roa
traffic deman
el and local s
tunnel wou
be challengi
tion will requ
s. The portal
d for tunnels
d conditions.
ll width of t
in order to e
way requirem
ncept 4 is th
d the need to
what more c
adway facilit
nd and capac
street) operat
ld require th
ng within the
Pa
uire laydown
l would be a f
which is gen
In the case o
he track. Fu
examine favo
ments and re
he constructi
o minimize im
challenging fo
ty. Further t
city required a
tional feasibi
he siting of a
e corridor’s h
age 29
areas
flared
nerally
of the
urther
orable
educe
on of
mpacts
or the
traffic
at the
lity of
a new
highly
SepulvedaEngineeri
3 NEXThis
could
for m
trans
for fr
for t
and s
grad
envir
At‐G
TunnIn ad
a mi
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
XT STEPS study has ide
d be the iden
merit. Further
sit alternative
reeway altern
ransit service
station spacin
e alternatives
ronmental stu
rade and Aer
Create b
Addition
Search o
Develop
Refine co
Refine e
Refinem
Identify
Perform
Commun
nel Options (Cddition to the
nimum, requ
Refine p
First pha
Mountai
Reconfir
based on
Refine tu
Develop
facilities
Identify
Perform
and fan
Identify
construc
or Systems Plport
entified six re
tification of o
r studies wou
es and would
natives. Based
es could be es
ng on anticipa
s. The next st
udies include
rial Viaduct O
basemap inclu
nal geotechnic
of existing util
preliminary r
ost estimate;
nvironmenta
ent of deman
sources of fu
cost/benefit
nity outreach
Concepts 4, 5 items listed
ire the follow
ortal location
ase of geotech
ins and labora
rm initial asse
n site investig
unnel alignme
concepts for
;
possible loca
conceptual d
plant building
standard des
ction, and ope
anning Study
presentative
other feasible
ld also establ
establish lan
d on the conc
stablished tha
ated operatin
teps expected
e, but are not
ptions (Conce
uding titles se
cal desk study
lities records
ramp configu
l analysis of p
nd modeling a
nding and pr
analysis base
h.
and 6) above for Co
wing analyses
ns;
hnical site inv
atory testing;
essment of lar
gation results
ent, profile, a
r tunnel venti
tions for fan
design and pr
gs.
sign compone
erating cost.
y
concepts. A
e alternatives
lish alignmen
e configurati
ceptual engin
at would take
ng speeds, as
d to be requir
limited to, th
epts 1, 2 and
earch for prop
y;
and buildings
urations;
potential imp
and financial
opose likely p
ed on above;
ncepts 1 thro
and evaluatio
vestigation, in
;
rge diameter
;
and configura
lation, fire lif
plant building
roduce conce
ents that can
potential out
, which shoul
nts and station
ons, ramp, an
neering plans,
e into account
well as grade
red as part su
hose listed be
3)
per right of w
s records;
acts and miti
analysis;
project delive
ough 3, conce
ons:
ncluding deep
TBM feasibil
tion;
fe/safety and
gs;
ptual drawing
be utilized as
tcome of sub
ld also be tho
n locations fo
nd direct con
, conceptual o
t the effects o
e‐crossing de
ubsequent pla
elow.
way requireme
gation;
ery method;
epts with tunn
p borings in th
ity with TBM
other tunnel
gs for underg
s “typicals” to
Pa
sequent stud
oroughly anal
or the differen
nector locatio
operating pla
of grades, cur
lay for any at
anning or
ents assessm
nel sections w
he Santa Mon
manufacture
systems and
ground struct
o reduce desig
age 30
dies
yzed
nt
ons
ans
rves,
t‐
ent;
will, at
nica
ers,
d
ures
gn,
SepulvedaEngineeri
Append
a Pass Corridong Issues Rep
dix 1: Conc
or Systems Plport
ceptual Dra
anning Study
awings
y