Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2002-040 Berger / Abam Engineers, Inc. Agreement (re: railroad underpass / railroad grade separation)RESOLUTION No. R-2002- 40 A RESOLUTION directing the City Manager to authorize BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc., to complete the environmental documentation and the design report for railroad underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue with Front Street maintained as a through street. WHEREAS, the design team has taken all reasonable and appropriate steps to determine how to best meet the project purpose and need while limiting impacts to the extent possible and staying within potential funding limits; and WHEREAS, the design team has solicited for, obtained, respondedto, and acted on public input; and WHEREAS, the design team recommends constructing railroad underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue with Front Street maintained as a through street as the best way to meet the project purpose and need while limiting impacts to the extent possible and staying within potential funding limits; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it to be in the best interest of the City of Yakima to approve a project alternative to enable the environmental documentation and design report to be completed for this project, now, therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF YAKIMA: The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to authorize BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc., to complete the environmental documentation in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which documentation shall include an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and economic impact analysis, together with the final design report for railroad underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue with Front Street maintained as a through street. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this ,16th day of April, 2002. ATTEST: Karen S. Roberts, City Clerk April 16, 2002 ary Place, Mayor Yakima Railroad Grade Separations Project The following information, plus the attached maps, was distributed to the public at the Open House on April 4, 2002. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Comment — Is current railroad use 10 to 12 trains a day or only two to four? Comment — Burlington Northern says there are 3-4 trains per day, with one in the middle of the night. Response — Per letter from Pat Keim of BNSF, current railroad use is 4 to 6 trains a day. Comment — Is projected railroad use 26 to 30 trains a day or only 10 to 12? Comment — Burlington Northern says they have never projected 26 trains per day. "That number was made up by the mayor of Auburn" Attributed to Pat Keim, an executive for Burlington Northern. The most they have ever projected is 12. Response — The following sources all indicate capacities of 22 to 26 trains per day with improvements to sidings, signals and the Stampede Pass tunnel. • Seattle Post Intelligencer, 15 April 1996, "there could be 22 trains a day using the Stampede Pass line" • Seattle Times, 5 August 1996, "the line could handle 22 trains" • Letter from Paul Krauss, City of Auburn to Timothy Miller, 12 August 1996, "Secretary Pena asked the Railroad's representative how many trains could be run over the Pass? The answer was 22" • Washington Public Ports Association, 1997, "Eventually, 22 to 26 trains per 24-hour period are projected to use this route" • Minutes of BNSF Railway Negotiation Session, 22 July 1999, "The actual physical capacity of the rail line is 22 to 24 trains per day" No one (including BNSF) knows exactly what improvements will be made, when they'll be made and what the resulting capacity or actual use will be. What is known is that BNSF reopened the line through Yakima to increase east -west capacity and that most future growth will be on the Yakima line because the Columbia Gorge and Stevens Pass lines are at or near capacity. It is also known that BNSF intends to improve the Stampede Pass tunnel to handle double -stack container trains when the rail traffic justifies it according to BNSF President Matt Rose on 30 October 2001. Both BNSF and the Puget Sound Ports expect a steady growth in business despite the economic downturn of the past year. Comment — What is the train caused blockage time: 12 to 15 minutes or three to four? Comment — Traffic delays are under 10 minutes. Response — Train blockage time varies widely depending on the length and speed of the train and whether it's a through train or a local train, which often stops, starts and reverses direction while blocking one or more intersections. Data from 1997 and from 2001 indicate that average blockage time is about 6 minutes and average traffic delays including blockage time and time for the backup to clear are between 8 minutes and 11 minutes, depending on the crossing. Comment — Can the trains go faster, lessening the impact? Comment — Speed is not an issue according to Burlington Northern. Speed will remain the same. Response — In theory, they can go as fast as 49 mph, but are limited to 20 mph maximum for several reasons. BNSF does not yet have the signaling in place that would allow the higher speed. This is one of the improvements they may make in the future. The other issue is congestion and safety. Yakima's density around the tracks, particularly the at -grade crossings, and the BNSF yard make higher speeds a safety and liability issue. Again, future improvements in grade separations and better separation of the through tracks and yard operations could result in higher speeds. Comment — Does the railroad cause more accidents than other City intersections? Response — This is not known and is not an issue in this project. Funding for this project is only for this project and would not be available to solve other problems. At -grade crossings are inherently dangerous and it is widely accepted that grade separations are the safest way to move cars, trucks, and pedestrians across railroad tracks. Also because of a train's size, speed and inability to stop quickly, vehicle/train accidents have a dramatically higher fatality rate than vehicle/vehicle accidents. Comment — How often are fire equipment and/or emergency vehicles delayed? Response — Police Chief Blesio and Fire Chief Gillespie have stated there are delays in emergency response due to train blockages. The City Engineer is working with the Chiefs to quantify these delays, but no specifics are available at this time. Comment - Has a study been done on the economic impact to the affected businesses? Response — No, not yet. This is an expensive effort and it is important to define the intended project before proceeding with this study. Once the project is defined, an economic impact study will be conducted as part of the Environmental Assessment for the project. After the Environmental Assessment is completed there will be additional time for public comment and another public open house prior to City Council voting on whether to proceed with final design and construction. Comment — Is the cost worth the advantage? Response — This is a highly subjective measure that each individual must decide for themselves. Comment — If Yakima accepts state and/or federal project funding, will the City be required to build grade separations at I and D Streets, Yakima Avenue, Mead and Washington even if actual railroad use indicates that crossings are unnecessary? Response — No, future projects will only be built as the need arises and funding becomes available. The largest funding source so far, the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB), requires the City to develop a plan for eliminating all seven at -grade crossings in order to receive funding for grade separating B Street and Lincoln Avenue. The plan will indicate the recommended way to eliminate each at -grade crossing and the City's commitment to pursue additional grade separations as the need and funding arises. No one knows for sure when or if the need or funding will materialize and therefore there is no set timeline for when or if any particular project will ever be built. Comment — Do the people of Yakima want a Yakima Avenue underpass? Response — Some do and some don't. A Yakima Avenue underpass was proposed along with underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue at the 25 October 2001 open house. Public reaction following that open house was generally against an underpass at Yakima Avenue at this time, so that underpass is no longer included in the proposed first project. Comment — There have been no deaths due to trains according to BNSF Response — There was a car/train collision at Mead Avenue on 9 December 1994 which killed one person. The train was operated by the Washington Central Railroad, not BNSF. Comment — The federal government is slashing passenger traffic subsidies. Burlington Northern says they would not give preference to passenger traffic. Freight traffic is much more profitable. The rail lines would also have to be altered significantly. The cost would be over $100 million. They have no plans to do so. Response — The possibility of passenger traffic is not considered part of the present or future problem of the at -grade rail crossings and therefore they are not considered a part of the purpose and need for this project. However, it is still a possibility. While all the things stated above about passenger trains may well be true, none of them preclude the possibility of passenger trains. Comment — Since the railroad is not the beneficiary of the crossings the taxpayers will pay 90% of the cost. Response — The railroad is required by law to pay at least 5% of the cost and sometimes they pay a little more. The remaining 90 to 95% would mostly be paid by Federal, State, County and City agencies. Comment — Mr. Keim (BNSF representative) says the project would not proceed without public support. The railroad has no opinion on the project. Response — Per Mr. Keim's letter of 13 March 2002: "BNSF position on grade separation: Grade separations are the safest means for moving the motoring public across railroad lines. That being said, it is our position that the construction and location of grade separations is a matter for the communities and their appropriate governing bodies to determine. Once they have decided to construct a grade separation BNSF will work with them to achieve it within the long-standing framework in existing laws and regulations." "Degree of community support: I did not make any comment regarding the degree of community support for the proposed grade separation projects." Comment — Over 60 downtown businesses have stated that this project will be the one thing that kills the downtown. Response — City staff is not aware of any petition with regard to the present proposal to construct underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. The City has received the following petition related to an underpass at Yakima Avenue only. "We the undersigned business and property owners of downtown Yakima strongly oppose any attempt to put in an underpass on Yakima Avenue. The underpass will more than adversely affect short term traffic patterns. Many of us will be put out of business and others will be forced to flee the downtown to survive. Empty properties will become more common; thus causing property values to plummet." This petition has 57 businesses listed on it. Because of this petition and other public input, the underpass at Yakima Avenue was deleted from this initial project. Only if the need and funding materializes in the future, would anything be done at Yakima Avenue. At that time the Yakima Avenue project would again go through the same process of public involvement, environmental documentation, and City Council votes, before it could be built. Comment — In reference to the statement that typical backups are 7-12 blocks on Yakima Avenue, the comment is made "the facts and everyone's common sense knows this would mean backups would be up to Summitview Avenue to the west, and past the convention center to the east. This has never been the case. Response — The 7-12 block backup refers to both directions combined, not 7-12 blocks each direction. Data indicates average blockages of about 3.5 to 4 blocks in each direction on Yakima Avenue which is 7 to 8 blocks total which is within this range. Occasional longer or slower trains, or local trains going back and forth while blocking the intersection would account for the blockages up to 6 blocks each way or 12 blocks total. Comment — If the project proceeds, Yakima will be the only part of the Seattle to Tri -Cities track that will be upgraded. Burlington Northern gets no benefit without the entire track being replaced. It costs over $1 million a mile to replace the track. None of the other cities are even interested in upgrading the tracks, so more than $200 million in total would be needed to be spent by Burlington Northern. They have no plans to do so. Response — Yakima is not pushing this project for the benefit of Burlington Northern, they are pushing for it to solve present problems and avoid future problems within Yakima. Other cities along the Seattle to Tri -Cities route are planning, designing, constructing, or have already completed grade separations. These cities are the larger cities on the route that have the greatest impacts from increased train traffic. They include Seattle, Tukwila, Kent, Auburn, Kennewick and Pasco. Yakima is the most congested area along the route east of the Pass so it stands to reason they would feel the impacts sooner than the smaller cities. Burlington Northern is a for- profit company. Companies increase profits by growing. In order to grow, companies must make capital improvements. When limited by capacity on their Columbia Gorge and Stevens Pass routes, Burlington Northern invested $135 million to reopen Stampede Pass to allow them to grow. When the current capacity of the Yakima line is reached at 12 to 14 trains a day, they will again be forced to make capital improvements to continue to grow. Their president has stated within just the last year, that the money will be spent to improve the Stampede Pass tunnel when growth justifies it. They may not have definite plans yet to make the capital improvements, but there is little doubt they will do whatever is necessary to continue to grow in the future. Comment — Extend Tieton Drive to meet with South 1St Street with a new overpass over the railroad tracks. Response — While this may be a worthwhile project, it has several flaws in comparison to the project being discussed. It is too far south to help significantly with traffic, emergency response delays, and air pollution in the central business district. FMSIB and BNSF would not provide funding for this project because they're funding is tied to grade separating existing at -grade crossings. This connection would be greater than the length of the B Street and Lincoln Avenue underpasses combined, would require demolition of at least four warehouses, and would cost more than the B Street and Lincoln Avenue underpasses combined while providing less grade separated traffic capacity. Comment — Extend Fruitvale over the railroad tracks from 5th Avenue to 1St Street. Comment — Install underpass at H Street. Close I Street between Front Street and tracks on the east side and between tracks and 1St Avenue on the west side. Response — This project is under consideration by Yakima County and is considered a possible alternative to an underpass at I Street. As with the similar proposal for Tieton above, this is a reasonable suggestion but has flaws in comparison to the project being discussed. Again, it is a long expensive project resulting in less grade separated capacity; several of the major funding partners would not participate in this project; and several homes would be demolished as well as bisecting Roche Fruit's operations. Comment — Build underpasses at D Street and Lincoln Avenue. Leave Yakima Avenue and B Street alone. Response — Yakima Avenue is being left alone for now. D Street is not a good substitute for B Street. Lincoln Avenue is a one way street and needs another one way street paired with it to function properly. If D Street were paired with Lincoln Avenue, it would require extensive improvements over 16 blocks to change it into a one way arterial as well as to reconstruct the interchange with I-82 to accommodate D Street instead of B Street. In addition to the costs involved for this, there would be impacts to residents and businesses for 16 blocks on both B Street and D Street due to the dramatically changed traffic on both streets. It should be noted that the plan is to never grade separate D Street but rather to close it at the tracks eventually, because D Street has less traffic than any of the other crossings and because a grade separation at D Street would require relocation of the fire station and the Washington Fruit loading dock. Comment — 3 -foot rise (in tracks) and deeper underpass/steeper grades. Response — When Yakima Avenue was deleted from the project, the ability to raise the tracks at all was eliminated. Therefore, the tracks at B Street and Lincoln Avenue are not being raised at all and the underpass is indeed deeper and has steeper grades. Comment - Raise the tracks enough to keep Front Street open just like Walnut. Response — This was considered but the tracks would need to be raised over 13 feet, which was determined to be too great a barrier through the middle of the City. Comment — Reduce the height of the underpasses at Yakima, B, and Lincoln with restrictions to all truck traffic. Response — The railroad will not approve reduced clearance underpasses, so this can't be done. Comment — Move underpasses westerly keeping Front St. open. Response — Doing this would mean 1st Ave. would be cut off and the Walnut St. underpass would have to be rebuilt. It would also have serious impacts on Track 29 Mall and Washington Fruit. Comment — I think we should leave Yakima as is and put underpasses on other streets. Response — B Street and Lincoln Avenue are proposed to be grade separated first. Yakima Avenue will only be grade separated in the future as the need and funds materialize. HELidM#�4d uu PLAN SCALE: 1"=150' 1ST STREET Aerial of B Street and Lincoln Avenue Looking West ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL YAKIMA, WASHINGTON AGENDA STATEMENT Item No. For Meeting of April 16, 2002 Resolution to approve the design report for roadway underpasses fo railroad intersections at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. iI'liam Cook, Dept. of Community and Economic Development CONTACT PERSON/TELEPHONE: K. Wendell Adams, P.E., City Engineer Engineering Division Manager / 575-6111 SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The attached resolution directs the City Manager to authorize BERGER/ABAM Engineers, Inc., to complete their contract dated January 19, 2001. Completion of the contract entails completing the environmental documentation for the proposed project as well as preparing the design report. The design team has identified, analyzed, and evaluated the possible ways of eliminating at -grade railroad crossings in the City of Yakima. The design team has also taken input at two public open houses and two City Council Study Sessions and has adjusted the design based on public input from those meetings and comments received throughout the process. As a result of these efforts, the design team recommends constructing railroad underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue with Front Street maintained as a through street to limit some public impacts. This alternative design is the best way to meet the purpose and need of the project while limiting public impacts and maintaining the potential for getting the project funded. ( Continued ) Resolution X Ordinance Other (Specify) Alternative Design Concept Funding Source: Already committed Federal and State funds APPROVED FOR SUBMITTAL: City Manager STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: COUNCIL ACTION: A substitute resolution was adopted by unanimous vote; April 11, 2002 Puccinelli recused. RESOLUTION NO. R-2002-40 Resolution to approve the design report for roadway underpasses for railroad intersections at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. ( Continued ) This is not a vote to proceed with final design or construction of these underpasses. Another resolution will be submitted to the City Council to consider proceeding with final design and construction after completion and acceptance of the environmental document and the design report. A " YES" vote on this resolution indicates concurrence with the design team that this project best balances the entire project' s goals, impacts, and resources and would commence the environmental/economic impact/mitigation analysis. A " NO" vote indicates the belief that there is a better way to reduce traffic congestion due to train blockages, improve emergency response, eliminate at -grade intersection incidents, and reduce carbon monoxide emissions at several key city intersections, without the proposed grade separations. We are looking for concurrence from the City Council that the proposed alternative best meets the purpose and need for the project. The next phase of the work is to complete the environmental documentation that will be needed for the proposed Lincoln Avenue and B Street underpasses. Financial Analysis of current Consultant Contract: Berger/ABAM Engineers: $ 627,420 Widener & Associates (environmental): $ 101,980 Total Contract Amount: $ 729,400 Paid through March 31, 2002: Berger/ ABAM Engineers: Widener & Associates (environmental): Total Paid to Date: $ 418,486 $ 60,687 $ 479,173 Remainder of Contract Funds: Berger/ ABAM Engineers: Widener & Associates (environmental): Remainder in Contract: $ 208,934 $ 41,293 $ 250,227 It is clear that we will need to amend the contract if the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) determines that a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary. April !I, 2002 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • ami m r _ Y 4 uA -..... Ra m IN r .. ..Y ,•\ .Ar 1 ��. ..... 1. "9 - • 2£' D Street IICIMIM ' �. - I : \ Lincoln Ave. Existing Walnut Street Underpass • - • 't , i jowl p-" iA ; j j I} .-S I , ' — ExistingiNob Hill �. I Blvd. Overpass I I 1E1 4111 _ .: t ? ! , I_ t Mead Ave. ii ii' r• I 111 -• Washin•ton Ave. AIM Job No. A01083 Railroad Grade Separations Project Final Design Report January 2003 Submitted to City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development Yakima, Washington Presented by BERGER/ABAM ENGINEERS I N C. FINAL DESIGN REPORT Yakima Railroad Grade Separations Project Submitted to City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development Yakima, Washington January 2003 Submitted by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003-2600 Job No. A01083 FINAL DESIGN REPORT YAKIMA RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATIONS PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY IV Introduction iv Part I - Alternatives Identification and Evaluation iv Part II - Determination of the Phase 1 Project v Part III - Preliminary Design of the First Project v INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE AND NEED 1 PART I — ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION 3 Description of Alternatives 3 Alternatives First Screening 10 Alternatives Second Screening 10 Alternatives Third Screening 12 PART II — DETERMINATION OF THE FIRST PROJECT 14 PART III — PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF THE FIRST PROJECT 18 EXISTING CONDITIONS 18 Roadways 18 Railroad 18 Utilities 18 Soils 21 DESIGN CRITERIA 21 DESIGN CONSTRAINTS 21 ALIGNMENTS 22 CROSS SECTIONS 22 WALLS 22 Cantilever Walls 26 Secant Pile Walls 26 Diaphragm Walls 26 BOTTOM GROUNDWATER SEAL 27 Cast -in -Place Concrete Poured in a Dry Excavation 27 Cast -in -Place Concrete Poured Underwater (Tremie Method) 28 Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) 28 Jet Grouting 28 Final Design Report BERGER/ABAIVI, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project ii January 2003 BRIDGES 29 STORMWATER SYSTEM 31 UTILITIES 31 ROW/ACCESS IMPACTS 31 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE 31 PERMITS 32 PROJECT COSTS 32 ENDORSEMENT 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Vicinity Map B Street Alternative 2a B Street Alternative 2b B Street Alternative 2c B Street Alternative 2d B Street Alternative 4 Preliminary Plan Revised Plan Existing Conditions Existing Utilities Roadway Profiles Underpass Section at Railroad Tracks Underpass Typical Section B Street - Wall and Bottom Seal LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Costs LIST OF APPENDIXES Appendix A Stormwater Site Plan Appendix B Access Management Investigation Final Design Report BERGER/ABAt1, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project iii January 2003 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction This design report was prepared to address alternative solutions for eliminating at -grade roadway/rail intersections on I Street. D Street, Lincoln Avenue, B Street. Yakima Avenue, Mead Avenue, and Washington Avenue in the City of Yakima, Washington. This report was prepared by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. under contract with the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development. This design report is divided into three parts, as follows. • Part I documents the identification and evaluation of the alternatives considered for eliminating the at -grade intersections. The end result of Part I is a recommendation for the preferred alternative to eliminate the at -grade intersection at each of the seven locations. • Part II documents the decision process to determine which of the seven at -grade crossing solutions would be designed and constructed under Phase 1. • Part III documents the preliminary engineering and design for the project selected in Part II. The purpose and need of the project is to provide for future levels of use. improve safety, improve the efficiency of transportation by rail and road, improve air quality, and reduce noise. Part I — Alternatives Identification and Evaluation • Alternative 1 — No Action • Alternative 2 — Lower the Road under the Rail * Alternative 2a — Lower the Road under the Rail with the Rail at Existing Grade * Alternative 2b — Lower the Road under the Rail and Raise the Rail 5 feet * Alternative 2c — Lower the Road under the Rail and Raise the Rail enough to Maintain an At - grade Intersection at Front Street * Alternative 2d — Lower the Road under the Rail and Front Street with the Rail at Existing Grade • Alternative 3 — Close the Road at the Rail • Alternative 4 — Raise the Road over the Rail • Alternative 5 — Lower the Rail under the Road • Alternative 6 — Raise the Rail over the Road • Alternative 7 — Reroute the Railroad around Yakima • Alternative 8 - Close the Railroad in Yakima Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, .A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project iv January 2003 The first screening ehminated Alternatives 1. 2c, 5, 6, 7. and 8 because they were deemed fatally flawed. The second screening determined which remaining alternative (2a, 2b, 2d, 3, or 4) was the best for Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue. Of these remaining alternatives, 3 and 4 were deemed fatally flawed for these three roadways. Alternative 2b was chosen over Alternatives 2a and 2d because it provided flatter roadway grades. The third screening resulted in Alternative 4 being chosen for Mead and Washington avenues, Alternative 2a for I Street, and Alternative 3 for D Street. Part II — Determination of the Phase 1 Project Since there are seven potential construction projects and all of them are not going to be completed at the same time, this report has an intermediate step to determine what the first phase project should be. The primary criterion for determining what project should be built first was value. Based on this criterion, B Street and Lincoln Avenue were chosen as the first project. However, because of the rail raise at B Street and Lincoln Avenue, Yakima Avenue and D Street were also added. This preliminary recommendation for the first project was presented at a 25 October 2001 open house. Through verbal comments at the open house, written responses to open house questionnaires, petitions, letters to local newspapers, and letters to the City Council, it was clear the businesses on and near Yakima Avenue did not want Yakima Avenue grade separated, even if it meant steeper grades for the B Street and Lincoln Avenue underpasses. Therefore. Yakima Avenue and D Street were dropped from the first phase project. As a result of the public concerns about potential impacts to businesses on Yakima Avenue and Front Street. a modification of Alternative 2d for B Street and Lincoln Avenue was presented at a 4 April 2002 open house as a revised preferred alternative The modification is that for B Street and Lincoln Avenue. it is possible to realign Front Street closer to the tracks in order to shorten up the length of the underpass. Further, the railroad tracks would remain at the existing grades and a shorter shoofly for construction phasing was determined to be feasible This proposal elicited far fewer public comments and more favorable public comments. City Council approved a resolution to move forward on this revised project on 16 April 2002. Part III — Preliminary Design of the First Project The existing horizontal alignment of Lincoln Avenue and B Street will remain the same Front Street will be realigned slightly to the west. The vertical grades on Lincoln Avenue and B Street will be 8 percent into and out of the underpass in order to clear the bottom of the bridges by 16.5 feet minimum. Front Street will be raised shghtly to match the railroad bridge elevation. Within each underpass, there will be three lanes (westbound on Lincoln and eastbound on B), and a combined bike path and sidewalk. "A" Street will be reconfigured to have one lane in each direction between First and Front streets. East and west of the tracks, there will be sidewalks at existing grade on either side of the underpass. There will also be a one-way service lane on the south side of B Street and north side of Lincoln Avenue. Diaphragm walls will be constructed on both sides of the underpass for the purposes of supporting the vertical sides of the excavation, keeping the groundwater from seeping into the underpass, and serving as the foundations for the bridges A seal is also needed underneath the underpass to keep the groundwater from flooding the underpass from below. Jet grouting will be used to construct the bottom seal. The four bridges will be constructed with similar precast, prestressed concrete single - cell box girders Because the roadway in the underpass will be below groundwater elevation. a gravity storm drain system will not work. Instead. storm drainage will be collected within each underpass and then pumped to the surface Storm drainage from both underpasses and the realigned Front Street will Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project v January 2003 be conveyed to a combined settling and infiltration pond in the vacated portion of the Front Street right-of-way (ROW). At least seven different types of utilities will have to be relocated to construct this project. The relocations could be outside the project construction limits, below the underpasses, or they could be removed and rerouted to other existing lines. Some relocations may be temporary while others are permanent. There are a total of 53 businesses within the project limits on land owned by 14 different owners. Since the limits of the underpasses are completely within existing City ROW. no ROW will need to be obtained solely for the underpasses. However, the realignment of Front Street will require the purchase of some of Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway's property. Additional property may need to be purchased due to access impacts. There are also some properties/businesses which will need revised access during and/or after the project. The project will be built in four stages, including two substages in Stage 4. These four stages are the main stages which will require long-term detours In addition to these stages, there will be a period before Stage 1 when the utility relocations will take place The total estimated project cost assuming construction starting in 2004 is approximately $25 million. Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project vi January 2003 INTRODUCTION This design report was prepared to address alternative solutions for ehminating seven at -grade roadway/rail intersections in the City of Yakima, Washington. This report was prepared by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. under contract with the City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development. This design report is divided into three parts, as follows. • Part I documents the identification and evaluation of all the alternatives considered for eliminating the at -grade intersections. The end result of Part I is a recommendation for the preferred alternative to eliminate the at -grade intersection at each of the seven locations • Part II documents the decision process to determine which of the seven at -grade crossing solutions would be designed and constructed under Phase 1. • Part III documents the preliminary engineering and design for the project selected in Part II PURPOSE AND NEED Purpose The purpose of the project is to provide for future levels of use, improve safety, improve the efficiency of transportation by rail and road, improve air quality. and reduce noise. Need The City of Yakima was literally built around the railroad and, subsequently. the railroad tracks have always bisected the city, effectively acting as a barrier by necessitating that all road traffic cross the tracks in order to travel between the east and west sides of the city. There are nine roadway/railroad crossings within the city. Two of the crossings (Nob Hill Boulevard and Walnut Street) are grade separated, and seven of the crossings (I Street. D Street, Lincoln Avenue, B Street, Yakima Avenue, Mead Avenue, and Washington Avenue) are at -grade (see Figure 1 for a vicinity map). Most, if not all, Yakima City citizens and services, including school buses, emergency vehicles, freight trucks, and citizens traveling to and from their destinations, use the streets where at -grade crossings exist. Conflicts arise when trains block the at -grade crossings. Levels of use of the project area by both road and rail traffic are projected to increase substantially over the next 30 years, thus intensifying the issues of safety, transportation efficiency, air quality, and noise at the at -grade crossings The elimination of road/rail conflicts at the at -grade intersections would accommodate future rail and road use levels and address safety, transportation efficiency, air quality, and noise issues for both current and future conditions in the project area Transformation of the at -grade crossings is expected to improve safety through the elimination of distractions and fixed obstacles, and by improving the response times of emergency vehicles. Transportation efficiency by road and rail is also expected to improve During a train passage, traffic would be free flowing at the crossings, benefiting industry (road and rail freight mobility). social services (emergency vehicles and school buses), and private citizens, including those traveling to and from their places of employment. Yakima is currently a nonattainment area for air pollution control under the Clean Air Act. Grade separating the crossings would improve air quality by reducing the time vehicles spend idling. Noise generated by the at -grade crossings, particularly the use of train whistles. has been identified as an issue This project would improve the noise environment in the project area by permanently eliminating the need for train whistles Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 1 January 2003 y B\�S�31.10, treet 1"4 Yakima Ave. ..14 A Existing Walnut Street Underpass Existing Nob Hill Blvd. Overpass BERGER/ARAM City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Vicinity Map Design Report Figure 1 PART I — ALTERNATIVES IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION BERGER/ABAM and City of Yakima staff held a series of meetings with three advisory groups to identify and evaluate alternatives to eliminate the at -grade intersections. The three advisory groups were the Citizens Advisory Group (CAG), which consisted of representatives of the local community and the City Council; the Project Guidance Team (PGT), which consisted of representatives of the project's funding partners; and the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), which consisted of technical experts in areas of concern to the project. Through these meetings, the design team was able to identify the alternatives hsted below. Once the alternatives were identified, three screening meetings were held to evaluate the alternatives and recommend a single alternative solution for each of the seven at -grade intersections. Description of Alternatives Eight alternatives have been considered for the at -grade crossings. The alternatives are applicable to the seven crossings although different alternatives could be implemented at different crossings. They are: 1) no action. 2) lower the road under the rail. 3) close the road at the rail, 4) build a road (bridge) over the rail, 5) lower the rail under the road, 6) raise the rail over the road, 7) reroute the railroad around Yakima, and 8) close the railroad in Yakima. Alternatives 2 and 4 are shown in Figures 2 through 6 for B Street. The other six crossings would be similar. Alternative 1- No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the crossings would remain at -grade at all seven intersections. Alternative 2 - Lower the Road under the Rail Under this alternative, the grade of the roadway would be lowered under the grade of the rail, which is known as an underpass Because the new roadway grade would be below the groundwater elevation, a watertight bottom seal and watertight walls would need to be built to keep the underpass from flooding. This is similar to the Walnut Street underpass except that the new underpasses would need to be deeper because design standards are more restrictive now than when the Walnut Street underpass was designed in the early 1970s. There are four subalternatives to Alternative 2 that modify the grade of the rail and affect Front Street in different ways. Alternative 2a - Lower the Road under the Rail with the Rail at Existing Grade Under this alternative. the road would be lowered under the rail and the rail maintained at its current vertical alignment. Because of the depth of these underpasses, the five roadways in the central business district (Yakima Avenue, B Street, Lincoln Avenue, D Street, and I Street) would lose their access to Front Street. Final Design Report BERGER/ABANI, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 3 January 2003 - i it r r NM- E MO M r- --- N- r 11111 1ST AVENUE RETAINING WALL BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE PLAN SCALE: 1"=100' 01 z 0 EXISTING GROUND 1ST STREET PROFILE SCALE: 1 "=100' (H), 1 "=20" (V) PROPOSED GROUND City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street Alternative 2a Design Report Figure 2 N M OM r MN NM MB M MI O--- N- i NM r MI 1111 J.M PERRY } -- RUIT PRODUCE A �I■Iti[- ....__t�lr: Y 1 t BNSF RR BRIDGE 1 } BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE RETAINING WALL PLAN SCALE: 1"=100' z u_ PROFILE SCALE: 1"=100' (H), 1"=20" (V) EXISTING GROUND \O' PROPOSED GROUND 1ST STREET City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street Alternative 2b Design Report Figure 3 NM N - - N r MI NM - - MS - - - N I N it - J M. PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE RETA N1NG WALL --\\ r RAILROAD• TRACK B STREET IESEN L BNSF RR BRIDGE frc 1ST AVENUE RETAINING WALL PLAN SCALE: 1"=100' BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE rri 4 z 0 PROPOSED GROUND EXISTING GROUND PROFILE SCALE: 1 "=100' (H), 1 "=20" (V) 1ST STREET City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street Alternative 2c Design Report Figure 4 TRAILROA TRACK - -- NM OM r NG NM 1- 1-- r N N- r NM J M PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE f.'.NG WALL--\ -FRONT ST BRIDGE / y y S"1RFEET i BNSF RR BRIDGE 1ST AVENUE RETAINING WALL PLAN SCALE: 1"=100' BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE +4} 4 FRONT ST BRIDGE EXISTING GROUND 1ST STREET N PROPOSED GROUND PROFILE SCALE: 1 "=100' (H), 1 "=20" (V) City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street Alternative 2d Design Report Figure 5 NS N 1 MB r INS - - - - - - - r - M - - MI 1ST AVENUE BRIDGE RETAINING WALL PLAN SCALE: 1"= 1 00' BRIDGE PROPOSED GROUND Oat BNSF RR EXISTING GROUND PROFILE SCALE: 1"=100' (H), 1"=20" (V) 1ST STREET 1 .ERGEIµa.M City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street Alternative 4 Design Report Figure 6 Alternative 26 — Lower the Road under the Rail and Raise the Rail 5 feet Under this alternative, the road would be lowered and the rail raised by approximately 5 feet so the roadway does not have to be lowered as much as in Alternative 2a. Because the road is not lowered as much, the grades into and out of the underpass would be less. which is beneficial to trucks and to all vehicles in icy conditions. Front Street would still be cutoff in the central business district and the elevated rail would create a partial barrier through the city along the railroad corridor Alternative 2c — Lower the Road under the Rati and Raise the Rail enough to Maintain an At -grade Intersectton at Front Street Under this alternative, the road would be lowered and the rail elevated by approximately 18 feet at I and D streets, about 14 feet at Lincoln Avenue and B Street, and about 17 feet at Yakima Avenue. Because of the rise in the rail. the underpasses would be considerably shallower and have lower grades than with Alternatives 2a and 2b. The intersections with Front Street would be maintained in the central business district, but the rail rise would result in a tall wall through the City along the railroad corridor. Alternative 2d — Lower the Road under the Rail and Front Street with the Rail at Existing Grade Under this alternative, the road would be lowered under the rail and Front Street at I Street, D Street, Lincoln Avenue, B Street, and Yakima Avenue. The underpasses would be slightly deeper than Alternative 2a in order to pass underneath both the rail and Front Street. Like Alternative 2a, Yakima Avenue, B Street, Lincoln Avenue, D Street, and I Street would lose their access to Front Street, but Front Street would be maintained as a north -south through street. Alternative 3 — Close the Road at the Rail Under this alternative. one or more of the seven roads would be closed where they intersect with the rail. Alternative 4 — Raise the Road over the Rail Under this alternative, the rail would be retained at its current grade and the road would be raised over it. This configuration is known as an overpass. The overpass would require extensive walls to allow the road to be elevated without impacting the adjacent buildings and it would require a bridge structure over the rail. Alternative 5 — Lower the Rail under the Road Under this alternative, a long deep trench would be built within the railway corridor with the rail rebuilt in the trench. Bridges would then be built for the roadways to cross over the rail in the trench. Alternative 6 — Raise the Rail over the Road Under this alternative, a long elevated rail would be built within the railway corridor on a series of walled embankments and bridges. The roadways would pass under the railroad bridges Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 9 January 2003 Alternative 7— Reroute the Railroad around Yakima Under this alternative, the railroad would be relocated outside the City of Yakima. Alternative 8 — Close the Railroad in Yakima Under this alternative, the railroad would be closed within the City of Yakima Alternatives First Screening The focus of the first screening was to separate those alternatives worthy of further consideration from those alternatives that were deemed fatally flawed The results of the first screening were that the following alternatives were fatally flawed for the reasons listed below Alternative 1 — This alternative was fatally flawed because it did nothing to improve the at -grade intersections and, therefore, did not meet the purpose and need of the project. Alternative 2c — This alternative was fatally flawed because the embankment needed to raise the rail through the center of town would be 14 to 18 feet high, which was determined by the advisory committees to be too high, even though it did have the benefit of maintaining the roadway intersections with Front Street. Alternative 5 — This alternative was fatally flawed because of the high cost and the necessity for connections to rail spur fines and the rail yard to still be at -grade, impeding vehicular traffic. Alternative 6 — This alternative was fatally flawed for the same reasons as Alternative 5 Alternative 7 — This alternative was fatally flawed because of the high cost and extreme property and environmental impacts of constructing a new railway corridor. The rail yard in Yakima would also have to be abandoned Alternative 8 — This alternative was fatally flawed because BNSF does not accept shutting down this corridor. Alternatives Second Screening The focus of the second screening was to determine which of the remaining alternatives (2a, 2b. 2d, 3, and 4) was the preferred alternative for Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue. Of these remaining alternatives, several were deemed fatally flawed for these three roadways for the reasons listed below. Alternative 3 — This alternative was fatally flawed for these three roadways because they carry too great a traffic volume to be able to close the road at the rail and reroute the traffic elsewhere. Alternative 4 — This alternative was fatally flawed because of the close proximity of businesses along these roads and the distance from the tracks to First Street and First Avenue Since trains need 23 feet of clearance as opposed to 16.5 feet of clearance for roadway traffic, the limits of an overpass would extend much further to gain the elevation necessary to clear the tracks. This can be seen by comparing how much longer the Nob Hill overpass is as compared to the Walnut Street underpass. An overpass alternative would extend well beyond First Street and First Avenue, impacting both of those roadways and all the businesses within the limits of the overpass alternative Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 10 January 2003 With the elimination of Alternatives 3 and 4, the choice came down to Alternatives 2a. 2b, or 2d, which were all variations of an underpass. The pros and cons of each of these alternatives are given below. Alternative 2a Pros • Does not require raising of the rail like Alternative 2b: therefore, no barrier would be created • Each roadway can be reconstructed independent of the others unlike Alternative 2b where they need to be reconstructed at the same time ■ Less expensive than Alternative 2d because there's no bridge for Front Street to cross the underpass Cons • The grades would be steeper than Alternative 2b and. therefore, more difficult for trucks and in icy conditions ■ Front Street would not be maintained as a through street as with Alternative 2d Alternative 2b Pros • The underpass grades would be flatter and, therefore. would be better for trucks and in icy conditions • Less expensive than Alternative 2d because there's no bridge for Front Street to cross the underpass Cons • The rail would be raised five feet creating a partial barrier through the central business district • Front Street would not be maintained as a through street as with Alternative 2d • All three roadways (plus D Street) would have to be reconstructed at the same time because the rail would need to be raised for all three roads and at -grade intersections could not be maintained with the raised rail Alternative 2d Pros • Does not require raising of the rail like Alternative 2b: therefore, no barrier would be created • Each roadway can be reconstructed independent of the others unlike Alternative 2b where they need to be reconstructed at the same time • Front Street would be maintained as a through street Final Design Report BERGER/AB_ M. A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 11 January 2003 Cons • The grades would be steeper than Alternative 2b and. therefore. more difficult for trucks and in icy conditions • More expensive than Alternative 2a because there's a bridge for Front Street to cross the underpass • Even at 8 percent grades. some reconstruction of the First Street and First Avenue intersections is required All three of these alternatives had strong pros and cons but, in the end. the most important factor was determined to be the grades into and out of the underpass For all three of these roads. the length of the underpass was set by the locations of First Street and First Avenue intersections It was set as a criterion that the underpasses match existing grade at these two intersections If the grade at these intersections were lowered to allow the underpass grades to be flattened. there would be significant impacts to both First Street and First Avenue. These impacts would include traffic detours, extensive utihty relocations, and lost or impacted property/business accesses Given that the underpass alternatives would be the same length, the grades for Alternative 2b would be about 6 to 7 percent and the grades for Alternatives 2a and 2d would be 7 to 8 percent because the underpasses are deeper than with Alternative 2b. where the rail is raised 5 feet. This may not seem like a big difference but when grades get this steep. vehicular and truck traffic operators are affected The general goal in design of overpasses and underpasses is to use 6 percent maximum grades. Eight percent is normally considered to be the steepest acceptable grade For reference, the maximum grades on Interstate 82. between Ellensburg and Yakima. are generally 5 percent. Based on the importance of the grades. the design team and the advisory groups recommended Alternative 2b (lower the road under the rail and raise the rail 5 feet) as the preferred alternative for Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue. See Part II of this report for further discussion of how this recommendation influenced the determination of the first project and how the disadvantage of Alternative 2b having to construct all three together proved to be more important than the advantage of lesser grades Alternatives Third Screening Washington and Mead Avenues The focus of the third screening was to determine which of the remaining alternatives (2a, 2b, 2d, 3, and 4) was the preferred alternative for Washington Avenue. Mead Avenue, D Street, and I Street. For Washington and Mead avenues. Alternative 2b was ehminated because they both cross the tracks at the southern end of the rail yard. Raising the mainline track would greatly impact the operations of BNSF's rail yard. Alternative 2d does not apply because Front Street does not extend that far south. Alternative 3 was eliminated because both of these roads have significant traffic volumes That left Alternatives 2a and 4 which is an underpass versus an overpass Because the area around Washington and Mead avenues is less developed and has fewer cross streets, most of the issues that favored an underpass in lieu of an overpass in the downtown central business district do not apply. Without any of the constraints of the downtown area, the choice of underpass or overpass comes down to cost Although the length of the overpass would be longer than the length of the underpass. due to the clearance requirements described earlier, the cost of the overpass would actually be less This is because a bridge structure is easier to build than the walls and the groundwater seal needed to build an underpass with the high groundwater table The design team and the advisory groups recommended overpasses at Washington and Mead avenues Final Design Report BERGER/XBAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 12 January 2003 based on the overpasses being approximately $3 million less than an underpass at Washington and Mead avenues. D Street For D Street, only Alternative 4 was eliminated from the remaining alternatives for the same impact reasons that it was eliminated for Yakima Avenue, B Street. and Lincoln Avenue. However, unlike those three roads, the traffic volumes on D Street are low enough that it could potentially be closed at the tracks. A traffic analysis of closing D Street along with grade separating B Street and Lincoln Avenue indicates there would not be significant impacts Although closing any road at the tracks may seem counterproductive to a freight mobility project. it deserves consideration on D Street because of the impacts of the competing alternatives In this case the competing alternatives are the 2a, 2b, or 2d underpasses. In addition to the pros and cons of these alternatives discussed earlier for Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue, there is the added disadvantage of lost access for the fire station east of the railroad and the Washington Fruit loading dock west of the railroad. Access for the fire trucks at Yakima's main fire station is directly onto D Street just east of the tracks. If an underpass were built, the station would have to move elsewhere or be completely remodeled to exit in a different direction. Access to Washington Fruit's multibay loading dock is onto D Street just west of the tracks. Again, if an underpass were built, this structure would have to be moved or completely remodeled. If the pros and cons of D Street were the same as Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue. an underpass would probably be recommended, but because of the extra impacts to the fire station and the loading dock, and because that traffic volumes can be accommodated at the other crossings, the design team and the advisory groups recommend closing D Street at the tracks. I Street I Street is not quite parallel to Yakima Avenue, B Street, Lincoln Avenue, and D Street. Because it is at a slight skew to First Street and First Avenue, the distance between those two cross streets is a little longer than for the four crossings in the central business district. This greater distance is not enough to allow an overpass at this site, so Alternative 4 was eliminated. However, this greater distance was enough to flatten the grades for an underpass enough that raising the rail was not necessary to achieve 6 to 7 percent grades; therefore, Alternative 2b was eliminated. Although I Street has the second lowest traffic volumes of the seven at -grade crossings (behind D Street), it is also the only crossing of the tracks for approximately 1 mile between State Route 12 and D Street. Therefore Alternative 3 (closing the road at the tracks) was eliminated. That left Alternatives 2a and 2d. Because Front Street does not continue past I Street to the north, Alternative 2d does not readily apply. There is, however, an entrance to a Chevron fuel storage business north of I Street across from Front Street. This access could be maintained either by obtaining an easement across other properties from First Street or by building a bridge across the underpass extending Front Street into the Chevron site (essentially Alternative 2d). Since determining the exact method of access is premature for a feasibility study such as this, it will be left to be determined when and if I Street continues into final design. For now, the design team and the advisory groups recommend lowering the road under the rail (either Alternative 2a or 2d). There is potentially another scenario for I Street that was discovered during this feasibility study. Yakima County is looking into the possibility of building a new arterial from Terrace Heights, east of the city, extending to the east end of Fruitvale Boulevard just west of the tracks. This arterial would cross the tracks, almost certainly with a grade separation. Early indications are that this crossing would be near G and H streets just south of I Street. If this were to happen, I Street could be closed at the tracks because this new major arterial could easily handle I Street's traffic volumes This new Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 13 January 2003 crossing could be an overpass or an underpass depending on the skew of the new road to First Street and First Avenue. PART II — DETERMINATION OF THE FIRST PROJECT If this were a typical study with just one potential construction project, there would only be two parts to this report; the preceding "Alternatives Identification and Evaluation" and the following "Preliminary Design." However, because there are seven potential construction projects and all of them are not likely to be done at the same time, this study required an intermediate step to determine what the first phase of the total project should be. This is particularly critical in this case because of the interdependence of the recommended alternatives from Part I for Yakima Avenue. B Street, Lincoln Avenue, and D Street. The primary criterion for determining which grade separation should be built first was value. In other words, elimination of which at -grade crossing or crossings would best meet the purpose and need for a given amount of money. Based on this criterion, Washington and Mead avenues were eliminated because they do not create the same amount of traffic congestion as the central business district crossings. Even though Washington Avenue has the second highest traffic volumes of the seven at -grade crossings, the street grid is much more spread out so that traffic congestion on the intersecting streets are minimal. Even though some of the central business district crossings carry less traffic, the density of the street grid and the fact that all five central business district crossings can be blocked at the same time during a train crossing dictates that the first phase of the total project should be in the central business district. Based solely on traffic volumes, Yakima Avenue would have been the first choice because it has almost twice the volume of B Street, Lincoln Avenue, D Street, or I Street. However. the potential impacts to local businesses along Yakima Avenue reduced the value of making it the first phase. D Street was also eliminated because the recommendation is to close it at the tracks, which is only worthwhile if a nearby crossing is grade separated. I Street was eliminated because it was too far from the central business district and had less traffic. It, therefore, wouldn't be a good a value. The remaining two choices were B Street and Lincoln Avenue. Grade separating either one of these would meet the purpose and need of the project for about the same amount of money as any of the others; however, grade separating only one would not provide nearly the value that grade separating both would. This is because B Street and Lincoln Avenue are a one-way couplet (B Street three lanes eastbound and Lincoln Avenue three lanes westbound). It is better to construct both together because doing only one would require both to be turned into two-way streets at the tracks with the resulting traffic circulation potentially being worse than without a grade separation. If the recommendations from Part I could each be constructed independent of all the other at -grade crossings. then B Street and Lincoln Avenue would be the first phase of the project. However, the recommendations for B Street and Lincoln Avenue were not independent of the recommendations for Yakima Avenue and D Street. As discussed in Part I, the recommendation for B Street and Lincoln Avenue was to construct underpasses while raising the rail elevation 5 feet in order to reduce the grades of the underpasses. Because rail grades are limited to less than 1 percent, it is not possible to raise the rail 5 feet at B Street and Lincoln Avenue without also raising it nearly that much at Yakima and D. It is also not practical, due to substandard sight distance and potential business impacts, to raise the rail nearly 5 feet at Yakima and D while maintaining at -grade crossings at those two locations. Therefore, in order to pursue the recommended alternatives at B Street and Lincoln Avenue, it was necessary to include the recommended alternatives for Yakima and D in the same initial Phase 1 project. It was with this background, that City staff and the design team presented the following preliminary recommendation for the Phase 1 project at the 25 October 2001 open house (see Figure 7 for a plan of this project). Final Design Report BERGERIABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 14 January 2003 r Mil — — M — lI — — — M — I — II 44 ti 191 AVENUE r T T LIESEN LUMBER TRACK 29 MALL BNSE RR BRIDGE BLASE RR BRIDGE RAILROAD TRACK T OIOIR R. 1 —14t 1ST MIKE a 1 1410. j 18T AVE/113 + t PLAN SCALE: 1"=130' MORT NT. a r El MEL'S O'NER " 1ST STREET City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Preliminary Plan Design Report Figure 7 • Construct underpasses at Yakima Avenue, B Street, and Lincoln Avenue • Close D Street at the tracks • Raise the rail 5 feet at Yakima Avenue. B Street. and Lincoln Avenue • Construct a 7 -foot -clearance underpass from Front Street into the Track 29 Mall to maintain access • Shoofly (detour) the railroad around the project area partially on First Avenue and partially on the existing spur track between First and Second avenues The public response to this project confirmed the reasoning presented earlier not to grade separate Yakima Avenue alone as the first project, even though it had the highest volume. Through verbal comments at the open house, written responses to open house questionnaires, petitions, letters to local newspapers, and letters to the City Council, it was clear the businesses on and near Yakima Avenue did not want Yakima Avenue grade separated, even if it meant steeper grades for the B Street and Lincoln Avenue underpasses. Therefore, the design team opted to review Yakima Avenue, dropping it from the Phase 1 project. Without grade separating Yakima Avenue, the rail could no longer be raised at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. This meant the recommendations from Part I had to be revised for these two locations. There were two alternatives similar to Alternative 2b that were considered in the final screening for B Street and Lincoln Avenue They were Alternatives 2a and 2d. Alternative 2a constructed an underpass without raising the rail and cutoff Front Street at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. Alternative 2d was similar to Alternative 2a, except that a bridge was built across the underpass to maintain Front Street as a through street, although the intersection of Front Street with B Street and Lincoln Avenue would still be eliminated. As a result of the public concerns about potential impacts to businesses along Front Street, City staff and the design team recommended a modification of Alternative 2d as the revised preferred alternative. The modification proposed to reahgn Front Street closer to the tracks in order to shorten up the length of the underpass and avoid reconstruction of the First Street and First Avenue intersections. This can be done at these locations because there are no permanent structures between Front Street and the tracks near or between B Street and Lincoln Avenue. This realignment is not possible at Yakima Avenue because the realignment would require demolition of the train depot, which as an historic structure, cannot be impacted without considerable coordination and mitigation costs. As a result of pubhc feedback concerning the preliminary recommendation for the Phase 1 project, the following revised Phase 1 project was presented at an open house on 4 April 2002 (See Figure 8 for a plan of this project). • Construct underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue • Realign Front Street closer to the tracks and build bridges across the underpasses to maintain Front Street as a through street • Change A Street to a two-way street between First Street and Front Street • Leave the rail at its existing elevation Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 16 January 2003 MN NE- M MN 11111 - r- - N- 1- ■M r M NS MN 1ST AVENUE 4 1ST AVENUE 1ST STREET 1ST STREET P LAN SCALE: 1"=130' 41'1' II 40.14, City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Revised Plan Design Report Figure 8 r - N UN r NW N - - it - NM - - iiiiiir SO - r i 4 t 197 AVrIOE TRACK 29 MALL RAILROAD TRAC 411 1 r J 1111 AO TRACK tlt 4 } 197 AMOR R i i T 4 1 411 C 11111111111111 /4 t FROM M. • I } FRONT ST. a. { • PLAN SCALE: 1"=130' f l} } 1ST STREET 11 City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Existing Conditions Design Report Figure 9 — M — — — MN S r — M IN - MINI a ! — BERGER/A&AM City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Existing Utilities Design Report Figure 10 1 I OP --,14 • �� OP OP i ! IIg r S; OP OP OP P OP OP OP OP OP DP OP OP—OP OP OP OP ° OP OP OP pa�OP I -G G S A S D c Off AMUL SS S A 55 A 55 A s5 S A A A D IR AMON �c 0 0 c D L I -SD m S S SD m m SO SD SO 50 50 m m m m m mm S S S ss A s5 m m m m—g A A -35 A 55 So O W SS A SO m A A wD — m -1,11--111--, • w w w w w w w w w w 5 w w w w w 1p w 8 w ala 8 1 { apnp s e 8 a a a g i a q a a a TRACT( 29 MALL g x a ROAD TRACK O—%• FOTO FO—FO—F9----FO—FOy- F0--PO—E-0—PO—P0— • • '• - FO IO F4 FO FO r _—..tir —FC— FO—F FO— -'-'- is a • a 1 55 ss 55 I C. -SS SS S-�.. S� ss S S A A i S _ y ---i-- i- S 53 S n w y •--i- S S S S SS SS w A S S SII( R, �w -Ow c" en NW � V . SD W R • w w W w w y W W uDL��IC v.. uG• UC UC { en $'—m I a r !J'1 Q 1 111111.11 uL UC V., UG Wu US L • 08 0 fhj S5 SS 55 A— a dD OP- C W C OP OP OP LEGEND O W g i. — WATER ■ s : —ss— SEWER —G— GAS —OP— OVERHEAD POWER —W— UNDERGROUND POWER �FO� FIBER OPTIC SO -- -1---" m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m SO. m m w w SD*m m m m SC S. S StS 1R Rif SSSs ss S S SLS SS A ss A g • W w M M w W w R w�� A w w , wO C S w •m S 55w 55w S S S S y R w W w • S s5 S �i,5 SS 5$--Aw M w w w wm 55 � / • a PLAN 1 [IP Q SCALE: 1"=130' i I BERGER/A&AM City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Existing Utilities Design Report Figure 10 Soils The project area is located on the historic floodplain of the Yakima River The top 1 to 4 feet of soil is fill placed during development of the roads, rails, and buildings in the area. Below that, to a depth of at least 52 feet, is dense sandy, gravelly soil with scattered to abundant cobbles. Groundwater elevations have ranged from 13 to 18 feet below the surface during 2001 and 2002. DESIGN CRITERIA The following design criteria will be used These criteria are based on the Local Agency Guidelines (LAG) Manual, the 2001 AASHTO Pohcy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. BNSF design standards, and City of Yakima Roadway Standards. • Design Speed — 30 mph will be used for B Street and Lincoln Avenue: 25 mph will be used for A Street and Front Street • Crest Vertical Curves — K=19 will be used for design speeds of 30 mph; K=12 will be used for design speeds of 25 mph • Sag Vertical Curves — K=19.5 will be used for design speeds of 30 mph: K=13.5 will be used for design speeds of 25 mph • Maximum Vertical Grade — Maximum grade will be 8 percent • Minimum Vertical Clearance — Minimum vertical clearance for roadway underpasses will be 16.5 feet • Lane Widths — Exterior lane widths will be 12 feet minimum and interior lane widths will be 11 feet minimum • Sidewalk Widths — Sidewalks will be 7 feet wide minimum DESIGN CONSTRAINTS In addition to the design criteria listed above, there are other constraints on the design that are dictated by finances rather than agency standards. The first, which was mentioned earlier, is that the underpass must match existing grades near the west edge of First Street and the east edge of First Avenue This is to prevent the high cost of reconstructing First Avenue and First Street beyond the limits of Lincoln Avenue and B Street ROW, relocating major utilities and disrupting traffic. The second constraint is the width of the roadway sections for B Street and Lincoln Avenue. Both B Street and Lincoln Avenue have buildings right up to the ROW line on both sides of the street. In order to avoid the cost of buying and demolishing those buildings, or portions of them, the new roadway sections must fit within the 80 -foot ROW width. The third constraint, as discussed earlier, is that the rail can't be raised because of the impacts that it would have on Yakima Avenue and D Street. The last constraint is that BNSF requires that the realigned Front Street be no closer to the track than 50 feet. Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 21 January 2003 ALIGNMENTS The project is in the oldest part of the city, which was built around the railroad. Therefore, the north -south streets are parallel to the tracks and the east -west streets are perpendicular to them. However, since the tracks run from slightly northwest to slightly southeast, the streets in this area also run slightly skewed to the north -south and east -west grid of most of Yakima. The horizontal alignment of all the streets and tracks within the project will remain the same, except for Front Street. As can be seen in Figure 8, Front Street will be realigned to the west from B Street to Lincoln Avenue with a reverse curve in order to move the bridges closer to the railroad bridges. This allows the grade on the east side of the underpasses to be lessened. The vertical alignment is controlled by five requirements. The minimum clearance from the road surface to the bottom of the bridges must be 16.5 feet, the design speed is 30 mph, the vertical curves must meet the design criteria, the grades must match existing grade at First Street and First Avenue, and the maximum grade must be 8 percent or less. Roadway profiles that meet all these requirements for B Street and Lincoln Avenue are shown in Figure 11. The vertical ahgnment of the tracks will not change. Front Street will likely be raised slightly to match the elevation of the railroad bridges. CROSS SECTIONS There are two separate elements within the cross sections of B Street and Lincoln Avenue. The first is the configuration of the lanes and sidewalk within the underpass under the bridges. The second is the at -grade lanes and sidewalks that provide access to adjacent properties east and west of the tracks. The total ROW width available for these two elements is 80 feet. Of this, 51 feet is used for the underpass section consisting of three 12 -foot lanes, an 11.5 -foot combined sidewalk and bike path, a 1.5 -foot -wide barrier, and a 2 -foot shoulder between the outside lane and the barrier. The underpass section is shown in Figure 12. The at -grade portions of the roadway section will only be built east and west of the tracks They will not cross the tracks because that would defeat the purpose of the project to eliminate the at -grade crossings. Out of the 80 -foot ROW, 29 feet is available for the at -grade elements. With the requirement for 7 -foot (minimum) sidewalks and the need for sidewalks on both sides to maintain pedestrian access, only 15 feet remains for traffic lanes. This is only enough for one 13.5 -foot lane and a 1.5 -foot barrier on one side. For safety and access reasons, the at -grade lanes were placed on the south side of B Street and the north side of Lincoln Avenue, and they are designated one-way in the same directions as B Street and Lincoln Avenue. The roadway section east and west of the tracks can be seen in Figure 13. WALLS Because of the limited ROW width and the close proximity of adjacent buildings, the sides of the underpass excavation cannot be cut back on a slope. Instead, vertical walls will be required These walls must perform three functions for the underpass. They must support the vertical sides of the excavation, they must keep the groundwater from seeping into the underpass, and they must serve as the foundations for the bridges. Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 22 January 2003 1ST AVENUE 1ST AVENUE BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE RETAINING WALL .0 REALIGNED FRONT ST. BRIDGE EXISTING GROUND LINCOLN AVENUE BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE RETAINING WALL PROPOSED GROUND REALIGNED FRONT ST. BRIDGE EXISTING GROUND 9 B STREET PROPOSED GROUND 1ST STREET Ld w City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Roadway Profiles Design Report Figure 11 BNSF RAILROAD BRIDGE RETAINING WALL 1.5' BARRIER 2 SHOULDER 1 u 2 2 J I SIDEWALK/ LANE LANE LANE BIKE PATH 3 j 2 GROUND WATER SEAL w B Street Looking East Lincoln Avenue Looking West BERGER/ARAM City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Underpass Section at Railroad Tracks Design Report Figure 12 r SIDE- WALK RETAINING WALL ,]' ,2' 1.5' BARRIER 2' SHOULDER -\ ,2' 1.5' BARRIER 1r ,35' Y SERVICE SIDE - LANE WALK SIDEWALK/ BIKE PATH LANE LANE GROUND WATER SEAL LANE B Street Looking East Lincoln Avenue Looking West RETAINING WAL BERGER/ABAM City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Underpass Typical Section Design Report Figure 13 Three wall types were considered most feasible for this project. • Cantilever walls • Secant pile walls • Diaphragm walls Each of these is described below, along with the reasons why the diaphragm wall was chosen over the cantilever wall and secant pile wall. Cantilever Walls A cantilever wall consists of a wide concrete footing built below the final underpass grade and a tall thin concrete wall extending from the footing up to the existing grade. In more open areas without a high groundwater table. this would be the least expensive of the three alternatives However, since this site is confined by existing buildings and has a high groundwater table, a lot of extra work is needed to build this wall. Specifically, temporary excavation support would be needed to excavate the hole to build the wall's footings. This excavation support and/or groundwater pumps (dewatering) would need to keep the groundwater out of the excavation. In essence, a temporary structure would be required to build the final wall. Due to this inefficiency and associated costs associated, the cantilever wall was eliminated. Secant Pile Walls The secant pile wall eliminates the need for temporary excavation support. However, it has drawbacks due to the soils at this site. A secant pile wall is a series of overlapping drilled shafts filled with concrete. A 4 -foot -diameter drill bit is used to drill holes at 6 -foot on center along the wall alignment. These holes are then filled with lean concrete. Next, 4 -foot -diameter holes are drilled between each pair of the concrete -filled shafts. These new shafts overlap the previous ones by about a foot on each side. These shafts have reinforcement inserted into the holes and stronger concrete. The end result is a continuous concrete wall that satisfies the three requirements of the wall. This method has been used for similar underpass designs in western Washington. The problem with using it at this site is that the drill bit for drilling the holes does not work well when it encounters large rocks or cobbles. Drilling can be done with core barrels, which are like cans with sharp teeth on the bottom which cut through the rocks that are encountered. This is very slow and expensive, however, and makes this method uneconomical given that about 400 of these shafts would be needed. The likelihood of encountering large rocks and cobbles is very high. Diaphragm Walls The last and preferred wall type is a diaphragm wall. Diaphragm walls are constructed from the surface level by excavating a long deep trench and inserting a reinforcement cage, followed by concrete, into the excavation. To prevent the sides of the excavation from collapsing before the concrete is placed, it is filled with a thick clay/water slurry, which bonds to the walls and holds the soils on the faces of the trench together. As with the secant pile wall, this results in a continuous concrete wall that satisfies the three requirements of the wall. Although this appears to be the best type of wall for this project, there are still a few potential drawbacks to this method. The first is that even though this is a common construction method in Europe and Asia. it is not as common yet in the United States The main specialty equipment to build this type of wall is the machine for excavating the trench Depending on how specialized the Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 26 January 2003 machine needs to be, it's possible that the machine and its crew could need to come from overseas, raising the cost. Anther potential drawback hinges on the number and size of the rocks and cobbles at the site. If there are too many big rocks along the trench alignment, it could be difficult to excavate the trench without considerable caving of the side walls. So far there have been four soil borings each at B Street and Lincoln Avenue. Although it is clear from these borings that cobbles (rocks 3 to 12 inches across) exist, it is not clear how big they are because the boring diameters were all 6 inches or less. In order to get a more complete picture of the soils conditions, open -pit explorations are proposed during final design of the underpasses By digging deep holes near the proposed walls, complete samples can be collected to verify precise subsurface conditions. With this more accurate information, the design can be fine tuned to meet the site conditions and the contractors will have more accurate data on which to base their bids. thereby lowering the contingency m their bids and decreasing the chance of costly change orders during construction. BOTTOM GROUNDWATER SEAL The walls will provide a barrier to groundwater seepage from the sides, but groundwater will still come up under the road unless there is a bottom groundwater seal. One way to think of the groundwater seal system is to call the underpass walls and bottom seal a boat. The walls are the sides of the boat and the bottom seal is the bottom of the boat. Once the walls and bottom seal form a complete watertight boat, it will want to do what boats are made to do. which is to float. This tendency for the boat to float is called buoyancy and if the underpass boat is not heavy enough. it will float or break apart and let the water in. Therefore, not only does the bottom seal have to be watertight. it also has to be heavy enough to counter the uplifting buoyancy force of the groundwater. Using the boat analogy, the underpass boat has to be heavy enough so that it will not float. Four bottom groundwater seal types were considered most feasible • Cast -in-place concrete poured in a dry excavation ✓ Cast -in-place concrete poured under water (tremae method) • Cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) • Jet grouting Each of these is described below along with the reasons why jet grouting was chosen over the other three seal methods. Cast -in -Place Concrete Poured in a Dry Excavation Under this method, the diaphragm walls would be built first. Then the soil in between the walls would be excavated below the final level of the roadway Since this would be below groundwater level, the excavation would fill with water. The next step would be to pump the water out of the excavation until it was dry. Finally, concrete would be poured into the bottom between the two walls to create a seal. This concrete would be many yards thick at the low point to have enough weight to counter the groundwater buoyancy force. The major disadvantage of this method is the continuous pumping of the groundwater during construction of the seal Because of the gravelly nature of the soils. they are very porous As soon as water is pumped out of the excavation, it will quickly be replaced by water nearby which can easily Final Design Report BERGER/ARAM. A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 27 January 2003 flow through the porous soils. As a result, tremendous amounts of water would have to be pumped out and hauled away before the excavation would be dry. This would be very expensive and could potentially cause settlement damage to adjacent buildings when the groundwater below these buildings is lowered as well. Cast -in -Place Concrete Poured Underwater (Tremie Method) This method would follow a similar procedure to the one above. With the tremae method. though. the groundwater, which floods the excavation, is not pumped out immediately. Instead. the concrete is poured through a hose underwater to the bottom of the excavation. After the concrete has hardened to form the bottom seal, the water inside the walls and seal is pumped off. The difference in this alternative is that the groundwater is limited to that within the roadway excavation, resulting in only a small amount of water that needs to be pumped. There are two major drawbacks to this method. The first is that the excavation to below roadway grade must be done underwater. Doing this would be similar to dredging a harbor Not only would it be expensive, it would also be very difficult to get the correct grade at the bottom. The second is that the top surface of concrete poured underwater will be level, rather than the curved surface necessary for the road. Therefore, the seal would have to be poured in many level steps rising from the bottom towards the ends like an inverted pyramid. The seams where each of these pieces come together would be very prone to leaking under the high groundwater pressures. Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) This method is quite different from the two above. Like the diaphragm walls and secant pile walls, it is done from the existing ground level without having to excavate the underpass to construct it. It also is done before the walls are constructed as opposed to the previous methods which build the walls first. The process involves one or more large augers like the ones described above for the secant pile wall. These augers are drilled into the ground down to the bottom of the proposed seal, except that for CDSM, the soil is not extracted. Instead, it is mixed in place like a mixer mixing cake batter. Water and cement are then injected under low pressure down the hollow center of the auger's shaft. With the augers still spinning and the water/cement mix being injected. the augers are raised back up. The result is a soil/cement mix equivalent to a weak concrete. By mixing the entire volume of the required seal in this way, the bottom seal is created in place without any excavation needed to build it. The diaphragm walls would then be built down into the CDSM to complete the "boat." The final step is to excavate the soil within the boat and construct the roadway. Just like the secant pile walls described earlier, the CDSM method has been used on a similar underpass project in western Washington. However, just like the secant pile wall method. the CDSM method is not well suited for the expected large rocks and cobbles in the soils at this site. It is extremely difficult to drill 40 feet into the ground with one or more 3 -foot -diameter drill bits because of the rocks. Jet Grouting This method combines many of the advantages of CDSM without the major drawback of drilling through large rock and cobble obstructions with large -diameter augers With jet grouting, a hollow core drill about 6 inches in diameter is drilled down to the bottom of the proposed seal. As it is pulled back up, a cement/water mix is expelled at high pressure from a nozzle on the side of the hollow tube. In this highly porous soil, the cement/water mix under pressure will fill all of the soil voids within about 2 feet in all directions. The result is a 4 -foot -diameter column of weak concrete. Unlike the CDSM, the jet grouting would be done after the diaphragm walls, since the hollow core drill could be inserted near the wall and the pressure would allow the cement/water mix to fill in the Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 28 January 2003 space between the tube and the wall face. Similar to the CDSM approach, the soil above the bottom seal and inside the walls would be excavated. The jet grouting method has been chosen for this project because it is best suited to the soils at this site. It can be done from the existing ground level, which is a major advantage over the cast -in-place concrete methods Since it injects the mixture under pressure. it covers a large area with each penetration even though the drill diameter is only 6 inches. Although this 6 -inch drill will also have difficulties in the rocky soil, it will have much less difficulties than a 3- or 4 -foot drill bit. It will, however, have the same coverage as the large CDSM drill bits. Figure 14 shows a plan and elevation of the walls and bottom seal for B Street. Lincoln Avenue would be similar. BRIDGES There will be a total of four bridges as part of this project. • BNSF over Lincoln Avenue • BNSF over B Street • BNSF shoofly over Lincoln Avenue to be converted to Front Street over Lincoln Avenue when construction is completed • Front Street over B Street In order to simplify detailing and save money, all four bridges will be designed with the same girders since all four bridges are the same length and three of the four must be designed for the greater railroad loading. Typical superstructure types for these bridges are as follows. • Steel through plate girder • Steel deck plate girder • Precast, prestressed concrete single cell box girders The three primary issues for choosing the best superstructure type are depth of superstructure, flexibility of track placement, and cost. The steel -through -plate girder is a deep girder with most of its depth above the track level. One girder on each side would support one track on beams connecting the bottom of each girder. Having most of the girder above the level of the rail makes this the best choice for minimum depth from top of rail to bottom of superstructure. This. in turn, would provide the shallowest underpass with the flattest grades This is the only advantage, however, because this is the most expensive and doesn't allow for tracks to be moved around on the bridge. The advantage in structure depth is also only approximately 2 feet because the span is relatively short. This girder type is best suited for long spans carrying only one track. The steel deck plate girder and precast, prestressed concrete single -cell box girder have about the same depth and both provide flexibility for track placement. However. since the concrete girder is about two-thirds the cost of the steel girder, the concrete girder was chosen. Final Design Report BERGER/ABI, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 29 January 2003 r S MN 6-- MS M M r- N OM NE MI- UN r 1ST AVENUE SEAL DEPTH jrYP.) RETAINING WALL NO SEAL 5' 5' 9' 13' 9' 5' 5' NO SEAL i I I I i I i i % +/ I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I PLAN - B STREET - SEAL DEPTH SCALE: 1"=100' BNSF RR BRIDGE FRONT ST BRIDGE fili 14' 18' 22' 26' 32' 39' 72' 48' 40' 40' 48' PROPOSED ROADWAY GROUND WATER SEAL EXISTING GROUND 32' 26' 22' 18' 224' 48' 40' 40' 48' 56' WALL HEIGHT (TIP) F w L.) 13' RETAINING WALL ELEVATION - B STREET - WALL HEIGHT SCALE: r= (H), 1"=20' (V) NOTE: UNCOLN AVENUE IDENTICAL City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B Street —Wall and Bottom Seal Design Report Figure 14 STORMWATER SYSTEM Since the underpasses will be below groundwater elevation, a gravity storm drain system will not work. Instead. storm drainage will be collected within each underpass and pumped to the surface. Storm drainage from both underpasses and the realigned Front Street will be conveyed to a combined settling and infiltration pond. The pond will be located in the existing Front Street ROW, just east of the realigned location of Front Street. If it is desired to use the existing Front Street ROW for added parking, then an enclosed structure with parking on top will be designed in place of the open pond. Appendix A contains the "Stormwater Site Plan" for this project, which describes the storm drainage design in more detail. UTILITIES The City owned utilities on the project are water, sanitary sewer, and storm drainage. These primarily run within the city ROW under B Street, Lincoln Avenue. and Front Street. These utilities will need to be relocated out of the underpass excavation zones prior to the start of underpass construction. For the utilities under B Street and Lincoln Avenue, it is intended to relocate them under the proposed service road and adjacent sidewalk. Depending on the existing local service lines off these mainlines, it is possible smaller service lines will also be needed under the at -grade sidewalk on the other side of each underpass. The best way to deal with the Front Street utilities will be to see if they can be shut off at Lincoln Avenue and B Street during a portion of the construction and then rebuilt under the realigned Front Street and new Front Street bridges. The private utilities (gas, power, and telecommunications) mostly run perpendicular to the city's Lincoln Avenue and B Street ROW. These utilities will need to be relocated at the utility company's costs, so they will have to do further analysis to determine the most cost-effective means of relocation. Some of the options will be to relocate outside the construction area (either temporarily or permanently), to relocate below the construction zone, or to reroute their loads to other existing hnes (either temporarily or permanently). Temporary relocations or rerouting may be followed by final configurations attached to the proposed bridges. ROW/ACCESS IMPACTS There are a total of 53 businesses within the project hmits on land owned by 14 different owners. Since the hmits of the underpasses are completely within existing city ROW, no ROW will need to be obtained solely for the underpasses. However, the realignment of Front Street will require the purchase of some of BNSF's property bounded by the tracks. Front Street, A Street, and D Street. Additional land may need to be purchased due to access impacts, but that land is not directly needed for the project and can be used by the City for other purposes or sold. There are also some properties/businesses that will need revised access during and/or after the project. Appendix B contains the "Access Management Investigation" for this project and compiles more details concerning access issues for specific properties. CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE AND SCHEDULE The project will be built in four stages, including two substages in Stage 4. These stages are depicted in Figures 3 through 7 of the "Access Management Investigation" in Appendix B. These four stages are the main stages that will require long-term detours. In addition to these stages, there will be a period before Stage 1 when the utility relocations will need to take place These relocations could begin as much as a year before Stage 1 as the private utilities move their services. Final Design Report BERGER/ABA1\1, A01083 Yakima Railroad Glade Separation Project 31 January 2003 Relocation of the public utilities will likely take place in the month or two before Stage 1. The utility relocations will require some lane closures for short periods, but likely not long-term street closures with detours. PERMITS Since this project has federal funding, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements must be followed. A NEPA environmental checklist has already been prepared and submitted to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and FHWA has ruled this project to be a Documented Categorical Exclusion (DCE) for the Environmental Classification Summary (ECS). During final design, a biological assessment will be prepared and, when it is approved, the ECS form will be signed allowing the ROW acquisition process to begin. Other required permits that will be completed during final design are a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and a grading permit. Additionally, the Section 4(f)1106 historical/archeological consultation. which has already begun, will be completed. PROJECT COSTS A summary of the cost estimate is shown in Table 1 on the following page. The total estimated project cost assuming construction starting in 2004 is $24,963,339. This total is further broken down into the cost for B Street, Lincoln Avenue, Front Street, and the railroad shoofly. The estimate shown represents BERGER/ABAM's judgment of the probable construction costs. Since BERGER/ABAM does not have control over the cost of labor, materials. or equipment; over contractor methods of setting unit bid prices; or over competitive bid practices. marketing, or negotiating condition, BERGER/ABAM does not warrant that the actual cost will not vary from this estimate. In order to better understand the cost estimate, some of the items in the estimate need to be elaborated on. All the items from preparation through railroad work are the estimated costs of actual construction work. Mobilization is generally estimated at about 5 percent of these actual construction items for a large project like this. Mobilization is compensation to the contractor for all the initial setup costs he incurs before work actually starts. These are items such as getting the construction equipment to the site and setting up the field office. An estimate for a design report is not as accurate as an estimate for final design because less details of the design are known early in the design. An estimating contingency is included during earlier stages of design to account for these unknown details and their costs. As design progresses, the estimating contingency decreases as the details and their costs get included in a more extensive listing of actual construction tasks and items. By the time final design is completed, there will be over 100 lines of actual construction items and the estimating contingency will be zero. Also included is a construction contingency line item, which generally stays constant throughout the design process. A construction contingency is an estimate of the probable cost increases that may be incurred during construction due to the contractor finding site conditions different than shown in the documents he bid on. Construction contingencies are lower on projects mostly above ground where there is httle chance of finding something that was not known. Higher contingencies are used on projects that are mostly in the ground such as this one. The design of the in -ground structures on this project (the walls and bottom seal) is based on a limited number of borings about 6 inches in diameter. So what is known about the soil conditions is based on a very small area. The actual area that will be excavated is thousands of times greater. There are likely to be some areas to be Final Design Report BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 32 January 2003 Table 1. Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Costs Construction Items _ Total B Street Underpass Lincoln Avenue Underpass Front Street Realignment Railroad Shoofly Mobilization $848,256 $374,790 $374,790 $39.937 858,739 Preparation 183,500 71.000 71.000 37 500 4.000 Grading 1.049,681 478,630 478,630 32,400 60.021 Storm water System 812,080 353,320 353,320 105.440 0 Sanitary Sewer 202.640 101,320 101.320 0 0 Waterlines 313,160 150,330 150.330 12,500 0 Walls 6,260,100 3.130,050 3,130,050 0 0 Bottom Seal 4,599,500 2,299.750 2.299,750 0 0 Bridges 1,213,800 303,450 303,450 303,450 303,450 Surfacing 79,350 31.050 31,050 17,250 0 Asphalt Concrete Pavement 264,600 103,500 103,500 57.600 0 Erosion Control and Planting 154,000 70,000 70,000 14.000 0 Traffic 623.772 249,440 249,440 124.892 0 Other Items 401,600 153,950 153,950 93.700 0 Railroad Work 807,300 0 0 0 807,300 Subtotal $17,813.339 $7,870.580 87.870.580 8838,669 $1,233.510 Estimating Contingency 2,000,000 800,000 800.000 150.000 250,000 Estimated Bid Price $19,813,339 $8,670,580 $8,670,580 $988,669 81.483,510 Construction Contingency 2,000,000 800,000 800,000 150.000 250,000 Estimated Construction Costs $21,813,339 $9,470,580 $9,470,580 $1,138,669 $1,733,510 Estimated ROW Costs Estimated Design Engineering Costs Estimated Construction Engineering Cost 800,000 1.350,000 1,000.000 0 600,000 450,000 500,000 600,000 450,000 300.000 50.000 40,000 0 100,000 60,000 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $24,963,339 $10.520,580 $11.020,580 81.528,669 $1,893,510 Final Design Report Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project 33 January 2003 BERGER/ABAM. A01083 excavated that will have conditions different than indicated by the test borings. Changed conditions can include different soil types, boulders, manmade obstructions, and hazardous materials. The construction contingency is an estimate of costs the contractor will incur to deal with these unexpected conditions. The two pits described earlier are intended to better determine the soil conditions and, therefore, lower this contingency at the time of bid. Below the estimated construction cost are three additional items. ROW cost is the compensation associated with the ROW and easements purchased from private property owners. Design engineering is the cost of doing design tasks through the completion of the bid documents. Construction administration is the cost for the project owner (the City of Yakima in this case) to supervise construction. the paperwork schedules, lbilling, change orders, asOllas the inspection of the construction to ensure it meets the requirements of the contract documents ENDORSEMENT / vi >e44.zie Gary ' hillips. PE Senior"' roject Manager BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. al Design Report Anna Railroad Grade Separation Project 34 BERGER/ABAM, A01083 January 2003 STORMWATER SITE PLAN Yakima Railroad Grade Separations Project (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) Submitted to City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development Yakima, Washington January 2003 Submitted by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003-2600 Job No. A01083 STORMWATER SITE PLAN YAKIMA RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATIONS PROJECT (LINCOLN AVENUE AND B STREET) TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE PROJECT OVERVIEW 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CORE ELEMENTS 1 Existing Conditions Summary 1 Core Elements Summary 2 OFF-SITE ANALYSIS 2 FLOW CONTROL AND RUNOFF TREATMENT FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 3 Flow Control 3 Runoff Treatment 3 Combined Water Quality and Infiltration Pond 3 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 4 General 4 Lincoln Avenue and B Street 4 Front Street 4 A Street 4 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES 5 BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS 5 OTHER PERMITS 5 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN 5 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL 5 FIGURES Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Site Location Map Stormwater Infiltration Pond Schematic of the Proposed Conveyance System Underpass Typical Section Front Street Typical Section WATERWORKS OUTPUT FLOW COMPUTATION FOR CONVEYANCE Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAM. A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A -ii January 2003 PROJECT OVERVIEW The project is located in the City of Yakima. The boundaries of the project extend from First Avenue on the west to First Street on the east and from A Street on the south to D Street on the north. The legal geographic description within which the project is located is Township 13 North, Range 18 East, Section 24, and Township 13 North, Range 19 East, Section 19. The project location and limits are shown on the Site Location Map in Figure 1. The proposed works will include the following. • The construction of underpasses at B Street and Lincoln Avenue • The reconstruction of Front Street and construction of bridges across the underpasses to maintain Front Street as a through street ■ The reconstruction of A Street to a two-way street between First and Front street ■ The temporary railroad detour (shoofly) during construction of the railroad bridges over the underpasses Stormwater runoff from the project site will be formally collected and conveyed to a new stormwater pond for water quality treatment and flow control. The project will replace approximately 5.52 acres of impervious surface area (93 percent of the existing impervious area). Following is the summary of the surface areas of the project. Impervious area (roadway) Impervious area (sidewalk) Impervious area (gravel parking) Impervious area (pond site) Total impervious area Pervious area (landscape) Total project area Existing 3.74 acres 1.40 acres 0.78 acre 0.00 acre 5.92 acres 0.00 acre 5.92 acres EXISTING CONDITIONS AND CORE ELEMENTS Existing Conditions Summary Proposed 3.33 acres 1.84 acres 0.00 acre 0.35 acre 5.52 acres 0 40 acre 5 92 acres Net (increase/decrease) 0.41 acre (decrease) 0.44 acre (increase) 0.78 acre (decrease) 0.35 acre (increase) 0.40 acre (decrease) 0.40 acre (increase) The project is located in the central business district of the City of Yakima, a highly urbanized/industrialized environment. The landscape is flat. The vegetation consists of burbside grass and landscaped trees. The closest natural water bodies are the Naches River (located over 1 mile north of the project area) and the Yakima River (located over 1 mile east of the project area). Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAI\4. A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A-1 January 2003 Roadways Lincoln Avenue is a three -lane, one-way street westbound. B Street is the same except it is eastbound. Both generally have parallel parking and sidewalks on both sides of the street. Front Street is one lane in each direction with parking and sidewalks on both sides. A Street is two lanes one way westbound. It has parking and sidewalks on both sides. Railroad The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) has one mainline track running north -south through the project area. The track is 380 feet from First Avenue and 460 feet from First Street. This track is within a 300 -foot -wide right-of-way (ROW) owned by BNSF. The ROW abuts the Front Street ROW on the east and is 180 feet from First Avenue on the west. Runoff from Lincoln Avenue, B Street, and A Street are collected and conveyed by a system of catch basins and pipes to the stormdrain systems on First Avenue, Front Street, and First Street. These systems also collect runoff from roadways and areas outside of the project hmits. The collected flows are conveyed to the larger system located further south of the project site. Core Elements Summary The proposed stormwater analysis and designs comply with core elements listed in the draft version of the Department of Ecology (DOE) Stormwater Management Manual for Eastern Washington (DOE). • Core Element No. 1: Preparation of Stormwater Site Plan (SSP) • Core Element No. 2: Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention • Core Element No. 3: Source Control of Pollution • Core Element No. 4: Preservation of Natural Drainage Systems and Outfalls • Core Element No. 5: Runoff Treatment • Core Element No. 6: Flow Control • Core Element No. 7 Operation and Maintenance • Core Element No. 8: Local Requirements OFF-SITE ANALYSIS This project proposes no off-site discharges. All stormwater within the project boundaries will be collected and infiltrated within the project boundaries. The project will reduce the total impervious surface area by 0.40 acre, and turn it into a landscaped area. Stormwater from the project site will be conveyed to a new infiltration pond for runoff treatment and flow control. During final design. after a detailed topographic survey is completed, the design will be analyzed to determine if any off-site stormwater will flow onto and be collected within the site. This would primarily consist of off-site stormwater on First Street, Front Street. and First Avenue. If there are Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A-2 January 2003 off-site flows being collected on site, then the pond will be sized to accommodate those additional flows. FLOW CONTROL AND -RUNOFF TREATMENT FACILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN The proposed flow control and water quality facilities were analyzed and designed in accordance with the guidelines listed m the DOE manual. Hydrologic models were developed using the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method with a 24-hour storm and Type II heytograph. The drainage areas reflect the configuration of the proposed conveyance system. Soil type, hydrologic group, and infiltration rate were derived from the Soil Survey of Yakima County, Washington. Precipitation values were determined from the DOE manual and are shown in Table 1. Table 1: Precipitation Values for 24 -Hour Storm Event Recurrence Interval 24 -Hour Precipitation (inches) 6 months 0.7 2 years 1.0 25 years 1.8 Computations are attached at the end of this report. Flow Control Flow control will be provided for all new and replaced impervious areas. The infiltration pond was sized to completely dram the volume of the 25 -year storm within 72 hours after the flow to it has stopped. The actual infiltration rate of the soil at the proposed pond site location was not available at the time of report preparation. The design infiltration rate was assumed to be 2 inches per hour which is equal to the infiltration rate of the soil type indicated in the SCS soil survey This value will be confirmed during the final design. Runoff Treatment Runoff treatment will be provided for runoff from the total roadway surface area. Water quality volume was determined using a SCS Type II storm with the 6 -month, 24-hour precipitation. Combined Water Quality and Infiltration Pond The new pond was designed using the guidehnes hsted in the DOE manual for infiltration basin with 3H:1V interior slopes. 2H•1V exterior slope, 1 foot of freeboard, and a volume safety factor of 10 percent. The pond consisted of two cells separated by a berm. The first cell is lined with a low - permeability liner such as compacted till hner, clay hner, or geomembrane finer An overflow structure is provided to bypass the 25 -year flow for the developed condition. The overflow will be conveyed to the existing stormwater system on First Street. An access ramp is provided to the first cell at a maximum grade of 15 percent. Figure 2 shows the preliminary design of the stormwater infiltration pond. Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A-3 January 2003 CONVEYANCE SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND DESIGN General The proposed conveyance system was analyzed and designed in accordance with the guidelines hsted in the DOE manual. The Rational Method was used to compute the 10 -year peak discharge for all pipelines, and the 25 -year peak flow for the pump capacity. Table 2 shows the precipitation coefficients, and Table 3 shows the calculated peak flows. Concrete curbs and gutters will be used in this project. Gutter flows and inlet/catch basin spacing were determined by using the method listed in the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Hydraulic Manual. Each full pipe capacity was evaluated using Manning's Equation. Computations are attached at the end of this report. Table 2. Precipitation Intensity Coefficients Recurrence Interval m n 10 -year 7.37 0.644 25 -year 9.4 0.654 Table 3. Peak Flows Drainage Area 10 -Year Flow 25 -Year Flow (Pump Capacity) Lincoln Ave. 2.63 cfs 3.31 cfs (1.486 gpm) B Street 2 63 cfs 3.31 cfs (1,486 gpm) Front St. 1.63 cfs N/A Figure 3 shows the schematic of the proposed conveyance system. Lincoln Avenue and B Street Runoff will be collected by catch basins at the gutter on both sides of the road On each underpass, the main pipeline will convey the flows to the pump station. Each station will have two pumps that alternate pumping the runoff. This allows for even wear on both pumps and provides for a back-up pump during the maintenance or replacement of one pump. The runoff will be pumped to the new stormwater infiltration pond for water quality and flow control. The proposed site for the pond is the existing Front Street ROW between the two underpasses. Figure 4 shows the typical section of the underpass with the proposed stormwater system. Front Street Runoff from the realigned section of Front Street will be collected at the gutter on both sides of the road and conveyed to the new pond mentioned above Figure 5 shows the typical section of Front Street with the proposed stormwater system. A Street No modifications are proposed to the existing system Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A-4 January 2003 SPECIAL REPORTS AND STUDIES A geotechnical report was completed for this project [see Draft Geotechnical Engineering Report, City of Yakima Grade Separation Project (Shannon & Wilson, Inc., 2001)]. BASIN AND COMMUNITY PLAN AREAS Not apphcable for this project OTHER PERMITS The required permits needed for this project are listed below ■ Grading ■ NPDES EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL DESIGN A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan will be submitted with the final construction plans to the City of Yakima for approval with the construction permit application. Construction phasing will minimize the extent and duration of areas exposed. Mulching and seeding disturbed areas will be done as soon as grading is completed. Filter fabric fences will be installed downslope of all construction areas and sediment traps will be used to protect new and existing catch basins. Runoff from the construction site will be conveyed to the sediment pond for settling before discharge through the existing outfall or will infiltrate into the ground. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS MANUAL A maintenance and operations manual will be prepared for the stormwater facilities as outlined in the DOE manual. The maintenance and operations manual for the pump stations will be prepared according to the manufacturer requirements. Stormwater Site Plan (Lincoln Avenue and B Street) BERGER/ABAMI, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project A-5 January 2003 FIGURES iip 116E slim \\ k \livivio t\t‘****** IL VA01140 Irks toit4000 0000•0*# aitvi% *411111* Ow "0130 0 itarot 0 Oilk 0040 gp IsoN **Ali Ill %lig poi )1111111 18 a�)v‘ 1AI17 PROJECT SITE PK1 M A AVE rE YAKIMA CHEST T ST IIIi � woo YALE.FEE mmi E NO8 1 "'I° L E 29 HILL 8LVD ii 111 1111117 AVE MP 2000 03 T 20 cn— BUTTERFIELD RD CIO BERGER/ABAM Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Site Location Map Figure 1 36' STORWATER INFILTRATION POND N.T.S. SEED, FERTIUZE, AND MULCH GRAVEL FILTER WINDOW EL. 1070 V1 170' CONSTRUCTION GEOTEXTILE FOR PERMANENT EROSION CONTROL (HIGH SURVIVABIUTY,CLASS C) QUARRY SPALLS 3 EL 1069 5' OSECTION SCALE: N.T.S. 1 GRAVEL ACCESS RAMP EL 1070 42' TOP OF FILTER WINDOW 5' CRUSHED SURFACING TOP COURSE 16' THICK BOTTOM OF POND WntV SECTION N.T.S. GRAVEL FILTER WINDOW BERGER/A8AM ENG N E Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Stormwater Infiltration Pond Figure 2 1st Avenue D Street Lincoln Ave cn z B Street Pump Station Proposed flow line — �— Existing flow line V) A Street r BERGER/ABAM ENG N '. -' 5 NC Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Schematic of The Proposed Conveyance System v a� Figure 3 80' ROW 7' SIDEWALK] PEDESTRIAN HANDRAIL 11.5' 12' 12' 1.5' BARRIER 1.5' BARRIER 2' SHY 12' 13.5' 7' SIDEWALK/ BIKE PATH LANE LANE LANE F SERVICE LANE SIDEWALK 1,71/r,�i?��rrmxl� 0 \-STORWATER PIPE CATCH BASIN (TYP) 0 SECTION STORWATER PIPE (TYP ) "B" STREET LOOKING STREET LOOKING EAST LINCOLN AVENUE LOOKING WEST WALL (TYP ) BERGER/ABAM h u N c; P j 1 4 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Underpass Typical Section Figure 4 BERGER/ABAM E h G NEP I h ,. Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project Front Street Typical Section Figure 5 WATERWORKS OUTPUTS INFILTRATION POND DESIGN Project Precipitation [2 yr] [10 yr] [25 yr] [0.5 yr] BasinlD ALL -Infiltration Peak Q (cfs) 10 65 1.00 in 1.50 in 1.80 in 0.70 in WATERWORKS OUTPUTS Peak T (hrs) 12.00 Peak Vol Area (ac -ft) ac 0.7186 5.52 Drainage Area: ALL -Infiltration (for all impervious areas) Hyd Method SCS Unit Hyd Loss Method Peak Factor: 484 00 SCS Abs: Storm Dur Pervious Impervious Total Impervious 24.00 hrs Area 0 0000 ac 5.5200 ac 5.5200 ac CN Data: CN 0.00 98.00 98.00 Impervious TC Data: Flow type. Description. Sheet Shallow Channel 25 yr Flow Time Summary: 10.6454 cfs 12.00 hrs TC 0.00 hrs 0 10 hrs 5 5200 ac Method Raintype Event /Loss SCS/SCS TYPE2 25 yr SCS CN Number 0.20 Length. Slope. Coeff: 24.00ft 2.00% 00110 100.00 ft 0.50% 27.0000 700.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 Volume 31301.09 cf - 0.7186 acft Travel Time 0.69 min 116 min 3.93 min RLPCOMPUTE [pondl-RLP] DETAILED - Pond Water Level (assume bottom of pond at elev. 100) 25 yr event Time 11 01 300.00 0.07 0 07 420 00 0 12 0 12 540 00 0.21 0 17 660 00 0.57 0 17 780 00 0 81 0 17 900 00 0.27 0 17 1020.00 0.20 017 1140.00 0 16 0 17 1260.00 0 12 0 17 1380.00 0 12 0 17 1440.00 0 10 0 17 1500 00 0 00 0 17 1620.00 0 00 0 17 1740 00 0 00 0 17 1860.00 0.00 017 1980.00 0 00 0 17 2100 00 0 00 0 17 2220 00 0 00 0 17 2340 00 0 00 0 17 2460.00 0 00 0 17 2580.00 0 00 0.17 12 0.07 0 12 0.21 0.57 0.81 0.27 0.20 0 16 0 12 0 12 0 10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 2S 0.00 0.00 0.20 3.71 60.84 67.53 69.15 69.25 68.40 67 08 66.40 64.59 60 44 56.28 52.12 47.97 43.81 39.66 35.50 31.35 27 19 Sum I+2S 0 14 0.25 0 63 4 90 62.36 68.08 69.55 69.56 68.64 67.32 66.58 64.59 60 44 56.28 52.12 47.97 43.81 39 66 35.50 31.35 27 19 02S 0.07 0 13 0.45 4 73 62.18 67 91 69.37 69 39 68.47 67 15 66.41 64 42 60.26 56.11 51.95 47.80 43 64 39 48 35.33 31.17 27 02 Elev 100.00 100.00 100.02 100.28 103.20 103 45 103.51 103.51 103.48 103.43 103.41 103.34 103.18 103.02 102.85 102.68 102.50 102.32 102.12 101.92 101.71 2700.00 2820.00 3060.00 3180.00 3300.00 3360.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 00 23.04 18.88 10.57 6.41 2.26 0.18 23.04 18.88 10.57 6.41 2.26 018 0.17 017 0 17 0 17 0.17 0 17 Drain time after flow into pond stopped = (3360-1440)/60 = 32 hours 25 yr Peak Out Q. 0.17 cfs - Peak Stg: 103.52 ft - Active Vol. 0.48 acft Node ID: pond1 Desc. infiltration pond Start El. 100.0000 ft Contrib Basin: Length ss1 ss2 170.0000 ft 3.00h:1v 3.00h.1v Bottom area only with infiltration Control Structure ID: pond - Infiltration Descrip. infiltration Start El Max El 100.0000 ft 105.0000 ft Infil. 2.00 in/hr HydID Peak Q (cfs) outl 0.17 Increment 0.10 Peak T (hrs) 8.33 WATER QUALITY POND DESIGN (FIRST CELL VOLUME) BasinlD Peak Q (cfs) ALL-WQ 2.34 Peak T (hrs) 12.00 Drainage Area: ALL-WQ (for all roadway Hyd Method SCS Unit Hyd Peak Factor 484.00 Storm Dur 24.00 hrs Area CN Pervious 0.0000 ac 0 00 Impervious 3.5000 ac 98.00 Total 3.5000 ac Supporting Data: Impervious CN Data: 98.00 Max El: Contrib Hyd: Width 22.0000 ft Multiplier Peak Vol (ac -ft) 0.7186 Peak Vol Area (ac -ft) ac 0 1433 3.5 areas) Loss Method. SCS Abs. TC 0 00 hrs 0 10 hrs 3 5000 ac 108.0000 ft 22.86 18.71 10 40 6.24 2.08 0.01 ss3 ss4 3.00h•1v 3.00h:1v 1 00 Cont Area (ac) 5.5200 101.49 101.26 100.76 100.48 100 18 100.01 Method Raintype Event /Loss SCS/SCS TYPE2 0.5 yr SCS CN Number 0.20 Impervious TC Data: Flow type: Description. Length: Slope: Coeff: Travel Time Sheet 24.00 ft 2.00% 0.0110 0.69 min Shallow 100.00 ft 0.50% 27.0000 1.16 min Channel 700.00 ft 0.50% 42.0000 3.93 min 0.5 yr Flow Time Volume Summary: 2.3402 cfs 12.00 hrs 6242.71 cf - 0 1433 acft Volume needed = 6,243 cf Bottom pond dimensions: 42' x 22' height: 3.5' slope: 3H:1V Calc. volume = (45+3 5x3) x (22+3.5x3) x 3.5 = 6,313 cf FLOW COMPUTATION FOR CONVEYANCE Flow Computation for Conveyance Rational Method (WSDOT Hydraulic Manual. 1997) T = L/(K4S) I = m/(T 11) Q = CIA For Lincoln Ave./B Street L = 500' K = 1,200 (paved area) S = 0.06 C = 0.9 A = 1.12 acres T = 500/(1,20040.06) = 1.7 min. Let T = 5 min. For 10 -year m = 7.37, n = 0.644 I = 7.37/(5 0.644) = 2.61 Q = 0.9 x 2.61 x 1.12 = 2.63 cfs For 25 -year: m=9.40, n = 0.654 I = 9.401(5 0.654) = 3.28 Q = 0 9 x 3.28 x 1.12 = 3.31 cfs = 1,486 gpm For Front Street L = 700' K = 1,200 (paved area) S = 0.005 C = 0.9 A = 0.96 acre T = 700/(1,20010.005) = 8.25 min. For 10 -year - m= 7.37; n = 0.644 I = 7.37/(8.25 0.644) = 1.89 Q = 0.9 x 1.89 x 0.96 = 1.63 cfs ACCESS MANAGEMENT INVESTIGATION Yakima Railroad Grade Separations Project Submitted to City of Yakima Department of Community and Economic Development Yakima, Washington January 2003 Submitted by BERGER/ABAM Engineers Inc. 33301 Ninth Avenue South, Suite 300 Federal Way, Washington 98003-2600 Job No. A01083 ACCESS MANAGEMENT INVESTIGATION YAKIMA RAILROAD GRADE SEPARATIONS PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 1 GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE AREA 1 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION 3 PROPERTIES AND BUSINESSES IN THE PROJECT AREA 3 PROPERTY AND BUSINESS ACCESS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT 3 POTENTIAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN 3 Design Solutions 3 Construction Phasing 14 Access Modifications 15 BNSF Property 15 Property/Business Acquisitions 16 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Primary Project Influence Area 2 Figure 2 - Final Configuration of Grade Separation Project 4 Figure 3 - Stage 1 Construction - Street Closure 5 Figure 4 - Stage 2 Construction - Street Closures 6 Figure 5 - Stage 3 Construction - Street Closures 7 Figure 6 - Stage 4A Construction - Street Closures 8 Figure 7 - Stage 4B Construction - Street Closures 9 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Property Owners in the Project Area 10 Table 2 - Business/Tenants in the Project Area 11 Table 3 - Properties/Businesses 12 Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B -ii January 2003 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE This access management investigation is being undertaken as part of the right-of-way (ROW) process for the proposed grade separation of Lincoln Avenue and B Street from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway in downtown Yakima. Because numerous properties abut the streets of the project area (see Figure 1) and gain access from those streets, it was determined that it is likely there may be temporary and/or permanent changes in some of the access to properties. The investigation involved contacts with representatives of business and property owners in the project area to gain an understanding of how the project might affect their business/property and what design solutions might work to offset potential changes. The result of one-on-one interviews and questionnaires are summarized below. The investigation document shows the proposed grade separations would generally affect the area businesses and properties access points. GENERAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THE AREA The project area is located immediately west of the commercial core of the City of Yakima and includes the Yakima Historic District and a portion of Fruit Row. The primary project influence area is bounded by Yakima Avenue, First Avenue, D Street, and First Street. Within these boundaries are a mix of uses including multifamily housing, restaurants, fruit warehouses, a lumberyard, correctional facilities, numerous retail and service outlets, offices, outdoor storage, and an active railroad. Approximately 30 of the businesses have 5 or fewer employees, 10 have 6 to 10 employees. 5 have 11 to 20 employees. and 5 have more than 20 employees. There is some draw to tourists by the Historic District primarily in the summer and there is increased seasonal activity (August through November) associated with the fruit industry. First Street is a high volume arterial that provides access to numerous abutting commercial properties. On -street parking along First Street in the project area occurs on all faces except from B Street to Lincoln Avenue. Front Street provides access to abutting businesses and has extensive on -street parking, but carries less volume than First Street. First Avenue serves fruit warehousing activities except in the block between Yakima Avenue and B Street, which also provides access to retail, offices, and a lumberyard. The street has pockets of parking and truck loading/unloading areas throughout the project area. Lincoln Avenue is used both for commercial access and for loading access to associated businesses along Fruit Row (First Avenue). On -street parking is allowed along much to Lincoln Avenue in the project area. B Street provides some commercial access to abutting properties (e.g., lumberyard) and provides access to the Track 29 complex of shops and restaurants. On -street parking is allowed along much of B Street in the project area. The project area does not function as a district or cohesive part of the City due in part to the railroad bisecting it in a north -south direction. Railroad -related uses once occupied the track frontages making use of spur lines for loading/unloading. Use of the spur lines has for the most part been discontinued. Many of the businesses rely on truck access now. Other historical uses have disappeared and have been replaced by tourist -oriented businesses and service -related businesses. Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABA.M, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-1 January 2003 MN N 1 IN N UN M- H MN M NS r EN --- r111111 FIGURE 1: PRIMARY PROJECT INFLUENCE AREA YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY 3f1N3Ad d1Yl)I STATE FARM INSURANCE FOSSEEN'S 0 - SEE TABLE FOR UST OF BUSINESSES/TENAN IL r BLDG 1ST AVENUE YESTERDAYS VILLAGE BLDG O sic mM TRACK 29 MALI. MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK BLDG 0 11ETUESEN LUMBER CO. OJ LA BLDG 0 J.M. PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE BNSF TRAIN DEPOT TRAIN STATEN ©D FRONT ST. 1ST STREET YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL tl YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE YAKIMA COUNTY JAL YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKIMA COUNTY COURIVIODSE 0 m z P1 BLDG BLDG 1ST AVENUE 0 0 SUNDQUIST FRUIT FRUIT WAREHOUSE BLD '1g BLDG 13 APPLIED IND. TECH. I PIZZA HU11 FRONT ST. 0 GOODYEAR 0 GOODYEAR ALLEY Do MEL'S DINER 1ST STREET z7, 100 I SCALE BLDG 100 200 FEET DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposal is to grade separate Lincoln Avenue and B Street from BSNF. These streets would underpass the railroad reconnecting to the local grid at First Avenue and First Street. Front Street would overpass Lincoln Avenue and B Street on a shghtly new alignment. Directional traffic flows and turtling movements would generally be as they are now except that A Street would become two- way and turning movements to/from Front Street would be modified at Lincoln Avenue and B Street (see Figure 2 for final configuration). The project would be constructed over no more than two years with traffic detours and street closures occurring throughout this period. Figures 3 through 7 show the four major stages of construction, the required street closures, and traffic circulation in the area. PROPERTIES AND BUSINESSES IN THE PROJECT AREA Table 1 and Table 2 list the various properties and businesses that are within the project area defined for the proposed railroad grade separation projects. Location of these properties and businesses are shown on Figure 1. These properties have been identified as the ones that will be investigated to ensure access is maintained during construction and after completion of the grade separations. PROPERTY AND BUSINESS ACCESS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT Access points currently in place at properties and for businesses in the project area can be affected during either the construction, after project completion, or both depending on how they relate to or use their street frontages. The affects vary widely and include loss of street and other parking access modifications, freight loading operations, and either increases or decreases in traffic volumes. Table 3 summarizes the potential effects for each property and business in the project area This summary is based on input received from surveys and at interviews with property/business owners and field observations. POTENTIAL ACCESS MANAGEMENT PLAN Design solutions identified to offset these property/business effects fall into four categories• 1) design solutions, 2) construction phasing, 3) access modifications, and 4) property acquisition. Design Solutions Design solutions to the proposed project have been identified that could be incorporated without changing basic project intent. These are as follows. Access to BNSF South of B Street By extending the proposed B Street access road on the north side of Helliesen Lumber an additional 50 to 60 feet easterly, it would be possible to create a parking reservoir behind Helhesen's that could be used to serve Helhesen's once their on -street parking (B Street) is displaced. This would require agreement with BNSF and perhaps Del Matthews Investments, which has a right of use for some of this BNSF parcel. Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-3 January 2003 111111 en M v r I N r N OM r r Si M I OM M OM FIGURE 2: FINAL CONFIGURATION OF GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY STATE FARM INSURANCE FOSSEEN'S BLDG 1ST AVENUE YESTERDAYS VILLAGE • BLDG BLDG HELLIESEN LUMBER CO. TRACK 28 MALL MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK BLDG BLDG J.M PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE BNSF RR BRIDGE BNSF +I} Z rO m BLDG BLDG 1ST AVENUE SUNDOUIST FRUIT BNSF RR BRIDGE FRUIT WAREHOUSE O P1 BLDG TRAIN DEPOT FRONT ST. TRAIN STATION 1ST STREET { v TA FRONT ST BRIDGE S YAKIMA COUNTY JAL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE u { -H J \ YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL /J YAKYA COUNTY { { r { U FRONT ST BRIDGE RE -ALIGNED FRONT ST E)G5TING FRONT ST -4— BLDG .. 1$ It, GOODYEAR I}I� wan II ALLEY MEL'S DINER FRONT 1ST STREET 100 � l rrne 100 200 FTET IBNSF I N- I EN N I NM N 11■r - UN NO r-- ON UN- r FIGURE 3: STAGE 1 CONSTRUCTION - STREET CLOSURE YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY 3fN3AV VVIINVA STATE FARM INSURANCE FOSSEEN'S STAGE 1 (4 MONTHS). 1. MOVE BNSF BUILDING 2. RESTRIPE A ST., B ST, AND UNCOLN AVE. FOR TWO WAY TRAFFIC BETWEEN 1ST ST. AND 1ST AVE. 3. CLOSE UNCOLN ME. BETWEEN FRONT ST AND JUST WEST OF RAILROAD MAINLINE. 4. 6111.1 THE TRAIN SILL ON THE EXISTING MAINLINE, EXCAVATE AND CONSTRUCT FINAL UNDERPASS SECTION JUST EAST OF MAINLINE AT LINCOLN AVE. S. CONSTRUCT THE TEMPORARY RR BRIDGE OVER THE COMPLETED UNDERPASS SECTION. 6. CONSTRUCT TRACKS FOR THE SHOOFLY 7. SHOOFLY THE TRAINS. BLDG II 1ST AVENUE r YESTERDAYS VILLAGE BLDG TRACK 29 MALL MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK BLDG BLDG HELLIESDI LIMBER CO. BLDG J M. PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE RSD llR4ODO , + C Z 0 Z m Z C m BLDG BLDG 1ST AVENUE SUNDOUIST FRUIT FRUIT WAREHOUSE l 21 TRAIN DEPOT TRAIN STATION FRONT ST. LUND BLDG ORIENTAL GARDEN [,'l r BLDG 1ST STREET or YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE .r. YAKIMA COUNTY Jodi YAKIMA COUNTY OFRCES L, 2 TEMPORARY RR BRIDGE AND PERMANENT FRONT ST BRIDGE YAXIMA COUNTY COLIRIHOUSE BLDG AMMO BO. MOIL SHOOFLY STAGE 1 FRONT ST. GOODYEAR GOODYEAR ALLEY D❑ MEL'S DINER A. Y. 1ST STREET ‘1,11. 7 7- 100 0 100 200 SCALE FEET r11111111 r MI IN MN NM r r N ! r NM r MI NS IIIIIIr FIGURE 4: STAGE 2 CONSTRUCTION - STREET CLOSURES YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY a Z C rn STATE FARM INSURANCE FOSSEEN'S • STAGE 2 (6 MONTHSI I CLOSE UNCOLN AVE. BETWEEN 1ST ST. AND 1ST AVE. AND DETOUR TRAFFIC TO B ST. 2. COMPLETE LINCOLN AVE. UNDERPASS. INCLUDING THE RR BRIDGE AT THE EXISTING MAINUNE LOCATION. 1ST AVENUE BLDG BLDG I YESTERDAYS VILLAGE LUMBER CO. BLDG BLDGNEWESEN I I TRACK 29 MALL MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK BLDG 1' 011. J.M. PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE TEMPORARYCESS STAGE 2 BASF BLDG BLDG a 1ST AVENUE SUN0OIAST FRUIT -BNSF RR BRIDGE FRUT WAREHOUSE m BLD TRAIN DEPOT FRONT ST. TRAIN STATION 1ST STREET YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE PJ II YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL I I YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKIMA COUNTY/ COURTHOUSE TEMPORARY RR BRIDGE AND PERMANENT FRONT 5T BRIDGF'-'"Nk- BLDG STAGE 2 SHOOFLY APPIED RID 1E04. 1 PIZZA HU1 1ST STREET 100 SCALE 100 200 FEET - r - - - - - - - - MI MI r - - r M S NM FIGURE 5: STAGE 3 CONSTRUCTION - STREET CLOSURES YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY a rn z STATE MN INSURANCE ,GssEvls STAGE 3 (3 MONTHSI 1. TEMPORARY STRIPE LINCOLN AVE. UNDERPASS FOR TWO WAY TRAFFIC. 2. CLOSE B ST. BETWEEN FRONT ST. AND JUST REST OF RAILROAD MAINLINE AND DETOUR TRAFFIC TO UNCOLJR AVE. 3. KITH THE TRAINS STILL ON THE SHOOFLY. EXCAVATE AND CONSTRUCT THE FINAL UNDERPASS SECTION. INCLUDING THE RR BRIDGE AT THE EXISTING MAINLINE LOCATION AT B ST. 4. RETURN THE TRAINS TO THE EXISTING MAINLNE. 1ST AVENUE BLDG YESTERDAYS VILLAGE g J.M PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE BLDG BLDG NEWESEN LUMBER CO. I I TRACK 29 MALL MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK BLDG II I Y CD BLDG TEMPORARY ACCESS BNSF RR BRIDGE 11 BLDG ELM 1ST AVENUE SUNDOUIST FRUIT FRUIT WAREHOUSE /—BNSF RR BRIDGE IRAN DEPOT 1RAN STATION FRONT ST. 1ST STREET YAKIMA COUNTY JAL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL • YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKIMA COUNTY COURTHOUSE { Y + f LILA I I TEMPORARY RR BRIDGE AND PERMANENT FRONT ST BRIDGE .. y APPLIED IND TECH. I 1I If FRONT ST. • GOODYEAR GOODYEAR ALLEY DINER i 1ST STREET \ {IIIA 1 II 100 SCALE eloa 0 100 200 FEET g J.M PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE R i F-, TEMPORARY ACCESS BNSF RR BRIDGE 11 BLDG ELM 1ST AVENUE SUNDOUIST FRUIT FRUIT WAREHOUSE /—BNSF RR BRIDGE IRAN DEPOT 1RAN STATION FRONT ST. 1ST STREET YAKIMA COUNTY JAL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL • YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKIMA COUNTY COURTHOUSE { Y + f LILA I I TEMPORARY RR BRIDGE AND PERMANENT FRONT ST BRIDGE .. y APPLIED IND TECH. I 1I If FRONT ST. • GOODYEAR GOODYEAR ALLEY DINER i 1ST STREET \ {IIIA 1 II 100 SCALE eloa 0 100 200 FEET 11111 — N r— N N— — UN MN r r N i MN r NS r FIGURE 6: STAGE 4A CONSTRUCTION - STREET CLOSURES YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY 3fIN3AV VYIUIV STATE FARM INSURANCE FOSSEEN'S • STA, 4A (I MONTH). CONSTRUCT THE RE -ALIGNED FRONT ST 1ST AVENUE BLDG BLDG BLDG YESTERDAYS VILLAGE BLDG BLDG HELLESEN LUMBER CO. CO J.M PERRY FRUIT PRODUCE HOWNGBERY & SON. INC. TEMPORARY ACCESS -BNSF RR BRIDGE BNS II I I RN4W BLDG BLDG 1ST AVENUE SUNDOUIST FRUIT FRUIT WAREHOUSE -BNSF RR BRIDGE TRAIN DEPOT TRAIN STATION FRONT ST. BRIDGE FRONT ST. CORDAYS ORIENTAL GARDEN r BLDG • I Y BLDG 1ST STREET A YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL + STAGE 4A EXISTING FRONT ST i Y ''� YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKIMA COUNTY COURTHOUSE BLDG i -STAGE 4A APPLIED IND. TECH PIIIA HU1 1ST STREET D BLOC FRONT J �t 100 L SCALE l 100 200 FEET M M M r r MS- N OM NM N- r--- r -N M FIGURE 7: STAGE 4B CONSTRUCTION - STREET CLOSURES YAKIMA GRADE SEPARATION STUDY 3fN3AV VWINVA STATE FARM INSURANCE F055EEN'S .2BIZALILANtinial 1. CLOSE B ST. AND DETOUR TRAFFIC TO UNCOLN AVE. 2. COMPLETE THE B 5T. UNDERPASS. INCLUDING THE BRIDGE FOR THE RE-AUGNED FRONT ST. 3. RESTRIPE UNCOLN AVE FOR ONE WAY TRAFFIC AND REMOVE DETOURS. BLDG BIDG 1ST AVENUE YESTERDAYS VILLAGE BLDG I ( TRACK 29 MALL MAINLINE RAILROAD TRACK TRAIN DEPOT BLDG BLDG HELLIESEN LUMBER CO. III III 41IIF • BLDG J.M. PERRY FRUT PRODUCE STAGE 48 BNSF RR BRIDGE FRONT ST. BRIDGE TRAIN STATION FRONT ST. CORDAYS l 1ST STREET m I BNSF RE -ALIGNED FRONT ST. BLDG BLDG z 0 0 r s z z SUNDOUIST FRUIT 1ST AVENUE FRUIT WAREHOUSE /-BNSF RR BRIDGE FRONT ST. BRIDGE EXISTING FRONT ST 1 YAKIMA COUNTY JAIL YAKIMA COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT OFFICE STAGE 48 YAKIMA COUNTY OFFICES YAKRIA COUNTY COURTHOUSE BLDG 4. IND. TECH. PIZZA HUT I I 1 ALLEY MELS DINER GOODYEAR 1ST STREET 100 FAX 0 PI FRONT 100 200 SCALE FEET Table 1- Property Owners in the Project Area Property Owner Site Address Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. West side of Front Street to east property line of First Avenue properties Helliesen Lumber and Supply Co. Inc. 102 West B Street Hollingbery Ca and Cold Storage 201 North First Avenue Donald R. et al. (and Bud) Hollingbery 215 North First Avenue Sundquist Fruit and Cold Storage Inc. 301 North First Avenue Yakima Fruit and Cold Storage Co. 132 North First Avenue Gary R. Et Ux Sybouts 301 North First Avenue John F. and Jeneen Puccinelli 314 North First Avenue John F. and Jeneen Puccinelli 326 North First Avenue John F. and Jeneen Puccinelli 328 North First Avenue Pleas J. and Paula J Green 1 East Lincoln Avenue Yakima County Commissioners 200 North First Street Yakima County Commissioners 220 North First Street Yakima County Commissioners 230 North First Street Yakima County Commissioners 200 North Front Street Yakima County Commissioners 205 North Front Street Yakima County Commissioners 207 North Front Street Yakima County Commissioners 124 North First Street Yakima County Commissioners 103 North Front Street Yakima County Commissioners 101 North Front Street John F. and Jeneen Puccinelli 330 North First Street Nancy Ann Camper 3 East Yakima Avenue 5 North Front Street Richard W. Dameyer 31 North Front Street 12 East A Street Nancy Rayner 29 North Front Street John L. Haas Company 109 First Avenue Del Matthews 101 First Avenue Access Management Investigation Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-10 BERGER/ABAM, A01083 January 2003 Table 2 - Business/Tenants in the Project Area Business Owner Doing Business As Map Locator on Figure 1 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co. BNSF 1 Helliesen Lumber and Supply Co Inc. Helliesen Lumber and Supply 2 R. et al. (&Bud) Hollingbery Hollingbery and Son 3 _Donald Brian/Neil McClure Firman Pollen Company. Inc. 4 Sundquist Fruit and Cold Storage Inc. Sundquist Fruit and Cold Storage 5 Yakima Fruit and Cold Storage Co. Yakima Fruit and Cold Storage Co. 6 Gary R. Et Ux Sybouts Lincoln Avenue Car Wash 7 Fred Gomez Jr. Inc. Mets Diner 8 John L. Haas Co. John L. Haas Co. 9 Clark Smith Goodyear Tire Center of Yakima 10 Yakima County Commissioners Yakima County Jail 11. 12. 13 Bail Bond 14 Nancy Camper and Gavla Games -Hopkins Greystone Restaurant 15 Sharon Trick Corday's LTD 16 Jane Feriton The Collector's Niche 17 Donald Wright Wright TV and VCR Repair 18 Richard W. Dameyer Senator Apartments 19 Grant's Brewery Grant's Brewery Pub 20 Ron/Melissa Richter Deli De Pasta Company (Cafe Melange) 21 Adam Castello SC Silver Images 22 Karl Paston The Depot 23 Archie Duncan Cine Northwest 24 Tammy Zerr Salon T'ZERR'S 25 Richard Larsen Rick Larsen Graphic Design 26 Kristen liars Kris's Kids 27 Bob Hargreaves Bob's Keg and Cork Law Offices of Robert Velikanje 28 29 Robert G. Velikanje Loven Stueckle Stueckle Optometrist 30 Adelina Esquivel Immigration and Translation Service 31 Ernest Brussman Ernie's Auto Repair 32 Del Matthews Yesterday's Village 33 Jackie Yunker Jakes Crossing 34 Coralie Greenhow Coralie's Sewing and Alterations Viv's Antiques and Collectables Sage -Fox Home Decor 35 36 37 Vivian Bornier James Sager Frank Yharta Singing the Blues Jewelry 38 Peggy Hiles Country Herbs 39 Rondall Gobson Southern Soul Bar-B-Que Restaurant Dolls in Wonderland 40 41 Lucha G De La Combe Tequila's Restaurant 42 Barbara Hougnen Little Red Caboose 43 Livier Anaya Dasv's Fashion 44 Patricia Christian Country Cottage 45 Tamara Boisselle Discovery Day School 46 Thomas Merkle The Coffee Depot 47 Detail Depot 48 Barbara De Marco Box Car Freddie's Diner 49 Washington State Department of Ecology 50 Department of Agriculture 51 Department of Importation Service 52 Dale Irwin International Therma Form 53 Access Management Investigation Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-11 BERGER/-aBAM, A0108:3 January 2003 Table 3 - Properties/Businesses Business/Property Potential Impact Parking Access Loading Operations Other Notes Burlington Northern Santa Fe New access off of Front Street ■ Helliesen Lumber and Supply Front entrance access changed ■ s Hollingbery and Son Loading dock removed/relocated, access to mechanical equipment via BNSF ■ • Firman Pollen Company, Inc. Mostly walk-in hand carried loading Sundquist Fruit and Cold Storage May limit loading along Lincoln Avenue ■ ■ • Yakima Fruit and Cold Storage Co. Lincoln Avenue Car Wash Business relocation and property acquisition proposed Mel's Diner Larger delivery trucks will lose direct alley access from Lincoln Avenue John L. Haas Goodyear Tire Center of Yakima Property acquisition and business relocation assistance proposed Yakima County Jail ■ ■ Greystone Building OGreystone Restaurant OCordav's LTD OThe Collector's Niche Access pattern will change • Wright TV and VCR Repair . Senator Apartments . • Grant's Brewery Pub Leased parking lot reduced in size with relocated Front Street • • Deli De Pasta Company (Cafe Melange) Access pattern will change • SC Silver Images Access pattern will change • The Depot t I Access pattern will change I • Access/Operations ' Minor • Modified Existing • New Access/Parking/Operation Access Management Investigation Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project BERGER/ABAM, A01083 B-12 January 2003 Business/Property Potential Impact Notes Parking Access Loading Operations Other Old City Hall/Opera Building OCine Northwest °Salon T'Zerr's Rick Larsen Graphic Design °Kris' Kids ()Bob's Keg and Cork °Law Offices of Robert Velikanje OStueckle Optometrist Access pattern will change I. Immigration and Translation Service Access pattern will change • Ernie's Auto Repair Access pattern will change • Yesterday's Village Access to/from parking lot will be altered • Track 29 'Jakes Crossing )Coralie's Sewing and Alterations )Viv's Antiques and Collectables OSage-Fox Home Decor °Singing the Blue Jewelry °Country Herbs )Southern Soul Bar-B-Que Restaurant )Dolls in Wonderland °Tequila's Restaurant )Little Red Caboose ODasv's Fashions °Country Cottage Access to/from parking lot will be altered • Discovery Day School Access pattern will change ■ The Coffee Depot Access pattern will change 0 Detail Depot Access pattern will change ■ Box Car Freddie's Diner Access to/from parking lot will change • Department of Ecology Access to/from parking lot will be altered 13 Department of Agriculture Access pattern will change a Department of Importation Service Access pattern will change • International Therma Form 0 Minor Modified Existing Access/Operations ❑� New Access/Parking/Operation Access Management Investigation Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-13 BERGER/ABAM, A01083 January 2003 Sundquist Loading Area Sundquist Fruit would be able to continue making use of their loading dock on Lincoln Avenue if the proposed access road and sidewalk from BNSF land out to First Avenue at Lincoln Avenue were constructed without a curb- or any street furniture or landscaping. Sundquist currently makes use of the curb lane and sidewalk for loading. An access agreement may need to be developed with BNSF. Coordination and agreements with Washington Fruit Company may be necessary to allow access to and the use of the new access road. Front Street Urban Design Master Plan The continuity and stability of the Yakima Historic Area could be enhanced by development and execution of an urban design master plan for Front Street from Yakima Avenue to B Street. Such a plan would help establish the area as a unified and inviting area. The plan could address a variety of elements including street trees, street furniture, new street pavement, subsurface utilities replacement, parking, signage, landscaping, and lighting. It would be directed at creating a sense of place that ties the abutting properties into a visually cohesiveness setting. The initial step would be the development and adoption of a plan that meets the needs of property owners, businesses, the City, County, and historical interests. This would be coupled to identification and pursuit of funding for its construction as a supplement to the proposed grade separation projects. Grant's Brewery Pub Grant's currently leases from BNSF the parking lot north of their pub for patron parking. A portion of this parking lot will be displaced during construction and over the long term for the new ahgnment of Front Street. This loss of parking would likely be offset by the improved street section. Construction Phasing Detour Planning Traffic modeling shows that there is the potential that traffic diverted from B Street or Lincoln Avenue during construction would make use of First Avenue between Yakima Avenue and D Street. This may be acceptable for a portion of the year. However, during fall harvest (August for hops and September through mid-November for apples and pears) and to a lesser extent from fall harvest to ship out (late January), First Avenue (Fruit Row) is a working street with tractor/trailer rigs moving in and out of the area. These rigs double park to offload and be serviced by forklifts accessing adjacent loading docks. The addition of any vehicles into this situation would be both unsafe and problematic for the warehouse operations. A detour plan that positively estabhshes an additional alternate route to First Avenue should be pursued. This could include continuing the two-way use of B Street or Lincoln Avenue to Third Avenue during construction to lessen the desire to use First Avenue. First Avenue does need to remain open for local access and to accept truck traffic throughout the year. Information Another traffic maintenance tool the project could promote would be the publication, distribution, and web page posting of route maps for customers, truckers, and delivery vehicles wanting access to the project area. These would be produced to match each construction phase and would provide a range of information on open streets. turn restrictions, and parking availability. This would assist those needing access to the area to plan their trip and avoid delays and conflicts. These notices would list specific businesses that are open for business in the area next to the construction. A comprehensive on-site signage program would need to be maintained to further assist those needing access to or around the area. Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-14 January 2003 Access Modifications Helliesen's Lumber In addition to assisting with developing an alternative parking strategy. it may be necessary to modify the actual front entrance to the business which now opens onto B Street. With the proposed project, the existing business entrance would open out onto the short access road that abuts the new underpass and would have no available street parking. By relocating the entrance to First Avenue (or perhaps to the east side in conjunction with new parking on BNSF land), a positive connection would be established between customer parking and access into this business. Hollingbery and Son To compensate for the displacement of the Hollingbery hops packaging building loading ramp on Lincoln Avenue, it would be necessary to revise access to the building. This could be done by modifying the building frontage on First Avenue to provide a replacement loading ramp and door, and interior modifications to provide proper circulation. BNSF Property BNSF Land Locked Parcel The BNSF land located west of the mainline tracks and between B Street and Lincoln Avenue would become landlocked with the proposed underpass project. An agreement would need to be made with BNSF to provide a curb cut on Front Street and gated access across this mainline track to this land west of the track. Hollingbery Fruit Storage Mechanical Access The Hollingbery Fruit Storage building in the northeast corner of First Avenue and B Street has mechanical equipment housed on the exterior face of the eastern side of the building. Service and/or replacement of this equipment can only be accomphshed from BNSF property or by crane from the proposed B Street. With the proposed underpass project, this parcel of BNSF land will lose street access to either B Street or Lincoln Avenue. A long-term agreement will need to be made with BNSF to allow the occasional access to the backside of the Hollingbery building over BNSF tracks from Front Street. Helliesen Lumber Parking An agreement would need to be made with BNSF to allow parking on their land that abuts Helhesen Lumber. This parking would be accessed from the new at -grade portion of B Street that connects First Avenue with BNSF property west of the mainline tracks This parking area would be feasible with minor changes in the proposed project. Track 29 Parking Access The parking area associated with Track 29 and other businesses leasing space from BNSF between Yakima Avenue and B Street on the west side of the mainline will be changed with the proposed underpass project. Traffic can still access this area from a B Street frontage road: however, traffic will no longer be able to access B Street. All traffic with the Track 29 business area would need to exit via Yakima Avenue. It is possible to provide additional egress by purchasing an access easement out to First Avenue on a portion of the open lot between Helliesen's Lumber and the vacant Yakima Fruit warehouse to the south or through the vacated A Street alignment. Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-15 January 2003 Property/Business Acquisitions Lincoln Car Wash (ARCO) Access disruption to the Lincoln Car Wash business is projected to cause a major loss of business. No options have been identified to offset this potential loss. It appears necessary to acquire this business and the property. The property would have long-term value for a new tenant and with redevelopment of the property. Good Year Tire Center of Yakima This facility will experience loss of access to the extent it currently exists. ' Unless access can be provided directly to First Street (along with signage), this business and property will likely see a decrease in revenues and value. It appears necessary to acquire this property and provide relocation assistance to this business. The property would have long-term value for a new tenant not requiring the existing access. BNSF Land East of Mainline between, Lincoln Avenue and D Street A portion of property will be necessary for the permanent realignment of Front Street. It is currently leased out for pallet and bin rebuilding by Washington Fruit Storage The utility of the remaining site would remain. Access Management Investigation BERGER/ABAM, A01083 Yakima Railroad Grade Separation Project B-16 January 2003 1 City of Yakima 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 > A04016 Railroad Grade Separations Overview of Completed Planning Phase March 2004 1 r. T,—�-, 1 4 rill a • • • 1111 - .r i` i soot I`r it � � .I ..st. D Street ••1111 VIMISIli _: Lincoln Ave. 1 `. 27100 \ 0.-, ra `�� Existing Walnut Street Underpass .. 'r 8 „,,,., ....... flrkfr'ri� .... A, ; i - \ 'A 1 �• �.-104. ti '� '` 'y. V -. - : L'� , V` , `, l.: �R11II1 11S o:€1 .I ; 1 r l I lel1'.., 4. 1- 1 ki 1 . u l �JH 1 ( 1 Existing Nob Blvd. Overpass Hill ' I I L� = 1j I 1� 1 F . , � 1 1�I � ,I a �, 1 9 - � II i �� Mead Ave. . a ii� 1. 1' I. ,I i:. I Fi 'I d i o<ao -Allf III r Ir Ji i 1 . 1 ` . 1 , __—Y _LL Washin.ton Ave. ' ■ � 1-1 ,rAI= i oPORM__ =LIE March 2004 1 Problem Definiton Roadway Traffic Average traffic delay of 10 minutes per crossing per train. Railroad Traffic Average train delay of 20 minutes per train due to reduced speeds in Yakima. Trains 4 to 6 through trains per day at present. 12 to 14 through trains per day at present capacity. 22 to 24 through trains per day at future capacity with Stampede Pass tunnel and other line improvements. A0-1011, Safety • At -grade railroad crossings have caused accidents and one fatality in recent years. Road blockages delay emergency response. Air Pollution • Idling traffic waiting for trains results in increased carbon monoxide levels. A04016 Project Development Process City staff and consultant team met regularly with three committees: Citizen's Advisory Group (CAG) - Representatives from local businesses, City Council, and the Mayor Project Guidance Team (PGT) - Representatives from the major funding partners for the project Interdisciplinary Team (IDT) - Technical experts to assess engineering, economic, and environmental issues A04016 Continuous Public Outreach Public meetings (2) Newsletters (2) City Council study sessions (3) Media briefings Web page Individual meetings with affected property owners Environmental Review • The project has been classified as an environmental assessment by FHWA and the City of Yakima. A0.101 Fi 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 Yakima Railroad Crossings 9 Total 7 At -Grade 2 Grade Separated Plan for Grade Separating At -Grade Crossings • 2 Overpasses (Washington and Mead) 4 Underpasses (Yakima, B, Lincoln, and 1) 1 Closure (D) Priority Central Business District Heaviest Traffic Most Economic Benefit Phase I B Street and Lincoln Avenue Underpasses City of Yakima Railroad Grade Separations 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 Project Status TASK 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Preliminary Engineering Environmental Documentation Final Design Permitting ROW Acquisition - Bid and Award Construction `-'41- Current Date 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 Project Funding ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $24,963,339 Committed Funding State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) *$7,000,000 City of Yakima $1,500,000 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) $9,518,000 Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) $436,000 State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) TBD BNSF Railway $1,500,000 TOTAL COMMITTED FUNDING $19,954,000 ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED $5,009,339 *Committed but Unfunded 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City of Yakima B Street and Lincoln Avenue Railroad Grade Separation Project Preconstruction Aerial View 1'1'i�3 �1!I �I �h d,41,Nifit BNSF Tracks 1 1 1 1 P04016 10 City of Yakima B Street and Lincoln Avenue Railroad Grade Separation Project Postconstruction Aerial View A04016 Public Involvement Process Activities to Date CAG, PGT, and IDT Monthly Meetings • February 2001 to December 2001 Media Briefings • May 22, 2001 City Council Study Sessions • September 18, 2001 • March 19, 2002 • March 4, 2003 • February 17, 2004 Newsletters • October 2001 • March 2002 Open Houses • October 25, 2001 • April 4, 2002 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 Public Involvement Process Activities to Date (continued) Focused Meeting$ Front Street Merchants and Del Matthews May 2001 and February 27, 2002 Fruit Row Owners and Operators September 14, 2001 and October 29, 2001 Chamber of Commerce October 8, 2001 League of Women Voters April 24, 2002 Business Questionnaire • July -August 2002 One -on -One Business/Property Owner Interviews July -August 2002 Funding Related Meetings with Business Community Representatives • Senator Murray's Aides - February 21, 2002 Senator Murray - April 2002 Senator Horn - September 3, 2003 Public Involvement Process Planned Future Activities Reestablish CAG, PGT, and IDT Meetings April 2004 ongoing Newsletter May 2004 Open House (following release of Phase II of the Economic Analysis) • May/June 2004 Newsletter • September 2004 Open House (following release of the Environmental Assessment) September/October 2004 Newsletter • September 2005 Open House (when project is fully funded for construction, right-of-way process is completed, and construction plans and specifications are ready to go to bid) • September/October 2005 Door -to -Door Construction Notices • Throughout Construction January 2006 to December 2007 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 One -on -One Property/Business Owner Interviews (July -August 2002) Business/Property Heltiesen Lumber ARCO/Lincoln Car Wash Firman Pollen Mel's Diner Hollingberry Et Son John L. Hass, Inc. Sundquist Fruit 27 Ft 29 North Front Street Track 29 Mall Greystone Restaurant/Corday's Goodyear Tequila's Restaurant Bob's Keg Et Cork Washington Fruit" Yakima Fruit The Depot Grant's Brewery* Individual(s) Interviewed Nancy Adams, Harry Helliesen, Jamie Carmody Steve Sybouts Gary Jordan John Puccinelli, Fred Gomez, Jr. Bud Hollingberry Bob Mondor, Peter Mahony Steve Sundquist Nancy Rayner Del Matthews Gayla Games -Hopkins, Nancy Camper, Corday Trick Clark Smith, John Evans, Pleas and Paula Green Lucha G. and Jasmine De La Combe Bob Hargreaves, Nancy Rayner Tommy Hanses Andy Patterson, Michael Wilcox Karl Paston Paul Brown Everyone on list received a business quesionnaire. Those marked with an * returned completed questionnaire to the City. 1 1 A04016 15 1 1 1 i Environmental Documentation Process 1 1 Classification 1 Process 1 Content • Economic Analysis I • Natural Environment 1 • Cultural Resources 1 FONSI 1 Permits 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 Economic Analysis Phase 1 - Access Phase 11 - Traffic Flow Analysis Phase 111 - Impacts? 17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A04016 The Right -of -Way Acquisition Process • The `Uniform Act" - Minimum Standards and Rules • Street Design and Right -of -Way Plans • The Acquistion Process Begins The Acquisition Process • Preparing an Appraisal • Reviewing and Approving the Appraisal • Acquisition What is Compensated? • Value of Land/Improvements • Business Displacement Costs Moving and Associated Expenses Reestablishment Expenses Search for New Location A04016 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 City of Yakima B Street and Lincoln Avenue Railroad Grade Separations Fall 2003 Project Update Project Description The City of Yakima has seven at -grade railroad crossings and only two grade -separated crossings. During 2001 and 2002, preliminary planning and engineering studies were conducted to determine the feasibility of grade separating the seven at -grade crossings and to determine which one(s) to grade separate first. The result of these studies was that grade separations were feasible at all seven locations and that grade separating B Street and Lincoln Avenue together was the most cost-effective initial project. As part of this project, bridges will also be built for Front Street to cross the underpasses, maintaining Front Street as a through street. Summary of Benefits • Reduce traffic delays within Central Business District • Reduce trucking delays for adjacent fruit distribution warehouses • Reduce traffic accidents related to the at -grade crossings • Improves railroad safety • Eliminate road blockage delays for emergency vehicles • Decrease air pollution from idling vehicles Artist's Rendering of 8 Street and Lincoln Avenue Underpasses Project Status TASK 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Preliminary Engineering $9,518,000 Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) $436,000 State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) TBD BNSF Railway $1,500,000 TOTAL COMMITTED FUNDING $19,954,000 ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED Environmental Documentation i Final Design : Permitting : ROW Acquisition Bid and Award . Construction, Funding Status Funding has been identified and committed from the following sources: FMSIB, the City of Yakima, FHWA, HUD, and BNSF. In addition, TIB has expressed the intent to contribute funds, but has not committed them yet. The estimated total project cost of $24,963,339 still needs over $6 million to be fully funded. :f—Current Date Preliminary engineering and environmental studies have been completed. The Yakima City Council has approved funds to complete final design, environmental documentation, and ROW acqusition. The project has been classified as an environmental assessment by FHWA and the City. If the project is fully funded, the two-year construction period could begin in early 2006. ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $24,963,339 Committed Funding State Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) * $7,000,000 City of Yakima $1,500,000 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) $9,518,000 Federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) $436,000 State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) TBD BNSF Railway $1,500,000 TOTAL COMMITTED FUNDING $19,954,000 ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED $5,009,339 * Committed but Unfunded 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Yakima Railroad Grade Separations Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Costs 30% Estimate 2/13/04 Construction Items TOTAL B Street Underpass Lincoln Avenue Underpass Front Street Realignment Railroad Shoofly MOBILIZATION $848,256 $374,790 $374,790 $39,937 $58,739 PREPARATION $183,500 $71,000 $71,000 $37,500 $4,000 GRADING $1,049,681 $478,630 $478,630 $32,400 $60,021 STORM WATER SYSTEM $812,080 $353,320 $353,320 $105,440 $0 SANITARY SEWER $202,640 $101,320 $101,320 $0 $0 WATER LINES $313,160 $150,330 $150,330 $12,500 $0 WALLS $6,260,100 $3,130,050 $3,130,050 $0 $0 BOTTOM SEAL $4,599,500 $2,299,750 $2,299,750 $0 $0 BRIDGES $1,213,800 $303,450 $303,450 $303,450 $303,-150 SURFACING $79,350 $31,050 $31,050 $17,250 $0 ASPHALT CONCRETI- PAVEMENT $264,600 $103,500 $103,500 $57,600 $0 EROSION CONTROL AND PLANTING 5154,000 $70,000 $70,000 $14,000 $0 TRAFFIC $623,772 $249,440 $249,440 $124,892 $0 OTHER ITEMS $401,600 $153,950 $153,950 $93,700 $0 RAILROAD WORK $807,300 $0 $0 $0 $807,300 Subtotal $17,813,339 $7,870,580 $7,870,580 $838,669 $1,233,510 Estimating Contingency $2,000,000 $800,000 $800,000 $150,000 $250,000 Estimated Bid Price $19,813,339 $8,670,580 $8,670,580 $988,669 $1,483,510 Construction Contingency 52,000,000 $800,000 $800,000 $150,000 $250,000 Estimated Construction Costs $21,813,339 $9,470,580 $9,470,580 $1,138,669 $1,733,510 Estimated ROW Costs Estimated Design Engineering Cost Estimated Construction Engineering Cost $800,000 $1,350,000 $1,000,000 $0 $600,000 $450,000 $500,000 $600,000 $450,000 $300,000 $50,000 $40,000 $0 $100,000 $60,000 ESTIMATED TOTAL PROJECT COST $24,963,339 $10,520,580 $11,020,580 $1,528,669 $1,893,510 * Committed, but unfunded Committed Funding FREIGHT MOBILITY STRATEGIC INVESTMENT BOARD * $7,000,000 CITY OF YAKIMA $1,500,000 FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION $9,518,000 FEDERAL HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD) $436,000 STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD (TIB) TBI) BNSF RAILROAD $1,500,000 TOTAL COMMITTED FUNDING 519,954,000 ADDITIONAL FUNDING REQUIRED $5,009,339 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Problem Definiton Roadway Traffic Average traffic delay of 10 minutes per crossing per train. Railroad Traffic • Average train delay of 20 minutes per train due to reduced speeds in Yakima. Trains • 4 to 6 through trains per day at present. 12 to 14 through trains per day at present capacity. 22 to 24 through trains per day at future capacity with Stampede Pass tunnel and other line improvements. A04016 2