Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Design Report Addendum No.2 <br />4.5 ROUTE RECOMMENDATION <br />For each alternative, basic data, including but not limited to, aerial photography, utility data, property <br />maps, wetlands, and long -range planning were evaluated and supplemented with field reconnaissance. <br />Two preferred alternative routes were identified and further evaluated below. The two preferred route <br />corridors were selected to be the least - disruptive, safest, and most cost - effective alignment for each route <br />of the alternative alignments. <br />4.5.1 Preferred Alternative Routes <br />Preferred Route —Route No. 3 <br />Below is a list of the estimated total quantities for preferred Route 3: <br />• 1,900 LF <br />• One easement to be acquired <br />• Two special crossings <br />• Irvine and Elden Pump Stations upgrade (cost not included) <br />Preferred Route — Route No. 5 <br />Below is a list of the estimated total quantities for Preferred Route 5: <br />• 7,566 LF <br />• One easement to be acquired <br />• Three special crossings <br />4.5.2 Estimated Route Cost <br />The overall estimated construction cost for the two preferred alternative routes are as follows: <br />Preferred Route 3 $861,000 <br />Preferred Route 5 $2,060,000 <br />Preferred Route 3 has the lowest construction cost. <br />4.5.3 Recommended Route <br />Based on the comprehensive evaluation presented herein, Preferred Route 3 and 5 arethe recommended <br />routes. <br />URS 28 <br />25F -160 <br />