Work Plan - Final - Maricopa County Department of Transportation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Schedule,• Study area boundary,• Study purpose and objectives,• Study process and approach used to meet objectives,• Data collection plan,• Design standards and guidelines, (per; MCDOT standards regarding accessprinciples, Arizona Parkway Guidelines, geometry, etc.)• Stakeholder database,• Key issues and challenges,• Detailed study tasks,• Criteria for the evaluation of alternatives,• Scoping report summary, (as an attachment from RHA)• Written quality assurance/quality control plan – including:o Checklists of items to be reviewed prior to each County submittal(including sub-consultant prepared materials),o Monthly quality progress reports,o Procedures for conducting QA/QC activities,o Person(s) responsible for QA/QC activities,o Sub consultant coordination and communication plan.1.2. Existing and Future Corridor Features AnalysisProduct: Technical Memorandum #1 – Existing and Future Corridor Features (includingaerial maps illustrating the base conditions/constraints)The Consultant will collect, analyze, map, and document (including dates) existing datarelevant to the corridor feasibility study area. Both corridor characteristics and roadwayconditions will need to be assessed. The Consultant shall also obtain, and utilize asappropriate, existing information/documentation from recent/relevant studies such as: I-10/Hassayampa Valley Roadway Framework Study, Town of Buckeye General Plans,Area Drainage Master Plans (ADMPs), Developer Master Plan Circulation Elements,available master plan circulation documents, and other recent reports/analysis tosupplement this collection effort. All information and analysis will be documented in theExisting and Future Corridor Features Technical Memorandum #1.At a minimum, the following features will be included in this section:1.2.1. Physical Features (natural and human made) of Study Area such as:• Drainage features (floodplains, washes, rivers and alluvial fans) and structures(channels, dikes, bridges, dams),• Irrigation canals,
• Topography from existing sources,• Facilities (airfields, power plants, waste water plants etc.),• Existing and planned utilities (above/below ground) – including:o Identification and mapping of major existing and planned utilities(including private wells) and utility owners within the corridoro Identification and documentation of potential conflicts between utilitiesand future corridor improvements,• Recreation trails, parks/areas, greenup areas, and clear zones.1.2.2. Existing Corridor Roadway Conditions – Using existing available data, theConsultant will document the existing roadways including alignment, ADT,roadway width, lanes, surface type, existing pavement condition ratings, yearconstructed, horizontal/vertical alignment, intersection configurations, trafficcontrol, and right-of-way.1.2.3. Existing Approved Access Conditions and Policies/Guidelines that address:• Land access – driveways,• Median openings and intersections/interchanges.1.2.4. Existing and Future Roadway Network Information within the study area,including at a minimum:• Future functional classification to be used is an Arizona Parkway,• MCDOT will provide Parkway configurations,• Road improvements programmed as under design or under construction,• Transportation networks, circulation elements, and site plans fromDMPs/CMP’s, General Plans, MCDOT plans/studies, and other regional/areastudies as available,• If applicable, traffic reports and impact studies conducted by land developersshould be reviewed,• Travel demand 2030 and build-out projections from the I-10/HassayampaValley Roadway Framework Study (use for implementation plan or phasingplan only). The Consultant will request modeling results from MCDOT andMCDOT will work closely with MAG through the formal request process toacquire modeling results from their regional travel demand model and providethis information to the Consultant. No additional traffic modeling or analysisis required.1.2.5. Land Use, Jurisdictional Control, Ownership, and Managementincluding at a minimum:• Property boundaries from County Assessor’s maps, the Town of Buckeye, andother jurisdictional agencies,• Existing land use and ownership including:
Page 1 and 2: Hidden Waters Parkway NorthCorridor
Page 3 and 4: AbbreviationsArizona Department of
Page 5 and 6: 2.0 Study Area Definition/Project U
Page 7 and 8: 3.0 Key IssuesThe intent of this st
Page 9 and 10: 3.2 DrainageThe Hidden Waters Corri
Page 11 and 12: 5.0 Study Process and ApproachThe H
Page 13 and 14: Figure 5-2 Project ScheduleHidden W
Page 15 and 16: Arizona Parkway Intersection/Interc
Page 17 and 18: 8.0 Criteria for Evaluation of Alte
Page 19 and 20: xHiddenWaters Parkway: Interstate 1
Page 21 and 22: xAttendeesHidden Waters Parkway: In
Page 23 and 24: x444AgendaHidden Waters Parkway:Int
Page 25 and 26: xHiddenProject GoalsWaters Parkway:
Page 27 and 28: xHiddenTechnical Advisory Committee
Page 29 and 30: x111Scope of WorkHidden Waters Park
Page 31 and 32: ContentsStudy Overview ............
Page 33: the first step in the development p
Page 37 and 38: Product: Technical Memorandum #2 -
Page 39 and 40: o CAP drainage studies that address
Page 41 and 42: 3.1. Technical Advisory Committee (
Page 43 and 44: o Douglas Rancho Toyota Proving Gro
Page 45 and 46: • Study Purpose/Need,• Study Go
Page 47 and 48: The Consultant will prepare the cor
Page 49 and 50: x222Project NotesProject Budget:$50
Page 51 and 52: Type First Name Last Name Title Com
Page 53 and 54: HIDDEN WATERS PARKWAY CFS: QUALITY
Page 55 and 56: verification of verbal conversation
Page 57: □ Preferred Alignmento Standard c

Work Plan - Final - Maricopa County Department of Transportation

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?