Design versus Planning

Design versus Planning

Presented by: Bill Kenny, Director, Highway Design, Project Management and Training Section, Technical Standard Branch

What is the difference between Design and Planning?

• Objectives – purpose

• Time Frame

• Design Parameters

• Tools

• Output - documentation

Case Study – Bergthal Road Interchange on Highway 2.

Didsbury

Carstairs

Bergthal Road

Red Deer

Calgary

Functional Planning Study

• 2008, a FPS by consultant at the proposed interchange location;

• Highway 2 – between Calgary and Edmonton, freeway standard;

• Projected AADT – in the year of 2026

Hwy 2

Bergthal Road

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Northbound

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Southbound

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Westbound

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Eastbound

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Ultimate stage layout and ramp terminal intersection layout – WSB&ENB LT bays on Bergthal Road;

Functional Planning Study (Con’t)

Cost Estimates:

• Stage 1 – Flyover: $28.6 million;

• Stage 2 – Diamond: additional $12.2 million, and

• Ultimate Stage – Parclo A: additional $15.6 million

• In total – CAD $56.4 million in 2007 dollars

AT Detailed Design

•Based on the projected AADT, simple diamond interchange works well after 20 years. Stop-controlled intersections at ramp terminals.

•In the long term, dumbbell interchange with 2-lane roundabout at each ramp terminal.

AT Detailed Design (Con’t)

• Narrow the structure width;

• Purchase enough land to accommodate the future dumbbell interchange footprint;

• Roundabouts are safer if signals are required in the long term

AT Detailed Design (Con’t)

Construction cost estimate:

• Common excavation: 381,000 m3;

• Borrow excavation: 794,000 m3;

• GBC: 86,000 t;

• ACP: 35,000 t;

• Total cost: 22 millions in 2011 CAD, compared to the FPS 28.6 millions for the flyover in stage one; 40.8 millions for the simple diamond interchange; and 56.4 millions for the Parclo “A” interchange

AT Detailed Design (Con’t)

QUESTIONS?

Basic layout and land acquisition protects for future

growth.

Lesson Learned

• Plan and Design according to the travel demand;

• Design must meet current Design Guidelines;

• Apply Economic Analysis principles to design;

• Negotiate/agree with landowners at Planning stage;

• Do more detailed geotechnical study at Planning stage to avoid long distance borrow sites.

Highway 63 Twinning- differences between planning and design

Due to low AADT and budget constraint

•Defer service roads

•Allow direct access temporarily

•Eliminate cross-overs

•Eliminate intersection treatments for single use accesses

•Minimize realignment to reduce utility relocations

•Reduce roadway width

Proposed width at time of construction = 12.4m

Width after one 80 mm overlay

Conclusion

• Designers need to re-examine findings in planning study.

• Look for efficiencies while preserving: safety,

functionality and

flexibility for unpredictable future developments.

Questions?