TRANSPORTAT 10N LIBRARY sº gº ºf ſº º sº tº º º * *, *, º - º º, I # º gº º i 3. | *". S. º i Hº Jº W º º, º - N. ‘. . ] ſº .. ) is Yº Hº is . . . ; *N & * , : ". : …" } º 5. Nº ºr º, . ; ; ; § || || º! ; ; ; ; º * * * º. Nº ºf j : ºf HR.N. ; (I|| |N|S|(ON N. : " : (RN/ \// |/ || || T. º Sw }/ ſ ſ ſ \!\!/. . º " - [] N ſ | || "a º " • ſº t ſ º W f : . § * f. -º ºf .º. ºf S g sº g St º, ſº ſ yº , iſ \º 2 \, | ( »l º º º \s [. • ‘V . ," * 3 *.. s-º d ſ: : 9 º' N º º J Ú - 3 * * * * * * A. , [ - * . . . . . , . . . No || , 1,2 z - - ſº | A sº ſº wº * -º d . . . . , \ , " . . . . - ſº | | || “... N. : * * | ſº ſº A tº A's * & a D) & i i , ; ; ; , ; , . & 2 × t iſ . . . . . . . N. . kºl Nº. º) || || 2 |\{ ºff ( ) | , , § ) | * * ſ: º * , , , ſº, , § W ſ * . y N * b A *Y. A , , , , ; , , ; ; , , s . . . . . ;h ºf . , N. 's "h li "Zººlſ Y. * . l, º, . . . . " º, , , º, . . . . .';tº ſº. - § 3. . . .” . . . . . . . . . ºf ſº , ſ º " " . " tº w At ..) . . . . " i i"" ; THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN LIBRARIES - "…flºº; ºf #2.É. ! . "jºyºtº, At | A- # |a º / ENGINEERING REPORT WESTERN EXTENSION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA, TURNPIKE n Tax Prepared for THE PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE COMMISSION VOLUME | By J. E. GREINER COMPANY onsulting Engineers AUGUST 1949 $3&ſtºpotis sº # tº sº; H. E. 235 (o , P4 an *ex w." CONMMONVEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA GOVERNOR Honorable James H. Duff PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE CONAMISSION Thomas J. Evans. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chairman James F. Torrance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secretary and Treasurer Edward N. Jones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commissioner James J. Coyne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Commissioner Ray F. Smock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Secretary of Highways (Ex officio) Roger B. Stone, Chief Engineer . . . . Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Edward L. Schmidt, Chief Engineer . . . . Department of Highways ‘... ; ‘....) A_2'ſ \) - ſº ry 2 RuOS-73 - 3.3% , : - - \ t * ...", • . . . * S t • * ..) A . . . . . .2% ſ. A } } . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Letter of Transmittal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Frontispiece—Location Map of Pennsylvania Turnpike System The Report Development of Turnpike System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Description of Western Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Advantages of Turnpike System over other Routes. . . . . . . . 9 Engineering Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |O Right-of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 5 Roadway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 7 Drainage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 9 Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Interchanges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Maintenance Buildings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Service Stations and Restaurants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Relocation of Public Utilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Construction ſtems and Unit Prices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Estimated Cost of the Project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Maintenance and Operating Expenses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Progress Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Appendix A Appraisers' Report on Right-of-Way . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Appendix B Design Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 List of Charts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 9, 8.9Meinen &mpany C O N S ULT I N G E N G | N E E R S 1201 S.T. PA U L S T R E E T B A L T | M O R E 2, M D. August 19, 1949 Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission ll North Fourth Street, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Gentlemen: We present herewith our Engineering Report for the Western Extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Results of our engineering studies indicate that there are no physical barriers that preclude the development of this extension substantially along the horizontal alignment and in accordance with the vertical grades that we have shown on the plates that constitute Volume 2 of this Report. The alignment, as shown has been adopted by the Pennsylvania. Turnpike Commission and approved by the Governor and the Department of Highways. The estimated total cost of the Project, exclusive of interest during construction and financing costs, is $70,500,000. The annual maintenance and operating expenses including payments to reserve funds are fully developed in the body of the Report. The progress schedule contemplates that the Western Extension will be completed and opened to traffic on January l, 1952. Very truly yours, J. E. GREINER COMPANY , ºzºzee. H. H. Allen b HHA: alk ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgement is herewith given in appreciation to all of those individuals and organizations whose valuable assistance and cooperation contributed to the prep- aration of this report. The J. E. Greiner Company extends sincere thanks and appreciation for the help- ful guidance of the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and its staff. To the Department of Highways and the Water and Power Resources Board, Com- monwealth of Pennsylvania, sincere acknowedgement is made of the valuable informa- tion drawn from their broad files of experience in the area of this project. In order to successfully complete the preliminary study of the engineering geol- ogy of the Western Extension, a large volume of varied data, such as out-of-print geologic literature, mine maps, records of seam thicknesses, etc., was studied and correlated. For their cordial cooperation and assistance in making available such data pertaining to the bituminous coal deposits of Western Pennsylvania, acknowledgement is made to the following: Pennsylvania Topographic and Geologic Survey, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Department of Mines Union Collieries, Renton, Pennsylvania Consumers' Mining Company, Harmar Mine, Harmarville, Pennsylvania Butler Consolidated Coal Company, Wildwood, Pennsylvania Westmoreland Coal Company, Irwin, Pennsylvania For making available necessary data concerning oil and gas, appreciation is also extended to the People's Natural Gas Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. sº - C. / *** i- -- - c- } - 6. ºr. - PLATE I ~ zo º;; - --- o 25 º N *. E |- W Bingh mpton Y O ſº º ºr Kº le ** * * 17 -- - º’ - % º * : - * - º 'º. 12 ZDETROIT i 17 º - Corning Elmira _* --- " º r it. º tº . 17 --- -- ^- I 25 ſ E. (Erie º Jamestown º º º -- º º * - ... - I 24 -- º º -- º * **** ºf ºz. Poughkeepsie f -º- º --- - --> -- * - -- º º º º º ºº I sº --- -- 5. - k Ashtabulº, ſº º, 2. 0. 7) e -ºš º - i.…" **** º - L º: - 2: - Scranton - c - tº gº 6. EE 3TOLF5 ºf º 6 riveſ -- º … º: * : ~~ a Oil Cit tº . . Wilkes-Barrex, %: - - EE LEVELAND I 19 Frankli y * * * Williamsport % h)." - I --- r º 4. 7 P E N N. * 2. £e V A N | A º E E. s 18 sº º º - y ** ºf NEW zo º – a 30% º: s 45 ºn YORK 4. - - Nd º: * : * * º EE * * * - Newark - 250 Youngstown 11 - - 42 º-(ſe lio I - | EE 22 Akron Kº I New Castle Sunb Elizabeth - 224 / unbury 5.ººhillipsburg 23 § 2. Bethlehem : EE 2. ersb rg - º º |4 * Butler 422 sº Allentownº, - f B 5. e 28 Lewist New Brunswick Eº 50)- Onton jº º ewistown 13. E_* (* --- N | s N a Lº 4° -- --~~ - Trent |EF. I6 I 㺠ºAltoond Reading º renton º 62 ºſſ I 0. Lebanon - &º | - - - - º Eº O H | O PINTSBURGH 2 - * : º "ARRISBURG <> Steubenville - Irwin … Johnstown º: -: - oA • * * * Greensburg º-s, ş, 3. Blue Mountal º Er 36 19. º ſº: - º - --- - - - - **** New Stanron tº . w º º º *Isle º, Lancaster King ŽPHILADELPHIA 6 I º i ** 65 & wil-Lo- 11 - (Camden Q º - - -> EE 2 I Washington s WILL ork & 22z 22 N E W * EE) 40 ill - Z". F R. J.s E y Wilmingtoſ, º ~~ - - Er 2. COLUMBUS Zanesville 7 w º 2 2I o 19 w ! SS º Fº § -- º º 1-0 !) Io 2 s. *Atlantic s º * & City 0. Frederick º gº N CN BALTI MoRE • Aſ s º W’ 4. * / I o - 250 o ſ !) -) - º +. N Clarksbur - Q. *_\º liº F. W E S T N | ..S. -E- º LEGEND PEN NSYLVANIA TURNPIKE PHILADELPHIA E PROPOSED WESTERN EXTENSION |NTERCHANGEs *"Popolis> º - lº * * *N NWASHINGTON Q VT, D E L. W. °FNNSYLVANIA TURNElks COMMISSION HARRISBURG, FENNSYLVANIA LOCATION MAP OF PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE SYSTEM SCALE or MILES *- FUTURE EXTENSION STATE AND FEDERAL HIGHWAYS PROPOSED STATE HIGHWAYS *E.G.RENER co. consul-TING ENGINEERs THE REPORT DEVELOPMENT OF TURNPIKE SYSTEM The construction of the Pennsylvania Turnpike from Irwin in Westmoreland County to Middlesex in Cumberland County was authorized by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in 1937 (Act No. 2 ||, May 21, 1937). Construction of the I60-mile expressway traversing and piercing the mountainous barriers of central Pennsylvania was started in the fall of 1938. The project was completed and opened to traffic in October, 1940 at a total cost of approximately $71,5000,000, which was financed through the issuance of $42,300,000 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Turn- pike Revenue Bonds and a Federal grant in the approximate amount of $29,250,000. In May of 1940 an extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike eastward to Philadel- phia was authorized by the General Assembly (Act. No. 1 |, May 16, 1940). The fol- lowing year an extension westward to the Pennsylvania-Ohio line was authorized (Act No. 53, June | 1, 1941). Although studies of the extensions both eastward and west- ward were commenced at that fime, the beginning of hostilities late in 1941 resulted in the temporary curtailment of all plans for further construction. Immediately following V. J. Day in August, 1945, traffic volumes on the Turnpike began to increase rapidly and by the end of 1947 traffic trends clearly indicated the feasibility of proceeding with the plans for extending the Turnpike. The Commission determined that the first project should be a 100 mile extension eastward connecting the ferminus of the Turnpike at Middlesex with U. S. Route 202 at King of Prussia. The financing of this project was accomplished in August, 1948, at which time Common- wealth of Pennsylvania Turnpike Revenue and Refunding Bonds in the aggregate amount of $134,000,000 were issued to pay the cost of constructing the Philadelphia Extension and to refund the outstanding bonds on the original Turnpike. Actual construction started in September of 1948 and, as of July 31, 1949, 71% of the total project was under contract. The Philadelphia Extension is scheduled for opening to traffic by Janu- ary 1, 1951 and the total project cost, exclusive of interest during construction and financing costs, will approximate $75,000,000. At the time the Philadelphia Extension was financed the Commission planned to proceed with the construction of the Western Extension to the Ohio line as soon as practicable and provisions were so made in the Trust Indenture securing the bonds. DESCRIPTION OF WESTERN EXTENSION In the fall of 1948 the Commission took the initial steps in the planning of the Western Extension. After engineering analysis of the economics of several possible routes, the alignment set forth in this report was adopted. Commencing at the Irwin terminus of the existing Turnpike, the line proceeds in a generally northwesterly direc- tion crossing the Allegheny River at Oakmont, the Beaver River at Homewood and terminating at the Ohio line in Lawrence County, Pennsylvania east of Petersburg, Ohio. The design criteria for the Western Extension will be similar to those controlling the other sections of the Turnpike, which provide for the vertical separation of traffic at all crossings, horizontal separation of opposing streams of traffic, shoulders of suf- ficient width to permit the parking of vehicles off the traveled lanes, maximum grades of 3%, curves having radii greater than 1432 feet superelevating and spiraling curves to permit safe driving at high speeds, and long acceleration and deceleration lanes at all interchanges and service stations. Upon completion of the Western Extension, the Pennsylvania Turnpike System will provide means for the free and uninterrupted flow of traffic for a distance of 327 miles, completely traversing the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from the Ohio border to King of Prussia. Although the Turnpike system by-passes urban areas throughout its length, if nevertheless is readily accessible to a majority of the major centers of population in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and, therefore, will attract large volumes of infrastate as well as interstate traffic. The location of the Turnpike system is exhibited on the location map marked Plate I and the Western Extension to a larger scale is shown on Plate 2. ADVANTAGES OF TURNPIKE SYSTEM OVER OTHER ROUTES The completion of the Western Extension will furnish an expressway-type highway practically across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania which will possess numerous in- herent advantages over other parallel routes. The Turnpike System will make possible 327 miles of travel with greater safety, greater ease and comfort of driving, consider- able saving in time and fuel, and with complete elimination of congestion and inter- ference with local traffic, not possible on ofber routes. The Turnpike System was basically designed to completely eliminate or materially reduce conditions which represent major accident causes on ordinary highways, thereby contributing to the safety, ease and comfort of the driving public. Intersectional acci- dents are completely eliminated by vertically separating grades at all intersecting high- ways and railroads and by denying access to or egress from abutting properties as well as highways except at interchange locations, where safe movements on or off the Turnpike are facilitated by accelerating and decelerating lanes. Sideswiping of vehicles and head-on collisions are materially reduced by separating opposing traffic lanes with a 10-foot wide medial strip. Substantial reductions in accidents due to marginal friction are made possible by providing shoulders of sufficient width to permit disabled vehicles to park off of the concrete roadway. Maximum safety for travel during winter months is assured by providing the high- est standards for roadway snow removal and cindering. Easy grades; superelevated curves with spiral transitions; long sight distances; uni- formity of pavement type; maximum roadway width; attractive landscape free of un- sightly billboards and roadside stands; clean attractive service stations, rest rooms and restaurants conveniently spaced along the highway; and the availability of patrol serv- ice trucks in the event of mechanical trouble are all elements contributing immeasurably to the ease and comfort of driving the Turnpike System. ENGINEERING GEOLOGY The presence of valuable coal seams beneath certain portions of the proposed route creates engineering problems and, therefore, it is with the immediate practical aspects of the geology with respect to coal deposits that this section of the report is primarily concerned. Geological nomenclature and names of coal seams generally accepted by the Penn- sylvania Geological Survey, and, with a few minor exceptions, the U. S. Geological Survey are herein employed. Therefore, data contained herein may be correlated with published data of the aforementioned and other agencies, thus making available a wealth of additional information. The columnar geologic sections appearing on Plate 62 have been provided speci- fically to illustrate the sequences of the various coal seams in the coal measures and the general stratigraphy of the several geologic groups or formations involved. It must be recognized that the data presented in the sections are necessarily somewhat gen- eralized and represent average conditions. On Plates 12 to 6 are shown the outcrop lines of the various coal seams encoun- tered, and structure confours on several of the more important and consistently present coal seams. The outcrop lines were derived originally from published geologic maps of the Pennsylvania Geological Survey and the U. S. Geological Survey. As investiga- tion of the proposed route progressed in the field, advantage was taken of every op- portunity to check the accuracy of the outcrop lines, and to modify their locations where necessary, to fit actual observations of the coal outcrops in road cuts, strip mines and small mine openings. t The structure contours, as shown, represent average elevations on the surfaces of the Upper Freeport and Middle Kittanning coals, and on the base of the Pittsburgh coal. They serve a variety of purposes. In areas where outcrops of a particular coal seam do not appear, the elevation of the structure confour either immediately furnishes an approximation of depth of cover over the seam, or, if the structure contour eleva- fion exceeds the ground elevation, non-existence of the coal because of removal by erosion is indicated. In addition, the trend of the structure contours furnishes valu- able data concerning the direction and degree of dip of the coal seams and the anti- clinal or synclinal nature of the underlying structure. Particular attention has been devoted to the problem of maintaining proper road- way and structure support in the areas of potentially mineable coal or active mining operations. Such areas have been located by correlating outcrop lines, structure con- fours, and mine maps of abandoned and active workings. |0 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY In several cases, specifically sighted below, roadway support over partially mined- out coal at shallow depths has been insured by providing for additional excavation be- low grade to the bottom of the coal seam and backfilling to eliminate any possibility of caving in around mine rooms. For average depths of cover up to 100 feet, pur- chase of 60% of the coal, over a width sufficiently greater than the combined road- way and shoulder widths to provide adequate protection against "breakthroughs", has been assumed. For cover ranging from 100 feet to 200 feet, purchase of 50% of the coal is considered adequate. Protection of structures against damage by settlement resulting from mining oper- ations in underlying seams has been furnished by providing for the purchase of a solid block of coal, to be left in place over an average area of one acre, in cases where the depth of cover does not exceed 100 feet. For depths of cover ranging from 100 feet to 300 feet, purchase of 50% of the coal is considered necessary. Coal seams having covers in excess of 300 feet are deemed to present no problems. Before proceeding with a description of the engineering geology of the proposed route, a very brief summary of the outstanding features of the geology of the per- finent portion of western Pennsylvania is of interest. The great series of strata com- prising the so-called coal measures in the area of interest are composed of limestone, shale, sandstone, clay, and coal. These materials, including the blankets of organic matter from which the coals evolved, were originally deposited in horizontal layers. In the long course of their geologic history, the rocks resulting from the deposition of the varied materials have been subjected to gentle folding into a series of approximately parallel waves frending from northeast to southwest. In the western portion this fold- ing is very gentle and the trend is rather irregular and obscure. To the north of Pitts- burgh the folding becomes readily apparent and its intensity gradually increases pro- gressing eastward. The resulting anticlines (crests) and synclines (troughs) are reflected by the trend of the structure confours. In addition to the gentle folding of the strata, there exists a very gentle regional dip to the south or southwest. As a result, the older strata generally crop out in the northern portions of the area, and the younger upper strata toward the south. With reference to the proposed route, this fact becomes readily apparent upon reflecting that the Upper Freeport coal, which outcrops in the western portion of the line, is under heavy cover in the eastern portion, where the Pittsburgh coal, some 600 feet above it, appears at the surface. The stratigraphy of the area is relatively simple. Of particular interest are the Washington, Monongahela, Conemaugh and Allegheny groups and the Pottsville series. Their correlation is shown by the sections on Plate 62. It will be noted that coal seams constitute convenient markers between the several groups. For example, the Pittsburgh ENGINEERING GEOLOGY coal separates the Monogahela and Conemaugh, and the Upper Freeport differentiates the Conemaugh and Allegheny. Therefore, in representing the extent of the formations on Plates 12-61, it was found convenient to utilize the coal outcrop lines to also define the contacts between the groups. For convenience, the following brief description of the more important geological features along the proposed route is presented by sections. Ohio Line Ho Beaver River The line, as it approximately follows the valleys of Honey Creek and Beaverdam Run, is on various types of glacial deposits laid down on the underlying Allegheny group. These deposits vary rather widely in composition and form, but generally appear as a mantle of clay, sand, and boulders. The mantle imparts a smoothly rounded, gentle rolling aspect to the topography. Where the line crosses the narrow stream valleys it traverses for short distances recent alluvium flood plain silts deposited on the glacial drift by the streams. No severe foundation problems arising from these conditions are anticipated. The limit of the Wis- consin glacial drift, crossed by the line approximately one mile west of Homewood, is shown on Plate 20. The Lower and Middle Kittanning coals outcrop in this section, usually on the sides of the stream valleys, and are therefore crossed frequently by the line. A number of openings in the Kittanning coals may be observed. On Plate 19 is shown the contact, marked by the Upper Freeport outcrop, where the line crosses the top of the Allegheny group and comes on to the overlying Conemaugh group, here still partially concealed beneath a mantle of glacial fill. In a strip operation just east of Township Road 422 and south of the center line, the Upper Freeport coal was observed to locally attain a thickness of some 5 feet. Here it is overlain by the very massive phase of the Ma- honing sandstone. Continuing eastward, the line leaves the Conemaugh and returns to the Allegheny group, so continuing to Homewood. At a strip mine about one mile west of Homewood, three coal seams may be observed. An approximately measured section is as follows: Lower Kittanning coal, (lower-most), average 30" seam; 47 feet from top of Lower Kittanning to bottom of Middle Kittanning, a 24" seam; 25 feet from top of Middle Kittanning to base of another seam, 8”-12” thick, probably the Upper Kittanning. In the bluff along the west bank of the Beaver River, the contact between the Allegheny group and the Pottsville series occurs. The terrace below is underlain by the Pottsville, covered here with glacial outwash deposits of silt, clay, and boulders. |2 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY Beaver River #o Bułler-Allegheny County Line The east bank of the Beaver River is composed of the Pottsville, here not covered by glacial deposits. At the contact in the bluff above, the line returns to the Alle- gheny group. Along Thompson Run, stripping operations have been completed or are in progress in the Upper Freeport, and Middle and Lower Kittanning seams. At the head of Thompson Run the line crosses the outcrop of the Upper Freeport and the old Thompson Run Mines. These workings were abandoned between 1900 and 1910. As much information as possible concerning the nature and extent of the workings was gathered from local sources. Provisions for additional excavation required to remove partially mined coal and for backfill to provide proper roadway support have been made in the estimates. East of Thompson Run, the line continues on the Conemaugh and Allegheny groups. In the vicinity of Township Road 562 (Plate 23) the horizon of the East Palestine coal is crossed but the coal, if present, has little economic importance in this area. South of Barrisville, the line, as it follows the Brush Creek Valley, is on the Allegheny group except where it skirts or crosses areas of recent alluvium. Southeast of Unionville, these general conditions in the valley continue to prevail to the Butler-Allegheny County line, except that larger areas of recent alluvium are crossed. No mining operations of any magnitude are present in the valley. Butler-Allegheny County Line fo Allegheny River This portion of the line is entirely underlain by the Conemaugh. Some sections of overlying recent alluvium are traversed in the valley of Deer Creek and on the west bank of the Allegheny River. The Upper Freeport coal underlies the entire section. Approximately along a line extending from Bakerstown on the north to Wildwood, south of the route, the Upper Freeport thickens from an average of 2 or 3 feet to 7 or 8 feet, and is known as the "Double" or "Thick" Freeport. From Willow Run, where it enters the "Thick" Freeport area, to a point due north of Harmarville, the line is largely underlain by active mining operations. In the vicinity of Indianola, the line crosses several "gob" or culm piles. Pro- visions have been made in the estimates for excavating this coal waste and replace- ment with suitable material. Allegheny River to Allegheny-Westmoreland County Line From the east bank of the Allegheny River to East Oakmont the route continues over the "Thick" Freeport, but in this vicinity coal operations have been developed only to a small degree. From East Oakmont to Station 1300 = (Plates 48-51) the op- |3 ENGINEERING GEOLOGY erations of the Hillman Coal and Coke Company and the Renton No. 6 Mine of Union Collieries are crossed. Over the Weirton Steel Company property adjoining to the east, and for the remainder of the route, the depth of cover over the Upper Freeport seam exceeds 500 feet, and presents no engineering problem. At Route 80 the first outcrop of the Pittsburgh coal and contact of the Cone- maugh with the Monongahela group are observed. Between this point and Township Road 756, the route crosses several necks of the Pittsburgh coal at the base of the Monongahela group. The coal in this section, under shallow cover, has been largely removed by a combination of stripping along the outcrop and underground mining. Provisions have been included in the estimates for additional excavation below grade to a depth sufficient for removal of the remaining coal and debris, and for backfill with suitable material. The necessity for this procedure is amply illustrated in the vi- cinity of Township Road 756, where numerous cave-ins of the surface over the old workings may be observed. Over the remaining portion of the section, the Pittsburgh coal has been removed by erosion. Allegheny-Westmoreland County Line #o Irwin The horizon of the Pittsburgh coal continues above the grade to Pleasant Valley in the vicinity of Township Road 869 (Plate 57) where the outcrop is once more crossed. Here the line passes over an active operation in the Pittsburgh coal. Some 400 feet south of the center line the Redstone seam overlying the Pittsburgh coal is being mined. A short distance to the east at Station 217+ is a small opening in the Redstone seam where the coal, of only fair quality, was measured to be 34” in thickness. From the outcrop to a point approximately 300 feet east of Route 180, acquisi- tion of Pittsburgh coal for proper roadway support has been assumed. Between this point and Brush Creek, the line is over portions of the workings of the Westmoreland Coal Company which are almost completely "gobbed" or mined out. From the east bank of Brush Creek to Irwin all except comparatively small areas of the Pittsburgh coal have been mined out. Between Stations 404+ and 433= the line crosses the Washington group overlying the Monongahela. Summary From the foregoing necessarily brief outline of the exploration of subsurface con- difions along the project, it is apparent that the general geologic information available from the various quoted sources has been localized to a sufficient extent to permit an analysis of the foundation conditions for the preparation of this report. Provision has been made in the estimate for additional work required to obtain sound structural foundation conditions. |4 RIGHT-OF-WAY For the purpose of developing a sound estimate of right-of-way costs, the Consult- ing Engineers retained the services of Harry C. Workmaster, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, who heads a firm of professional appraisers, to determine an estimated cost of prop- erty acquisition in relation to surface land, structures and appurtenances. Robert A. Ramsay of Greensburg, Pennsylvania, a mining engineer experienced in coal and other subsurface appraisals as well as construction practices in such areas, was also retained to assist in determining the cost of acquisition and damages in connection with coal deposits as well as design criteria to be followed in coal areas. In developing the estimated cost of surface land, structures and appurtenances, the appraisers made a field reconnaissance of the entire route, taking into account not only the area within the 200-foot right-of-way strip but also such property as will be required for interchanges, relocation of intersecting highways and relocation of public utilities as well as such other properties beyond the confines of the required right-of-way that might be subject to encroachment or severance or be damaged or otherwise affected. The appraisal also covered the acquisition of residential and commercial buildings, barns and other farm buildings, coal tipples, and gas well instal- lations. A copy of Mr. Workmaster's appraisal report setting forth in detail the costs of various types of properties to be acquired is appended. An estimated cost of the acquisition of gas and oil rights was developed from field reconnaissance, analysis and review of all available data and conferences with representatives of the industry operating in the area. From these sources the relative intensity of lease holdings along the several portions of the route was established. It was determined that residential areas, rivers, and the areas extending one-half mile back from the shores of the Allegheny River could be excluded from the estimate and after eliminating such areas the following factors should be applied to the remain- Ing areas. |. Westmoreland County from Irwin to the Allegheny River is considered 100% leased. 2. Allegheny and Butler Counties are considered 75% leased. 3. Beaver and Lawrence Counties are considered 50% leased. These factors were then used to compute the total acreage involved in the entire project to which was applied a fair market value for the purchase of oil and gas rights as determined from actual leases now in effect. |5 RIGHT-OF WAY The estimate of coal damages was based on field studies which were concurrently carried on and correlated with preliminary geological investigations. Data obtained in the field were supplemented with information obtained through conferences with tech- nical representatives of large operating companies and from Federal and State geo- logical publications. - % Coal areas were located by means of outcrop lines, structure contours and mine maps of active workings and all available data from such sources were plotted on the photogrammetric maps. Classification was then made as between potential stripping areas and coal deposits requiring sub-surface mining operations. The estimate in- cludes all coal within the confines of the right-of-way where stripping operations are feasible. Where coal is mineable at greater depths, required coal acquisitions were determined on the basis of the criteria set forth under the section entitled "Engineer- ing Geology". Tonnages of coal required were computed from seam thicknesses which were determined from information obtained from mine operators, actual meas- urements at available outcrops and geological publications. Unit royalties per ton were based on current values which were established after consideration of such factors as the quality of the coal, the thickness of the seam, and whether the deposit was located in a developed, partially developed or undeveloped C, ſed. ROADWAY Typical roadway cross-sections are illustrated on Plate | | . The adopted section for the Western Extension is identical to the section developed for the Philadelphia Extension, which provides a graded width of 78 feet. The alignment, grades and ground profiles used in the preparation of this report were determined from photogrammetric maps developed by aerial surveys. The grad- ing quantities were computed from grading charts based on centerline ordinates and cross slopes of existing ground. Allowances were made in the quantity estimates to provide for shrinkage of embankments, benching of all cuts in excess of 50 feet in height, benching of side hills to receive fill material and compensation of possible errors in the development of the photogrammetric maps. Mass diagrams were pre- pared to establish centerline limits of balanced sections of highway for the purpose of determining approximate lengths of contracts. Selected subgrade material to be placed immediately below the concrete pave- ment and the shoulders was computed and estimated on the basis of the specifications for similar material on the Philadelphia Extension. This material is to be placed in a layer of 6-inch thickness for the purpose of carrying off any water which may get below the concrete pavement and damage the subgrade, thereby resulting in joint pumping and pavement failure. The 9-inch reinforced concrete pavement is the same thickness as the paving on the original Turnpike and the Philadelphia Extension. Expansion joints will be placed on approximately 900-foot centers with contraction joints spaced at approximately 46-foot intervals. This spacing of joints together with the pavement design was adopted after considerable study to develop an economical pavement section that will result in a minimum number of locations for possible water seepage through the joints. All joints are to be sealed with a rubber compound of non-extruding material. Shoulders 10 feet in width will be constructed of stabilized material to insure a smooth and durable surface requiring a minimum of maintenance after construc- tion. Considerable study and research was conducted to determine the proper shoul- der slopes. The section finally adopted was controlled primarily by two major factors; (a) sufficient slope to adequately drain the runoff from the pavement slabs; and (b) a maximum slope that could be safely used by trucks and trailers in an emergency with- out causing a serious shift in the center of gravity of the load. The section illustrated herein was adopted after several conferences with representatives of the trucking indus- fry and detailed analysis of their recommendations. |7 ROADWAY A 10-foot medial strip separates the opposing traffic lanes and it was determined to slope the median away from the concrete and carry the drainage in the center. This section was adopted to prevent water from the medial strip flowing across the pavement and to eliminate the icy conditions during the winter months which are brought about by melting snow from the median draining onto the concrete pave- ment and freezing. In addition to the major roadway items enumerated above, the estimate pro- vides for such roadway appurtenances as guard rail on all fills in excess of 10 feet, delineators at 200-foot centers on tangents and 100-foot centers on curves at the shoulder edges and in the medial strip, lane marking, and fencing of the right-of-way for the full length of the project. Detailed design criteria covering the design of the roadway are set forth in Ap- pendix B. |8 DRAINAGE Adequate drainage of all portions of the roadway at all times is of vital impor- tance on a major express highway such as the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Surface water which is not properly collected and disposed of can cause heavy damage and create serious traffic hazards in the form of bridge washouts, roadway flooding, land slides, erosion of side shoulders, and the deposition on the shoulders of material eroded from areas beyond the limits of the roadway. Ground water which is not intercepted and re- moved from the vicinity of the roadway will, by destroying the roadway foundations, cause settlement of the pavement and pavement cracks, thereby increasing mainte- nance costs and shortening the life of the pavement. Surface drainage falls into several general classifications, each of which is treated in an appropriate manner in the design of drainage facilities. These general classifi- cations are: major streams, which are those having a drainage area of one-half square mile or more; minor streams and small outside drainage areas of less than one-half square mile; and roadway drainage. Estimated costs for drainage structures, culverts and storm sewers have been made on the basis of the requirements outlined below for each general classification. The design of drainage structures and channel changes for major streams is sub- ject to the approval of the Water and Power Resources Board, Department of Forests and Waters, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, which has jurisdiction over all water- shed areas of one-half square mile or more. The Water and Power Resources Board has issued data on the amount of stream flow and the procedures of design to be used in determining the sizes of all drainage structures and channel changes coming within its jurisdiction. Accordingly, these data and design procedures have been employed in designing drainage structures in this classification. Minor streams and small outside drainage areas embody all watersheds beyond the limits of the roadway, from the smallest area requiring an 18 inch pipe culvert to an area of one-half square mile in extent. This classification in turn falls into two categories, namely, those areas which are small enough to be served by a pipe cul- vert, and areas requiring box or arch culverts. Pipe culverts vary in size from a mini- mum of 18 inches to a maximum of 72 inches. When a culvert larger than a 72-inch pipe is required, reinforced concrete structures are used to reduce the danger of flooding and erosion resulting from greater depth of flow and higher velocity obtained in a large pipe culvert. Since the flow from the larger drainage areas carries more debris and is capable of creating more damage than that from smaller areas, the culvert capacity for the larger areas should provide for more extreme conditions of flow. Design factors have been established which will provide adequate capacity for | 9 DRAINAGE pipe culverts for the stream flow resulting from a rainfall intensity which may be expected on the average of once every twenty-five years. For those drainage areas requiring a culvert of greater capacity than a 72-inch pipe, design factors have been established which will provide adequate capacity for the stream flow resulting from a rainfall intensity which may be expected on the average of once every one hundred years. Roadway drainage embodies the collection and disposal of all surface water which may fall within the limits of the roadway and cut slopes, or may reach the roadway or storm sewers under the roadway. Inlets for the collection of surface water will be provided at suitable intervals, depending upon the roadway grade, width of cut slopes, and other factors affecting the flow of water in the medial strip or on the shoulders. The inlets are to be spaced so that no flooding of the roadway will occur because of the flow in the medial strip, and no hazards to traffic will result from the flow of water on the shoulders in cut sections. Water collected by inlets will be car- ried to the open by lateral storm sewers in fill or side-hill sections. In cut sections the storm water will be collected by a system of lateral pipes and a longitudinal storm sewer placed under one shoulder of the road. Longitudinal storm sewers will extend to the end of the cut section, where they will discharge into the open or into suit- able outlet ditches. Through all cut sections where longitudinal storm sewers are installed, they shall serve as combined storm sewers and underdrains, thereby elimi- nating the necessity of a separate underdrain under that shoulder where the storm sewer is located. All storm sewers are to be provided with adequate capacity to carry the run-off resulting from a rainfall intensity which may be expected to occur on the average of once every ten years. In the coal mining areas traversed by the Western Extension, many of the cul- verts and drainage structures will carry acid mine water. This water is of a corro- sive nature, and suitable provision must be made to prevent damage to the culverts. Vitrified clay liner plates for both reinforced concrete structures and plain or rein- forced concrete pipe will provide the required protection. Vitrified clay pipe of ade- quate strength is to be used for the smaller sizes, and cast iron culvert pipe will be used where vitrified clay pipe or vitrified clay lined reinforced concrete pipe is of inadequate strength to meet the traffic or roadway embankment loads. Longitudinal difches are required at the tops of cut slopes to intercept surface drainage which may cause erosion of the cut slope or may spill too great a flow of wafer on the roadway shoulders. The flow in these ditches will be outletted to natural channels where possible, or will be intercepted and carried to storm sewers or culverts. Longitudinal ditches will also be provided at the bottoms of fill slopes, where necessary, to drain depressions, swampy areas, or to prevent erosion of the slope by too great 20 DRA|NAGE a flow of water along the toe of fill. Paving of the ditch with concrete or stone rubble is required on steep slopes to prevent erosion of the ditch, where such erosion would result in damage to the Turnpike. Underdrainage for the roadway is to be provided by means of a special sub- grade and underdrain system. This special subgrade, consisting of six inches of porous material, is to extend under the concrete roadway, shoulders, and medial strip. All surface water which seeps through joints and openings in the pavements, or perco- lates through the surfaces of the shoulders or medial strip, will flow through the special subgrade until intercepted by a longitudinal underdrain or until it flows into the open on fill slopes. Longitudinal underdrains, consisting of adequate underdrain pipe covered with porous material extending to the bottom of the special subgrade, are to be placed under the medial strip for the entire length of the project and under shoul- ders in all cut sections. Ground water in cut sections as well as surface seepage, will be intercepted by the underdrains and discharged through storm sewers. Detailed design criteria governing all drainage design are set forth in Appendix B. 2| STRUCTURES The Western Extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike involves the construction of | 74 structures of varying types which may be classified as follows: Major River Crossings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Viaducts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Legislative Route Crossings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Township Road Crossings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | Interchange Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Railroad Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Stream and Drainage Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76 In summary there are 5 major structures, 93 grade separation structures and 76 stream and drainage structures for a total of 174 in the project. All structures will be designed in accordance with the criteria which are appended (Appendix B). The major river crossings, consisting of structures over the Allegheny and Beaver Rivers, were estimated by Modjeski and Masters, Consulting Engineers, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and George G. Richardson, Consulting Engineer, Pittsburgh, Pennsyl- vania, retained by the Commission to prepare contract plans for these structures. These estimates were based upon preliminary plans approved by the Commission, the Department of Highways and the Consulting Engineers. The Allegheny River Bridge, measuring 2 | | | feet from abutment to abutment, is planned as a series of cantilever deck-type frusses with continuous deck girder spans on the north approach. The Beaver River Bridge totalling 1540 feet in length will consist of a series of continuous deck-type frusses with simple deck fruss and beam spans on the approaches. Both structures will provide two 26-foot roadways separated by a 4-foot medial divider and flanked by 2-foot safety walks. Viaduct structures over Willow Run, Plum Creek and Brush Creek were estimated by Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald, Engineers, New York City, retained by the Commission for the design of these structures. The roadway cross-section on the viaducts will be similar to the aforementioned bridge structures. Through conferences with representatives of the Department of Highways, span lengths, roadway width and vertical clearances were established for all crossings involv- 22 STRUCTURES ing legislative routes. This information formed the basis for estimating the structures at these locations. Controlling dimensions for structures at township road crossings were established on the basis of experience obtained on similar structures on the origi- nal Turnpike and the Philadelphia Extension. The criteria developed for interchange structures on the Philadelphia Extension controlled the size of similar structures to be used on the Western Extension. Standard railroad clearances were used for structures over railroads. The sizes of drainage structures were determined by the methods out- lined in detail under "Drainage". The type of structure selected at each location and included in the estimate herein was governed by such controlling factors as span length, foundation conditions, and economy of construction. Structures at all locations, except the major river cross- ings and viaducts, include the following types: . Three-span composite steel beams. Deck plate girders. Through plate girders. Steel beams. Rigid frames. Reinforced concrete T-beams. Reinforced concrete arches. Reinforced concrete slabs. Reinforced concrete box culverts. Three-span composite steel beam bridges were selected where intersecting high- ways are bridged over the Turnpike, eliminating costly wing walls and effecting con- siderable saving in abutment construction. When the angle of skew was less than 60°, however, a through plate girder structure was used in place of the three-span units for reasons of economy. Reinforced concrete T-beam structures were generally selected to carry the Turn- pike over intersecting highways where the clear span requirement was less than 35 feet. Where a grade separation structure occurred in a deep fill with the Turnpike pass- ing over, it was determined that a reinforced concrete arch was the most economical structure in light of the excessive heights of abutments and wing walls required for other types. 23 STRUCTURES Continuous deck girder and steel beam spans were used where the Turnpike is in heavy cut and the intersecting highway is overhead. In such locations it was found that a three-span continuous structure with spill-through type abutments proved to be the most practical structure from the standpoint of economy of construction. Rigid frame structures were selected at several locations to provide a structure that would furnish sufficient clear span with a maximum vertical clearance. Types of drainage and stream crossing structures were selected on the basis of the depth of overfill and required vertical clearance. Generally, if the depth of fill over the structure was less than 10 feet, a reinforced concrete box culvert was used whereas a reinforced concrete arch was selected if the overfill exceeded 10 feet. In locations where vertical clearance was a major factor, reinforced concrete slab bridges were used. In developing the estimated construction cost of structures, quantities of mate- rials were computed for each structure. Where necessary, preliminary designs were made for structures involving unusual conditions; however, in most instances full advan- tage was taken of known quantities for similar structures on the original Turnpike and the Philadelphia Extension. The standards of the Department of Highways were also utilized in computing quantities for a large percentage of the drainage structures. 24 INTERCHANGES Facilities for interchange of traffic between the Turnpike and principal State and Federal Highway routes are provided at six strategic locations along the route of the Western Extension. Interchange locations were selected on the basis of traffic demands as developed from the origin and destination surveys made by Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald, Engineers, New York City, who prepared the traffic report. Commencing at the Ohio line interchanges are located at State Route 18 serving traffic between Pittsburgh, Beaver Falls and New Castle; at U. S. Route 19 serving traffic between Pittsburgh and Erie; at State Route 8 serving traffic between Pitts- burgh and Butler; at State Route 28 serving traffic between Pittsburgh and Kittanning; and at U. S. Routes 22 and 30, the principal east-west trans-Stafe routes, serving Pitts- burgh and the West. The geometrics of each interchange were developed on the basis of such factors as topography of the site, design limitations for maximum grade and degree of curva- ture, elimination of all cross-movements and fangent and grade requirements of the foll plaza. Wherever construction economics permit, the facilities are designed to favor maximum traffic with direct movements through the interchange. Safe and unin- terrupted flow of traffic at all interchanges is provided through the media of complete grade separation of all cross-traffic movements and long acceleration and decel- eration lanes for access to and egress from the Turnpike and the intersecting high- ways. Layouts of each interchange are illustrated on Plates 4 to 9 inclusive. Interchange areas and foll plazas will be adequately lighted by roadway type luminaires mounted on suitable standards. Mercury vapor lamps will be used at the foll plazas to provide the high intensity white light required for rapid and accurate vehicle classification by the officer-collectors. Ramps and speed change lanes will be lighted with sodium vapor lamps which produce soft amber illumination having a desir- able cautionary effect on traffic traversing the area. - Toll plaza installations will include service buildings and the requisite number of ticket booths complete with canopies, barrier gates, signal devices, ticket stamps, treadle counters, printing counter assemblies and utilities. In appearance they will be similar to existing installations on the Turnpike. - 25 NMAINTENANCE BUILDINGS For maintenance purposes the Western Extension has been divided into two dis- tricts with a maintenance building in each district. Estimated costs of mantaining the project as set forth hereinafter are based on this criterion. The buildings will be of architectural design similar to the structures on the exist- ing portion of the Turnpike; however, operating experience dictates that the buildings should be somewhat larger than the original structures. Each building site will have a large paved area for parking and storage space. A typical layout for maintenance building areas is illustrated on Plate |0. SERVICE STATIONS AND RESTAURANTS Service stations and resturants will be constructed under contracts for conces- sions at convenient locations. Standards which have been established and maintained through the policies of the Commission will assure clean, courteous and comfortable service to the Turnpike patrons. Architecturally the buildings will be comparable to similar installations on the existing portion of the Turnpike. Final locations for these facilities will be adopted after considerable study to determine the most desirable sites based on such factors as convenient intervals be- tween stations, proper sight distances, easy grades, economy of construction and economy of operation. Long acceleration and deceleration lanes will be provided at each location to enable patrons to approach and leave the stations under conditions of maximum safety and minimum friction with through traffic. For the purposes of this report fentative locations have been selected and estimates of costs for grading sites and paving approach lanes have been included in the cost of the project. Plate 10 portrays a typical layout for a service station and restaurant. 26 RELOCATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES The project passes through a region thickly traversed with utility lines of every description. Of these utilities, only major lines such as pipe lines, electrical trans- mission lines, and transcontinental telephone lines have been shown on the Plan and Profile plates. All utility lines crossing the proposed right-of-way, with the exception of electrical transmission lines with sufficiently high vertical clearance, will be affected and must be relocated, re-built to new grade, or otherwise altered or adjusted to con- form to the location of the highway so that no hazards to traffic will result therefrom. For the purpose of determining the extent of utility relocation work involved, a field reconnaissance of the entire route from Irwin to the Ohio line was made. Aerial maps, photogrammetric drawings, utility company maps, and other available data were studied and various interested utility companies were consulted. Each utility line cross- ing was studied separately, and the effect of roadway cut or fill, location, and the type and capacity of the utility line was considered in estimating the cost of relocation. The alignment of the project was established so as to avoid, insofar as possible, interference with the towers of electrical transmission lines. In some instances, how- ever, economic considerations dictated the location of the highway, necessitating the relocation of transmission line towers. Where such towers are affected, the proposed relocation has been indicated on the Plan and Profile plates. The work of relocating utility lines generally will be performed by the various Utility Companies concerned and the cost of such work borne by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission. In some instances, however, such as water and sewer lines owned by the Federal Government or by municipalities, it is mutually advantageous for the relocation work to be done by the Commission. 27 CONSTRUCTION ITEMS AND UNIT PRICES The major elements of work included in the various units of construction into which the construction costs have been divided are defined below. Each unit Com- prises all material, labor, tools, equipment and other incidental and attendant costs to complete each item of work. Clearing and Grubbing includes clearing the construction site of all buildings, trees, brush and stumps preparatory to the construction operations to follow. Class I Excavation covers all excavation in connection with the construction of road- ways in cut, drainage ditches and stream relocations having a bottom width in excess of 8 feet and the forming into embankment of all suitable materials thus excavated. Class 2 Excavation includes excavation for all underpasses, overpasses, drainage struc- tures, stream crossings, drainage ditches and stream relocations having a bottom width of less than 8 feet, and pipe frenches. Borrow Excavation is excavation off the site of the work to provide material in excess of that obtained from "Class | Excavation" and necessary for the construction of road- ways on fill. Subgrade covers the preparation of the bottom of excavation and the top of fills to the required lines, grades and cross-sections. Special Subgrade consists of a selected material course, 6 inches in thickness, con- structed on the prepared subgrade to provide a foundation and drainage course for the concrete pavement and stabilized shoulders. Stabilized Shoulders consist of furnishing, placing, compacting, and shaping selected materials to produce a smooth and durable surface. Reinforced Concrete Pavement includes the furnishing, mixing, placing and finishing of the concrete together with furnishing, fabricating and placing of reinforcing steel and roadway joints. Class A Concrete consists of forming, furnishing, mixing and placing all concrete used in the construction of bridge superstructures, bridge floors, wearing surfaces, side- walks, curbs and reinforced concrete cribbing. Class B Concrete includes forming, furnishing, mixing and placing all concrete used in abutments, piers, retaining walls, arches, drainage structures, stream bed paving and copings. 28 CONSTRUCTION ITEMS AND UNIT PRICES Reinforcing Steel consists of furnishing, fabricating and placing all reinforcing steel other than in concrete pavement and inlets, including tie wires, spacing bars, bar seats and other incidentals in connection therewith. Structural Steel covers fabricating, furnishing, erecting and painting the complete superstructures of bridges, including roadway joints, anchor bolts, grillages, shoes, pins, rollers and masonry plates. Medial and Shoulder Inlets consist of furnishing, fabricating and placing all materials for inlets in the medial strip and on the shoulders including excavation, concrete, rein- forcing steel, frames, grafings and other incidentals in connection therewith. Pipe Culverts and Storm Sewers cover fabricating, furnishing, bedding, placing and covering all pipes for culverts and storm sewers. These pipes are of varying types as required including cast iron, corrugated metal, asphalf coated corrugated metal, re- inforced concrete, plain cement concrete and vitrified clay. Unit Prices applied herein to the computed quantifies of construction items were deter- mined after considerable review, study and analysis of all available data. All bids re- ceived on the Philadelphia Extension as well as on major highway projects in the Com- monwealth of Pennsylvania within the last year were tabulated and reviewed. Recent publications on highway construction cost trends and indices were analyzed. Contrac- tors, fabricators and material suppliers familiar with construction costs and conditions in the area were contacted. After careful analysis of all information obtained from these sources, the unit prices set forth in this report were adopted as being sound es- timates of cost for performing the various classes of work required in the construction of the project. The following tabulation is a detailed breakdown of the estimated construction costs. 29 |TEM Construction Costs DESCRIPTION Clearing & Grubbing Excavation—Class Excavation—Class || Excavation—Borrow Subgrade Special Subgrade 9" R.C. Pavement R.C. Pavement—Side Roads Bitum. Pavement—Side Roads Stabilized Shoulders Shoulders—Side Roads Concrete Medial Divisor Class A. Concrete Class B. Concrete Piles Reinforcing Steel Fabricated Structural Steel Metal Railing Stone Backfill—Structures Membrane Waterproofing Grouted Stone Slope Walls Concrete Pavement for Streams Medial Inlets Shoulder Inlefs |5" Storm Sewer | 8" Storm Sewer 24" Storm Sewer 30" Storm Sewer 36" Storm Sewer Subgrade Drains—Side Roads 24" Pipe Culvert 30" Pipe Culvert 36" Pipe Culvert 42" Pipe Culvert 48" Pipe Culvert 54" Pipe Culvert 60" Pipe Culvert UNIT Acre C.Y. |4,000,000 C.Y. 300,000 C.Y. |,900,000 S.Y. 3,415,000 S.Y. 3,230,000 S.Y. |,934,000 S.Y. 50,000 S.Y. |40,000 L.F. 370,000 L.F. 80,000 L.F. | 2,000 C.Y. 37,600 C.Y. |06,900 L.F. 43, 100 Lbs. | 3,400,000 Lbs. 21,500,000 L.F. 6,500 C.Y. 2|,000 S.Y. 600 C.Y. 2,600 S.Y. 600 Each 1,200 Each | 200 L.F. 26,000 L.F. 90,000 L.F. 30,000 L.F. |0,000 L.F. 4,000 L.F. | 5,000 L.F. 3,000 L.F. 4,200 L.F. 4,400 L.F. 4,600 L.F. 3,600 L.F. 2, 100 L.F. |,300 QUANTITY UNIT PRICE 1,400 $400.00 $ 0.85 3.75 0.65 0.20 0.55 4.70 4.00 3.00 |.40 0.50 4.00 55.00 45.00 6.00 0. |0 0.|3 5.00 6.00 5.00 50.00 3.75 240.00 345.00 3.50 5.00 6.25 8.50 | 3.00 |.00 7.50 |0.00 |3.50 | 7.00 2|.00 25.00 30.00 TOTAL 560,000 | |,900,000 |, |25,000 |,235,000 683,000 |,776,500 9,089,800 200,000 420,000 518,000 40,000 48,000 2,068,000 4,810,500 258,600 |,340,000 2,795,000 32,500 |26,000 3,000 |30,000 2,250 288,000 4|4,000 9|,000 450,000 | 87,500 85,000 52,000 | 5,000 22,500 42,000 59,400 78,200 75,600 52,500 39,000 30 CONSTRUCTION ITEMS AND UNIT PRICES |TEM - DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE TOTAL 38 66" Pipe Culvert L.F. |,400 $37.00 $ 51,800 39 72" Pipe Culver; L.F. 2,000 38.00 76,000 40 V.C. Liner Plates for Culverts S.F. 80,000 |.50 | 20,000 4| 6" V.C. Underdrains—Structures L.F. 25,000 |.20 30,000 42 6" V.C. Underdrains L.F. 530,000 |.75 927,500 43 6" V.C. Outlets for Underdrains L.F. 5,000 |.50 7,500 44 Coarse Aggr. for Comb. S.S. & U.D. C.Y. 6,600 6.50 42,900 45 Fine Aggr. for Comb. S.S. & U.D. C.Y. | |,000 7.50 82,500 46 Earth Fill for Medial Strip C.Y. 64,400 |.00 64,400 47 Topsoil—Medial Strip S.Y. 390,000 0.25 97,500 48 Topsoil—Interchanges S.Y. 90,000 0.25 22,500 49 Seeding & Mulching—Interchanges S.Y. 90,000 0.20 | 8,000 50 Guard Rail—Turnpike L.F. 2| 8,000 2.00 436,000 5| Guard Rail—Side Roads L.F. 42,000 |.25 52,500 52 End Anchorages—Side Roads Each 230 60.00 | 3,800 53 Permanent Barricades L.F. |,000 5.50 5,500 54 Right-of-Way Fence L.F. 695,000 0.50 347,500 55 Snow Fence L.F. 225,000 0.20 45,000 56 Delineators Each 7,600 5.00 38,000 57 Line Striping L.S. - - - - - - - e. |0,000 58 Signs L.S. • * * * - * * * 50,000 59 Railroad Relocation, B.8L.E.R.R. L.F. 3,300 |0.00 33,000 60 Maintenance of Traffic—R.R. L.S. - * * * - * * * 30,000 6 Maintenance of Traffic—Side Roads L.S. • * * *s - * * * 80,000 62 Maintenance Buildings (2) L.S. - * > * - - - * |00,000 63 Police Barracks (I) L.S. * - 8 & - * * * 50,000 64 Toll Booths & Utility Bldgs. L.S. - * * * * * * * 240,000 65 Toll Collecting Equipment L.S. - - - - - - - = 85,650 66 Lighting System—Interchanges L.S. • a s = - * * * | 00,000 67 Communications L.S. • * * * * * * * 2|0,000 68 Plum Creek Viaduct L.S. - * * * - * * * 970,000 69 Willow Run Viaduct L.S. - * * * - * * * 574,000 70 Brush Creek Viaduct L.S. - * * * - - - - |,000,000 7| Beaver River Bridge L.S. * * * * - - « a 2,337,600 72 Allegheny River Bridge L.S. - * * * - * * * 3,536,000 TOTAL $52,998,000 3 | ESTINMATED COST OF THE PROJECT The following tabulation represents the estimated cost of the project in sum- marized form exclusive of interest during construction and financing costs. A. Preliminary Costs $ 350,000 B. Right-of-Way Costs . 1. Land $ 602,327 2. Buildings - |,267,455 3. Property Damage 766,249 4. Highway Relocations 73,000 5. Utility Relocations 90,250 6. Railroad Right-of-Way 22,305 7. Coal Damages 650,000 8. Gas and Oil Rights 20,000 9. Acquisition Costs 548,4|4 Total $ 4,040,000 C. Construction Costs 52,998,000 D. Relocation of Public Utilities |,400,000 E. Engineering Costs 4,500,000 F. Legal, Administrative & Overhead Costs 550,000 G. Purchase of Maintenance Equipment & Supplies 250,000 H. Contingencies - 6,412,000 TOTAL PROJECT COST $70,500,000 The total project cost in the aggregate amount of $70,500,000 represents the net amount of money required by the Commission for the construction of the West- ern Extension exclusive of interest during construction and financing costs. Preliminary costs include aerial surveys; preliminary ground surveys; electro-resis- tivity and other geological investigations; preliminary studies and estimates of cost; 32 ESTIMATED COST OF PROJECT traffic surveys and report; engineering report; and administrative and other related costs of the Commission which are incurred prior to the sale of bonds. Right-of-way costs, construction costs and the cost of relocating public utilities are explained in detail in other sections of this report. Engineering costs comprise final surveys; borings and related geological investi- gations; preparation of construction plans, specifications and contract documents; assistance to the Commission in preparing proposals, analyzing bids and awarding con- fracts; checking of shop and detailed construction plans; general direction and detailed supervision and inspection of the work as it progresses; incidental expenses of super- vision and inspection such as field offices, engineering equipment, automobiles and mis- cellaneous supplies; shop and mill inspection of materials; general coordination of con- struction and material contracts; and the performance of administrative functions of an engineering nature required to carry to completion a project financed with funds derived from the sale of revenue bonds. Legal, administrative and overhead expenses cover the salaries and expenses of the Commission, general officers and clerical staff; legal advice and opinions; and other similar costs incurred subsequent to the sale of bonds and prior to the completion of the project. Purchase of maintenance equipment and supplies includes the cost of automotive equipment necessary for maintaining the project following completion and opening to traffic; the initial cost of uniforms and equipment for fare collection personnel and tellers; and the acquisition of other miscellaneous supplies required to commence operation of the facility. 33 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES The estimates of maintenance and operating costs are based on data obtained from recorded costs over a period of eight years of operation on the existing Turnpike. The defailed estimates were developed under principal account headings which include general administration, maintenance of roadway and structures, tunnel maintenance, fare collection, police patrol, and stores and inventory. In addition to the above accounts covering actual maintenance and operation expenses, annual deposits to the Insurance and Replacement Reserve Funds were also estimated. Account No. 100, General Administration, includes the salaries and expenses of the Commission, general counsel, general officers, clerks and attendants; general office expenses such as heat, light, telephone, telegraph, rental of accounting machines, jani- for service and publications; office supplies; trust indenture expenses including fees for trustees, auditors and consulting engineers; advertising and public relations; miscellane- ous administrative expenses; and miscellaneous insurance costs. Account No. 200, Maintenance of Roadway and Structures, includes the salaries and expenses of maintenance superintendents, division supervisors, foremen, clerks, at- fendants and watchmen; general office expenses at maintenance buildings including light, heaf, janitor service, telephone, telegraph and office supplies; pavement mainte- nance including roadway joints, mudjacking, traffic lines, bituminous patching and resur- facing, repairing concrete pavement slab, and roadway sweeping; maintenance of shoulders, medial strip gutters, drains, curbs, fills, side slopes, drainage ditches, bridges, culverts, guard rail, right-of-way fence, directional signs, delineators, foll booths, col- lection equipment, buildings and surrounding grounds, communication system, power lines, and mobile maintenance equipment; purchase and maintenance of small tools; snow removal and cindering of the pavement; maintenance of access roads; and gen- eral cleanup of the right-of-way. Account No. 300, Maintenance of Tunnels, is applicable only to the original sec- tion of the Turnpike as there will be no funnels on either the Philadelphia or the West- ern Extensions. Chargeable to this account are the salaries and expenses of tunnel supervisors, operators, guards and inspectors; the cost of heat, light, telephone and telegraph services at the tunnel portal buildings; maintenance and operation of tunnel crash and fire equipment; maintenance and repair of funnels and portal buildings; lamp replacements in tunnels and on approaches; power for fan operations and lighting fun- nels and approaches; maintenance of ventilating equipment, analyzers, standby power equipment and heating plants; purchase and maintenance of small tools; and uniforms and miscellaneous supplies for tunnel personnel. 34 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES Account No. 400, Fare Collection, was estimated on the basis of traffic require- ments predicted by the traffic engineers at the various interchanges. Included under this account are the salaries and expenses of fare superintendents, senior collectors, officer collectors, fellers, drivers, and hourly relief collectors; power and lamp renewals for interchange lighting systems; purchase and repair of uniforms for fare collection personnel; heat, light, telephone and telegraph services at fare collection booths and service buildings; maintenance of and repairs to fare collection equipment; and miscel- laneous supplies. Account No. 500, Police Patrol, includes salaries and subsistence of sergeants, patrolmen and clerks; maintenance, operation and repair of patrol cars; and heat, light, telephone, telegraph, janitor service, and miscellaneous supplies for the police barracks. Account No. 600, Stores and Inventory, includes the salaries of the purchasing agent, clerks, and attendants. The Insurance Fund and annual payments therefo are determined by annual pre- mium requirements for all types of insurance as required by the Trust lndenture. The Replacement Reserve Fund is established in accordance with the require- ments of the Trust Agreement to provide funds for major repairs, equipment replace- ment and other expenditures of considerable magnitude which occur at infrequent intervals and therefore are not classified as routine maintenance operations. The prin- cipal items thus provided for include replacement of automotive equipment, painting of steel structures and replacement of roadway pavement. - The following tabulation sets forth the estimated annual maintenance and operat- ing expenses, including payments to the reserve funds for the Pennsylvania Turnpike, the Philadelphia Extension, the Western Extension and the Turnpike System. The estimate for the Pennsylvania Turnpike from Irwin to Middlesex is based on operations in the event the Philadelphia and Western Extensions are not constructed. The increments of decrease in maintenance and operating expenses as a result of the construction of each of the Extensions are also shown. The net decrease results from a reduction in the cost of general administration chargeable to the Turnpike plus a reduction in operating expenses by reason of the fact that the terminal interchanges are moved to the ends of the Extensions. These decreases offset the increased main- tenance costs resulting from larger traffic volumes by the amounts shown in the tabu- lation. The estimate for the Philadelphia Extension from Middlesex to King of Prussia is based on combined operations with the Turnpike from Irwin to Middlesex. An incre- 35 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES ment increase resulting from the construction of the Western Extension is then added to produce the cost of maintenance and operation following the opening of the entire system to traffic. The net increase represents additional maintenance costs resulting from increased traffic produced by the Western Extension less a reduction in admin- istrative costs resulting from combined operation. The payment to the insurance fund in the first year of operation is high because of the requirements of the Trust lnden- ture which necessitate increasing the linsurance Reserve from $250,000 to $500,000 when the Philadelphia Extension is opened to traffic. The estimates for the Western Extension from Irwin to the Ohio line and the Turn- pike System from King of Prussia to the Ohio line are based on combined operations. The years of operation shown in the tabulation represent calendar years. Janu- ary 1, 1951 and January 1, 1952 are assumed to represent the commencement of operations of the Philadelphia Extension and the Western Extension, respectively. 36 PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE IRVIN TO MIDDLESEX PHILADELPHIA EXTENSION NAIDDLESEX TO KING OF PRUSSIA WESTERN EXTENSION IRWIN TO OHIO LINE PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE SYSTEM KING OF PRUSSIA TO OHIO LINE ... be In- || Total Year Mainte- Insur- Replace- - Due To | * | Total After Mainte- Replace- Cred. Se After Mainte- Insur- Replace- - Mainte- Replace- Year of ment • Due To º nance & Insurance ment Due To | Construc- || nance & ment Insurance ment of nance & an Ce Total Phila- Construction Total º an Ce Total nance & Total Oper- O + Fund Reserve delphi Western f Extensi Oper- Fund Reserve West- tion of Oper- Fund Reserve O +i Fund Reserve Oper- ation peration U. In Fund .." Eden. of Extensions ation Fund ern Ex- | Western ation Uſ) Fund peration Fund ation :- sion tension | Extension SiOn - 1950 $1,275,000 |$25,000 |$175,000 || $1,475,000 $1,475,000 *-*. — || $1,275,000 $ 25,000 |$175,000 || $1,475,000 | 1950 | 95 | 3,275,000 || 25,000 || ||75,000 || |,475,000 |$20,000 ||—|| |,455,000 ||$635,000 |$270,000 || – |$905,000 — l,885,000 || 300,000 || ||75,000 2,360,000 | 1951 | 952 I,275,000 || 25,000 || ||75,000 | 1,475,000 || 25,000 $20,000 || |,430,000 || 735,000 | 20,000 |$ 25,000 780,000 $5,000 |$785,000 ||$515,000 |$20,000 |$ 20,000 |$555,000 || 2,480,000 || 70,000 220,000 || 2,770,000 || 1952 | 953 I,275,000 || 25,000 || 175,000 || |,475,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,430,000 || 745,000 | 20,000 || 75,000 | 840,000 || 5,000 | 845,000 || 535,000 | 20,000 || 50,000 | 605,000 || 2,510,000 || 70,000 || 300,000 || 2,880,000 | 1953 | 954 I,275,000 || 25,000 || 175,000 | 1,475,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,430,000 || 745,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 || 915,000 5,000 || 920,000 || 545,000 | 20,000 || 75,000 | 640,000 || 2,520,000 || 70,000 | 400,000 | 2,990,000 | 1954 1955 1,330,000 || 25,000 | 200,000 | 1,555,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,510,000 || 770,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 940,000 || 5,000 945,000 || 585,000 | 20,000 || 150,000 || 755,000 || 2,640,000 || 70,000 || 500,000 || 3,210,000 | 1955 | 956 1,330,000 || 25,000 | 200,000 | 1,555,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,510,000 || 770,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 | 940,000 || 5,000 || 945,000 || 585,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 || 755,000 || 2,640,000 || 70,000 || 500,000 || 3,210,000 | 1956 | 957 1,330,000 || 30,000 || 200,000 | 1,560,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,515,000 || 770,000 25,000 | 150,000 || 945,000 || 5,000 | 950,000 || 585,000 || 20,000 || 150,000 755,000 || 2,640,000 80,000 || 500,000 || 3,220,000 | 1957 | 958 1,330,000 || 30,000 | 200,000 | 1,560,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,515,000 || 770,000 || 25,000 | 150,000 | 945,000 || 5,000 | 950,000 || 585,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 || 755,000 || 2,640,000 | 80,000 || 500,000 || 3,220,000 | 1958 | 959 1,365,000 || 30,000 | 200,000 | 1,595,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,550,000 || 790,000 || 25,000 | 150,000 | 965,000 || 5,000 || 970,000 || 600,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 770,000 2,710,000 | 80,000 || 500,000 || 3,290,000 || 1959 | 960 1,365,000 || 30,000 | 200,000 | 1,595,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,550,000 || 790,000 || 25,000 | 150,000 | 965,000 || 5,000 || 970,000 || 600,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 || 770,000 || 2,710,000 | 80,000 || 500,000 || 3,290,000 || 1960 | 96 | 1,365,000 || 30,000 | 200,000 | 1,595,000 || 25,000 | 20,000 | 1,550,000 || 790,000 || 25,000 | 150,000 | 965,000 || 5,000 || 970,000 || 600,000 | 20,000 || 150,000 770,000 2,710,000 | 80,000 || 500,000 3,290,000 1961 - 37 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES The following is a defailed breakdown of estimated maintenance and operating expenses for the Turnpike System from King of Prussia to the Ohio line for an average year (assumed to be 1956). Acct. No. 100—General Administration Commission and General Officers $100,000.00 Administrative Clerks and Attendants | |4,000.00 General Office Expenses 24,000.00 Office Supplies 13,000.00 Trust Indenture Expenses 60,000.00 Advertising 32,000.00 Miscellaneous Expenses 7,000.00 Refirement Fund, Workmens Compensation and Miscellaneous Insurance 60,000.00 Total—Acct. No. 100 $410,000.00 Accł. No. 200—Maintenance of Roadway and Structures Superintendence $175,000.00 Pavement Maintenance |25,000.00 Shoulders and Medial Strip 32,000.00 Drainage and Subgrade 55,000.00 Bridges and Culverts 38,000.00 Fences, Guard Rail and Signs 65,000.00 Buildings 40,000.00 Communications 20,000.00 Power Lines 7,000.00 Equipment Maintenance 220,000.00 Small Tools and Supplies 4,000.00 Snow Removal and Cindering | 70,000.00 Access Roads 6,000.00 General Cleanup 23,000.00 Miscellaneous 20,000.00 Total—Accf. No. 200 $1,000,000.00 39 ** MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES Accł. No. 300—Maintenance of Tunnels Operation Tunnels and Portal Buildings Lighting Equipment Maintenance Power Small Tools and Supplies Total—Accf. No. 300 Accf. No. 400—Fare Collection Superintendence Fare Collectors & Tellers Interchange Lighting Power Supplies and Uniforms Total—Accf. No. 400 Accf. No. 500—Police Patrol Superintendence Patrolmen Building, Maintenance & Supplies Total—Accf. No. 500 $175,000.00 15,000.00 30,000.00 10,000.00 45,000.00 5,000.00 $280,000.00 $ 24,000.00 563,000.00 7,000.00 23,000.00 73,000.00 $690,000.00 $ 24,000.00 | 96,000.00 20,000.00 $240,000.00 MAINTENANCE AND OPERATING EXPENSES Acct. No. 600—Stores and Inventory Salaries, Purchasing Agent and Assistants Insurance Fund Multi-Risk Use and Occupancy Fire Insurance Public Liability—Property Damage Fire, Theft and Collision Comprehensive Liability Total Replacement Reserve Fund Painting Structures Equipment Replacement Pavement Replacement Total SUNAMARY Acct. No. Description 100 General Administration 200 Maintenance of Roadway & Structures 300 Tunnel Maintenance 400 Fare Collection 500 Police Patrol 600 Stores and Inventory Total Maintenance & Operating Expenses Insurance Fund Replacement Reserve Fund Total Expenses $ 20,000.00 $ 35,000.00 | 5,000.00 3,000.00 7,000.00 5,000.00 5,000.00 $ 70,000.00 $ 60,000.00 |40,000.00 300,000.00 $500,000.00 Amount $ 4|0,000.00 | 000,000.00 280,000.00 690,000.00 240,000.00 20,000.00 $2,640,000.00 70,000.00 500,000.00 $3,210,000.00 4| PROGRESS SCHEDULE A progress chart scheduling the design and construction phases of the complete project is presented graphically on Plate 63. The principal factors which governed the development of the schedule included efficiency of operation, economy of con- struction, construction seasons, availability of materials, coordination of construction contracts, early commencement of major individual portions of the work requiring long construction periods and completion of the project at the earliest practicable date. The schedule contemplates that there will be eighteen contracts, each for a com- pleted section covering grading, drainage, grade separation and drainage structures, and paving. It is anticipated that plans for eight sections will be completed and placed under contract in the fall of 1949, the remaining sections being under contract by April, 1950. All of the work included in this phase of the project is scheduled for com- pletion by October, 1951. Construction of the major structures including the Allegheny and Beaver River Bridges and the Willow Run, Plum Creek and Brush Creek Viaducts will be accom- plished under separate contracts. Completion of plans and commencement of con- struction of these five structures are scheduled for Decemer, 1949, with final comple- tion schedules varying from October, 1950 to August, 1951. The installation of roadway appurtenances such as guard rail, delineators and right-of-way fence will immediately follow the completion of the paving on the various contracts. The construction of foll booths and maintenance buildings can proceed in- dependently of the other major phases of the work and is not a major factor in the ultimate completion of the project. The schedule as developed herein contemplates that the section of the project extending from Irwin to U. S. Route 22 will be completed and opened to traffic in November, 1950. The remaining sections are scheduled for completion in December, | 95 |. 42 APPENDIX A APPRAISERS’ REPORT ON RIGHT-OF-WAY 43 R&AL ESTATE APP RA 5AL 5 wºrk MAETER ſº UNIT VALUE APPRAISAL CO. 2 ºf ECILºº. PITTSBURGH 12 E. North Ave. N.S. (12) ESTIMATED APPRAISAL of PROPERTY of WARIOUS OWNERSHIPS ALONG FROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY OF THE WESTERN EXTENSION OF THE PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE, Beginning Out Present IRWIN TERMINUS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE, and EX- TENDING NORTHWESTWARDIY TO THE OHIO STATE LINE in the VICINITY OF PETERSBURG, OHIO. Nº. ls : t REAL TORS ARE. ACTV e. Nº EMREYS OF CONSTITUGNT BOARDS: MEMBER PITTSB URGH AND NATIONAL REAL ESTATE BOARD S 45 REAL ESTATE CD UN SELD RE AND AP P RA15 ER 5 FH C N E A L., T ~ 5 33 3 A FF t-1 AT E D C D M PA N J E B B ETTE R B I LT H E M Es c D., 1 N c. C D M M L N ITY REALTY C D. FD REST PARK D Eve Lto PM ENT c D., in c. U N IT VAL LJ E APP RAI EAL E D. WERºšTER P R D C L R E M ENT D F L D CATI D N E F D F C D M M E R C 1A L Af{ D J N D L STR 1AL LJ B E TAX AS S E S E M E NT STLJ D H E S FD R M LJ N C I PALS AN D P R D P E RTY D. W N E R 3 A PP RA SALS - REAL E STATE - M A C H 1 N E RY 12 E. ND RTH AVE., N. S. FITT's B L R G H 12, PA. J. E. Greiner Company, July 23, 1949 l2Ol St. Paul Street, Baltimore 2, Maryland. Gentlemen: The following constitutes our completed preliminary estimate of the cost of acquisition of such property as deemed needful for the construction of the | proposed western extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike. Such estimate is predicated upon the basis of Aerial and Flight Maps furnished us by the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and yourselves and in relation to which, we have examined indetail all surface property along such proposed route, together with buildings or other structures thereon. In considering the cost of acquisition of such property, we have not only considered the area within the Right of Way, 200 Ft. in width, but have likewise included such other property beyond the confines of such Right of Way that might by encroachment or severance be likewise damaged or affected. You will appreciate that in the absence of definite road plans showing detailed cuts and fills, that this study can represent only an estimate, but in our judgment and in our experience in the making of like estimates in relation to major Highway Improvements, we believe the within conclusions to be sufficiently accurate upon which to determine an approximate cost of such property acquisition. In our estimate of value of various structures, we have considered such items as coal tipple and gas wells within the previously mentioned areas. We have also, in relation to our land acquisition study, included additional areas needful for the construction of intersections as contemplated at Route 30 at Irwin, U. S. Route 22 between Monroeville and Murraysville, Route 28 on the North Side of the Allegheny River, Route 8 between Talleycavey and upper Talleycavey, U. S. Route 19 in the vicinity of Warrendale, Route l8 in the vicinity of Homewood and in connection with other roads in the vicinity of the Ohio State Line. We have also considered such additional cost of acquisition incident to added takings, where existing or contemplated crossings, over and under such proposed Highway, are necessary. | We have also taken cognizance of major electric, gas or utility services, with respect to which, we have set up an estimated figure to cover the cost of acquiring new Rights of Ways with respect to such services, as well as proper compensation for the taking of weils and tipples • We have not considered, in any manner, any cost of construction incident to such utilities, nor have we considered coal deposits or mines below the surface, which, we understand, is being evaluated by another agency, Our examination of the proposed route, as covered by Aerial or Flight Maps furnished us, has extended over an approximate distance of 65 miles, in which lineal distance, widths of rivers and roadways are excluded, 47 REAL ESTATE App RA 5A1 5 WDRKMASTER J. E. Greiner Company Page 2 July 23, 1949 We have also, as requested, made a separate alternate study of the property known as the Lyons Run Branch of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, extending from coal operation and tipple of the Pittsburgh Coal Company in Penn Township, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania to the Turtle Creek Branch of the Pennsylvania Railroad in Patton Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. You will further note accompanying Summary showing the area and character of the various properties covered in our examination of such proposed routes. If, in the judgment of uhe Turnpike Commission, it is advisable to follow the alternate route along the Lyons Run Branch of the Pennsylvania Railroad, it must be appreciated that it will be necessary to acquire additional private property, in iristances where the width of such proposed Turnpike would exceed the width oil the Railroad Right of Way, which added cost has likewise been estimated in our attached Summary of Acquisition costs • In conclusion, our Coldpany and our representatives have met with a very whole- some cooperation in our meetings with various Utility and Railroad owners and in our contact with many property owners over the proposed route. In our field examination and our experience in our employment in relation to imany other major Highway Improvements, we believe that the course followed by the Engineers in relation to this improvement is Inost feasible and practical and that in charting such course, a proper recognition has been given vo minimizing property damage and cost of acquisition. It must be appreciated that such proposed western extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike must, of necessity, pass thru that section of our State where much greater development and land value exists, as compared with the route and the cost of the previous Turnpike. We must also realize that all properties are of greater value than when such previous road was built and which again will reflect higher cost, both in acquisition and constructions |If the original route as indicated upon Aerial or Flight Maps is contemplated, the total cost of property acquisition is est at $2,799,281. If the alternate Railroad Route is decided upon, acquisition cost will in our judgment be $2,821,586. UNIT WALUNAPP - / /Zéze H. C. Workmaster, Prop. HCW: a 48 PROPERTY-PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE LOCATION-PETERSBURG, OHIO, STATE LINE WORKMASTER prºtestart: APPRASALS ESTIMATED COST OF ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WESTERN EXTENSION EXTENDING FROM IRWIN TERMINAL OF PRESENT PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE TO WICINITY OF SUMMARY - ESTIMATED COST OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION LINEAL FT • CHARACTER OF LAND UTILITY ESTIMATED COSTS TOTAL ESTIMATED ACJUISITION COST l 121,020 Planting or Orchard Cultivated | Cost Land Taken For Total Estimated Right of Way. $ 602,327 |Acquisition cost # 2,799,281 2 70,315 Cleared but not Cultvd. | Meadow - Pasture Cost Buildings Taken 3 63, ll:0 Second Growth Timber | Woodland or affected by 3) Improvement. 1,267, lºss Additional Estimated 56, h95 Scrub, Brush or Swamp Rough Land cost other Prperty Cost of Acquiting - Damaged or affected 66 Railroad Right of Way 22,305 by Improvement. 766 s2 5 20,800 Residential Property | Home sites |* * ,2h9 12, h95 Industrial & Special Industrial gº Total Estimated *s furpose Property ºples:... [...*.* Acquisition Cost if Wells, etc., Property for Alternate Railroad Approaches over and Route is selected 2,821,586 under Turnpike. 73,000 © p > --> Cost of Acquiring New #: of Way for See Note Utility & Pipe Lines, 90,250 3ll,235 | Lineal Ft. or 65.2 Miles Property at Estimated Acq. cost *—99st. Under Alternata R, s 2,821,586. ******* HOTE: If it is decided upon to acquire from Pennsylvania Railroad Co. their Lyons Run Branch for a distance of approximately 20,735 Lineal Feet and consisting of land covered by Railroad R/w, Ballast, ties, trackage, etc. at an estir-ted depreciated Value of $39,733 it would also be necessary to acquire added private property evaluated at $39,798 to provide Turnpike width of 200 feet. Such alternate plan would create an added acquisition cost over original route of $22,305. Such added property cost would, however, doubtless enable substantial savings in construction cost due to established grade of Railroad Right of Way and hence may well justify its purchase. THIS ESTIMATED COST OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION IS IN RELATION TO SURFACE LAND AND STRUCTURES AND APPURTANCES THEREON AND DOES NOT INCLUDE SUR-SURFACE COAL OR MINERALS. UTILITY REPLACEMENTS ARE CONFINED ONLY TO THE ESTIVATED COST OF SECURING NEW RIGHTS OF WAY ANI DOES NOT INCLUDE PHYSICAL UTILITY PROPERTY COST. SUCH ESTIMATE DOES INCLUDE COSTS OF ADDED PROPERTY tº CESSARY AT INTERSECTIONS OR CROSSINGS. § APPENDIX B DESIGN CRITERIA 5| APPENDIX B DESIGN CRITERIA 1. Roadway a. Cross-section Roadway cross-section shall conform to the standards shown on the drawing en- titled "Typical Roadway Sections", Plate | | dated August, 1949. (l) Cut Sections In cut sections in excess of approximately fifty feet in depth, benches fourteen feet in width shall be provided sloping back two feet in fourteen feet. Side slopes in cut sections in rock may vary as directed. (2) Fill Sections Where the depth of fill is ten feet or less side slopes shall be four to one and in such sections guard rail is not required. (3) Interchange Ramps Interchange ramp lanes shall be flanked with ten foot shoulders except at structures where shoulder width shall be reduced to six feet. Pavement widths on ramps shall vary from twelve feet per lane to four- teen feet at points of maximum degree of curvature as required. Opposing traffic lanes shall be separated by two foot raised concrete medial devisor. All ramp curves shall be provided with spiral transitions. (4) Cross-section at Major Structures At major structures the roadway cross-section shall be reduced by suit- able transitions as directed by the Engineer and a raised concrete medial divisor pro- vided to separate opposing traffic lanes. 53 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA b. Alignment Horizontal curves shall not exceed four degrees. c. Grades The maximum roadway grade shall be three percent. The minimum permis- sible grade shall be 0.5 percent, except in extreme cases where use of less than the specified minimum shall be subject to approval of the Engineer. d. Sight Distances The sight distance at every point on the Turnpike to prevent rear end col- lision shall be as long as possible but shall be not less than the following: (1) On tangent sections at sags, the length of vertical curve shall be suf- ficient to provide a headlight sight distance of 1000 feet. (See Chart No. 4.) (2) The length of vertical curve at summits shall be sufficient to provide a headlight sight distance required for a design speed of 70 miles per hour. (See Chart No. 3.) (3) The length of vertical curve shall be sufficient to provide a daylight sight distance between eye level at 4.5 feet above the pavement and an object height of 4 inches on the pavement of not less than 600 feet for a design speed of 70 miles per hour. On interchange ramps the minimum sight distance provided may be re- duced corresponding to the reduced design speed of the ramp. Minimum sight dis- tances for various speeds are tabulated below for interchange ramp design. Speed Minimum Sight Distance 30 MPH 200 feet 40 MPH 275 feet 50 MPH 350 feet 60 MPH 475 feet (See Chart No. 1.) (4) Horizontal curves shall be designed to provide the minimum rear end collision sight distances as set forth under (3) above. (See Chart No. 2.) 54 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA e. Superelevation and Transitions The following table sets forth the rates of superelevation together with the spiral transition lengths for various curves: Degree of Curve Inside Lane O°30' I/6" per ft. O°35' |/6" per ft. O°40' I/6" per ft. O°45' I/6" per fr. | 900' I/6" per ft. | 930" 1/4" per ft. | 94.5" 5/16" per ft. 2°00' 3/8" per ft. 2° 15' 7/16" per ft. 2°30' 9/16" per ft. 2°45' | 1/16" per ft. 3°00' 3/4" per fr. 3° 5' 13/16" per ft. 3°30' 7/8" per ft. 4°00' l" per ft. Rafe of Superelevation Outside Lane I/6" I/6" I/6" I/6" I/6" I/4" 5/16" 3/8" 7/16" 9/16" | |7|6" 3/4" | 3/16" 7/8" | " per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. per ft. Length of Spiral Desirable 200 f{. 225 ft. 250 ft. 275 ft. 300 ft. 325 ft. 350 ft. 400 ft. None None None None None None None Minimum 200 ft. 225 ft. 250 ft. 250 ft. 250 ft. 275 ft. 300 ft. 350 ft. These rates are in accordance with Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Stand- ard SC-1, Drawings I to 4, dated January 21, 1949 and July 6, 1949. 2. Shruchures a. Specifications Specifications shall be in accordance with standard specifications of the American Association State Highway Officials, 1944. (l) Loading H20-S16-44. b. Turnpike Roadway Width The Turnpike roadway clear width curb to curb shall vary with the span of the structure as follows: Span Total Width Median Width 9' or less 73'-O" |O'-O'' Over 9' to 9' 73'-6" | O'-O'' Over 19' to 100' 70'-0" | O'-O'' Over |00' to 300' 64'-0" | O'-O'' Over 300' 58'-0" 4'-O'' 55 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA c. Roadway Deck Deck slabs for all structures carrying the Turnpike, State Highways, and Town- ship roads shall be designed for a three-quarter inch integral wearing surface. d. Clearances All Turnpike underpasses, i.e., where side roads are carried over the Turn- pike, shall provide a seventy-eight foot horizontal clearance between abutments and a minimum vertical clearance of fifteen feet throughout. Roadway widths, clear spans, and vertical clearances for other structures shall be as directed by the Pennsylvania State Highway Department and the Engineer. e. Expansion Joints Expansion joints shall be provided as required in abutments, wing walls, slabs, arch culverts, and box culverts. All expansion joints shall be flashed. f. Drains Six inch underdrain pipe shall be provided, behind abutments and walls for their entire length and shall be covered by stone backfill twelve inches in width, ex- fending upward to within fifteen inches of the top of abutment or wall, or to bottom of subgrade. Such drains shall be properly brought to grade or weeped at suitable intervals. g. Approach Slab Suitable recess in backwalls of abutments shall be provided to receive ap- proach slabs. Approach slab design shall be in accordance with standards shown on Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission drawing entitled "Standard Types and Methods of Placing Reinforcement" dated February 12, 1949, No. PS102-1. 3. Drainage a. Areas of one-half square mile or over Design drainage structures in accordance with the requirements of the Water and Power Resources Board of the Department of Forests and Waters of the Com- monwealth of Pennsylvania. Application for permission to construct drainage struc- tures for these areas shall be submitted to the Turnpike Commission for transmission to the Water and Power Resources Board for approval. 56 APPENDIX B_DESIGN CRITERIA The following outline of the design requirements of the Water and Power Re- sources Board will serve as a guide to be followed in designing drainage structures for waterways having a watershed area of one-half square mile or more: Obtain design flow for various drainage areas from Chart No. 5. Use Kutters N = 0.030 for stream slopes up to and including 1%, and N = 0.035 for stream slopes exceeding 1%. Paved inverts, due to their comparatively short length, do not warrant the use of other values of N. Values of the Velocity, V, may be taken from Chart No. 10 for N = 0.030 or Chart No. | | for N = 0.035, entering the chart with the proper values of Slope and Hydraulic Radius, R. Values of V greater than 15 feet per second are not to be used in determining culvert and bridge capacities, regardless of actual velocity. In determining the Hydraulic Radius, R, use one clear height of opening for each pier or abutment in computing the wetted perimeter. For Arches, Pipes, and Pipe-Arches, use areas and wetted perimeters for heights equal to 0.9 of the clear heights. Characteristics of Reinforced Con- crete Arches may be obtained from Chart No. 6. The efficiency of a drain- age structure equals the discharge capacity of the structure times 100 di- vided by the expected runoff for the drainage area. Structures built to grade shall be designed for a discharge efficiency of not less than 75 percent in open country and a discharge efficiency of at least 100 percent in built-up communities. Structures having a fill of 5 feet or more over them shall be designed for a discharge efficiency of at least 125 percent. Where local conditions indicate that a discharge capacity lower than those called for above is warranted, recommendations for such lowered efficiencies must be accompanied by a full explanation of the reasons justifying such lower ef- ficiencies. Application for multiple spans having a clear opening normal to the piers and abutments of less than 12 feet will not be approved. b. Areas less than one-half square mile Design drainage structures by the Talbot Formula as follows: A = c W. M. Where A = necessary waterway in square feet. M = drainage area in acres. C = a coefficient varying with the slope and shape of the drainage area, character of soil and of vegetation. (See Chart No. 8 included for the solution of this formula). 57 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA An appropriate value of "C" shall be selected from the following tables. Where areas are made up of several types, a weighted average shall be taken. Where areas may be more fully developed during the life of a structure, a proper allowance shall be made for such future development. (1) Values of "C" for areas where box or arch culverts are required: Type of Area Flat Rolling Hilly Cultivated 0.70 0.95 |. 5 Meadows and Pastures 0.50 0.75 0.95 Wooded Areas with Mature heavy ground litter 0.25 0.50 0.70 (2) Values of "C" for areas where pipe culverts not greater than 72 inches in diameter are to be used: Type of Area Flat Rolling Hilly Cultivated 0.55 0.75 0.90 Meadows and Pastures 0.40 0.60 0.75 Wooded Areas with Mature heavy ground litter 0.20 0.48 0.55 c. Roadway Drainage Design drainage for Roadway areas which are to be served by a system of inlets and storm sewers, including all areas beyond the limits of the roadway which drain into the roadway storm sewers, by the Rational Method, using the following fac- fors and data: (1) Rainfall—Rainfall intensity shall be defermined from the U. S. De- partment of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication No. 204 entitled, "Rainfall intensity —Frequency Data" by David L. Yarnell (See Chart No. 7 included in this appendix). Sform sewers shall be designed for a rainfall frequency of 25 years with a maximum surcharge not above the bottom of inlet grate and a 10-year frequency with pipe flowing full. Where combination storm sewer and underdrain is used, the depth of flow for a 2-year rainfall frequency shall not exceed 2/3 the diameter of the pipe. (2) Coefficient of Runoff—An appropriate value of the Coefficient of Runoff shall be selected from the following table. Where areas are made up of several types, a weighted average shall be used. Type of Area Flat Rolling Hilly Pavements 0.90 0.90 0.90 Shoulders 0.50 0.50 0.50 Cut Slopes 0.60 0.60 0.60 Cultivated Land 0.50 0.55 0.60 Meadows and Pasture Land 0.35 0.40 0.45 Wooded Areas with Mature heavy ground liffer 0.20 0.25 0.30 58 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA (3) Hydraulic Design—Storm sewers, drains, channals and ditches shall be designed by either Kuffer's or Manning's formula using the following values of "N". Type of Waterway Value of "N" C.I., R.C., and V.C. Pipe 0.0 |3 C.M. Pipe (Plain) 0.02 | C.M. Pipe (Paved invert) 0.020 Grass Gutters and Ditches (flow less than 6") 0.060 Grass Gutters and Ditches (flow more than 6") 0.040 Earth Guffers and Ditches 0.0225 Concrete Guffers 0.020 Rubble Gutters (Cement) 0.022 Rubble Gutters (Dry) 0.032 (4) Inlet Spacing (a) Medial Strip—design inlet spacing for a maixmum flow in medial strip of 8 feet in width for a 10-year rainfall frequency. Maximum spacing shall be 400 feet. (See Chart No. 9 included in this appendix.) Spacing of inlets in vertical curves shall be approximately 200 feet. 1. (b) Shoulders—design inlet spacing for a maximum flow in shoulder gutter of 4 feet from outside edge of shoulder for a 10-year rainfall frequency. Maxi- mum spacing shall be 400 feet. Minimum spacing of inlets shall be 200 feet on side shoulders. (5) Type and Use of Pipe. The maximum size of pipe shall be 72 inches and no multiple pipe installations shall be permitted except in unusual circumstances where prior approval of the Engineer shall be required. The fill over rigid pipe shall not exceed the amounts given in the fol- lowing table: Ultimate Strength Maximum Fill of Pipe Feet 2000 D 2 3000 D 32 4000 D 42 (Ultimate strength of pipe per lineal foot when tested by three edge bearing method, where D is the nominal inside diameter of pipe in feet). 59 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA (a) Reinforced Concrete Pipe—Use where cover is adequate, water is not corrosive, and where depth of fill is not in excess of 21 feet. (b) Extra Strength Reinforced Concrete Pipe—Use where water is not corrosive, depth of fill not in excess of 32 feet, and where diameter of pipe re- quired is not in excess of 72 inches. (c) Reinforced Concrete Pipe and Extra Strength Reinforced Con- crete Pipe shall be used with vitrified clay liner plates where corrosive water is en- countered. (d) Corrugated Metal Pipe—Corrugated Metal Pipe shall be used where the water is not corrosive, in lieu of Reinforced Concrete Pipe under the fol- lowing conditions: (i) Where fill over the pipe exceeds 32 feet (ii) Where culvert is on an excessive grade (iii) Where culvert bed is subject to movement Corrugated metal pipe for use on the Turnpike shall have paved invert and be fully asphalt coated. (e) Cast Iron Pipe (2000D)—Use where cover is exceptionally shal- low, pipe invert is subject to excessive abrasion, or where depth of fill is not in excess of 21 feet. Where pipe culvert is on an excessive grade the interlocking style shall be specified. (f) Heavy Cast Iron Pipe (3000D)—Use in lieu of Cast Iron Pipe (2000D) where depth of fill is in excess of 21 feet but not in excess of 32 feet. (g) Extra Heavy Cast Iron Pipe (4000D)—Use in lieu of Heavy Cast Iron Pipe (3000D) where depth of fill is in excess of 32 feet. Cast Iron pipe shall be used in lieu of corrugated metal pipe where corrosive water is encountered. (h) Triple Strength Vitrified Clay Pipe (2000D)—Use where cover is ade- quate, water is corrosive, depth of fill is not in excess of 21 feet, and where the diam- efer of pipe required is not in excess of 30 inches. (i) Vitrified Clay Pipe or Plain Cement Concrete Pipe — Use where there is ample cover but fill does not exceed 10 feet and culvert is beyond travelled area. Unlined Cement Concrete Pipe shall not be used where corrosive water is en- countered. 60 APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA (i) Arch Culverts—Reinforced Concrete Arch Culverts shall be used in deep fill where rigid foundation is found, with vitrified clay liners or brick lining where corrosive water is encountered, and where the fill is deeper than permitted for lined reinforced concrete pipe. (k) Box Culverts—Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts shall be used where fills are deeper than permitted on reinforced concrete pipe and where the foundation is not rigid enough for arches. Use with liners if corrosive water is encountered. Con- crete Box structures shall not be used in slide areas. Where headroom is limited, box culverts shall be used to provide waterway areas that would require a larger diameter pipe than the height of box. (l) Slab Bridges—Use Slab Bridges only where headroom will not per- mit the use of concrete box culverts. (6) Gauges & Elongation of Corrugated Metal Pipe Corrugated metal pipe 36 inches in diameter and larger shall be elongated vertically and gauges of metal used for various heights of fill over the top of pipe, in accordance with the following requirements: Gauges for Various Fills over Top of Pipe Height of fill over top Diameter of pipe ex- of Pipe 3–5 5-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 Over ceeding which Inches Fil| Fil| Fill Fil| Fil| Fil| Fill Fil 40 elongation is Fil| required | 5 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 6 | 6 |4 |4 24 |4 |4 |4 |4 |4 |4 | 2 | 2 | 0 30 |4 | 4 |4 |2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | O | 0 36 | 2 | 2 |2 | O |O | 0 | 0 8 8 20' 42 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | O 8 8 | 5' 48 | 2 |2 | 0 |O | 0 | 0 | O 8 8 | 2' 54 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 8 8 8 8 | O' 60 |O | 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 |O' 66 | 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 | O' 72 | 0 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 5' Where fills over the top of pipe exceed 30 feet, the minimum diameter of pipe shall be 24 inches. Where the fill over a required 30-inch diameter pipe ex- ceeds 30 feet, a pipe having a minimum diameter of 36 inches shall be used. 6 | APPENDIX B–DESIGN CRITERIA Where headroom is limited corrugated metal arch pipe may be used where approved by the Engineer. (7) Secondary Ditches Ditches shall have a minimum bottom width of 18 inches and side slopes of 1-1/2 to I. Where a ditch is to have a bottom width in excess of 18 inches, such width shall be clearly indicated on the required list shown on the plans. Side ditches are to be provided at the top of cut slopes to intercept surface drainage which may cause errosion of the cut slope or may spill too great a flow of water on the roadway shoulders, with consequent increase in the required capacity of longitudinal storm sewers. Side ditches are to be provided also at the bottoms of fill slopes where re- quired to drain depressions and swampy areas, or to prevent erosion of the slope by too great a flow of water along the toe of fill. Factors such as ground cover, type of soil, depth of cut, concentration of runoff, slope of the natural ground, etc., will determine the necessity for such ditches. (8) Longitudinal Sewers Longitudinal storm sewers shall be designated on the required list as "Combination Storm Sewers and Underdrain", abbreviated as "Comb. S.S. & U.D." These sewers may be plain cement, vitrified clay, or corrugated metal pipe at the option of the contractor and such type shall not be designated on the plans unless con- ditions of design, such as hydraulic capacity, warrant specification of particular type. (See Charts No. 12 and No. 13.) 62 LIST OF CHARTS CHART NO. TITLE Rear End Collision Sight Distance Sight Distance on Horizontal Curves Headlight Sight Distance—Summits Headlight Sight Distance—Sags Stream Discharge—0.5 Sq. Mi. and Over Waterway Data—Semicircular Arches Rainfall Intensity—Frequency Data Required Culvert Sizes Roadway Drainage Solution of Kutter's Formula for N = .030 Solution of Kutter's Formula for N = .035 Capacity of Storm Sewers for N = .013 Capacity of Storm Sewers for N = .02 | Entrance Capacity of Pipe Culverts Flow in Trapezoidal Channel 63 PEN NSYLVAN | A TURN P | KE WEST E R N EXT ENS ON REAR END COLL | S I ON SIGHT D | STANCE OO92 1 B E - N | B /\ }} [h O T \70 | 1 \} E A JO H 19 N B T = Tl OOO 2 OO9|| O O O | OO9 O søųou! ty º! O 9{qo jo ļų ôļ9H !ººg gºtz ºº Ka jo ļų ôļa H V.OO | TLAZ’9ç = S “T uolų į SS 9 | S | S uøųNA/Z $+##=S “T uolų į u 340au6 sų S uøųM//ZOOZ ZZZ ļu 30 u ºd ºse pou9ZØ 3 O 99uau 9 g ) !p 0 ! Duq 9 ô{\7 = \f ！O O 2 ±% / X2/// Lº. JºO O £7 }，„ſ,/Y KA 23:32，1 ×/ Cőé），z4%OO9 2：1，1：6º/！/ >+<>+<><！%！4//O O9 Lºr _-'！！！_^_^%4O//OO /. |- __^Lºr _^2+，！/7 |×/ &\ >+<！]2^1 /)/， /O O6 _^！！/^/ _}^/ O O O | LE E - N | E O N VLS O L H 9 |S = S CHART NO. PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE WESTERN EXTENSION SIGHT DISTANCE ON HORIZONTAL CURVES |OOO | OOO 9 OO 9 OO 8 OO 8 OO 7 OO 7 OO 6 OO 6 OO 5 OO 5 OO 4OO 4 OO 2% / 2 Slope 2. z - Application to stabh dish arocz or, H. akovvav, Carves 3OO 3OO |O 2O 3O 4 O 5 O 6 O 7O MIDDLE OR DINATE OR RADIAL DISTANCE (M) 8' FROM INSIDE EDGE OF PAVEMENT TO VIEW OBSTRUCTION - CHART NO. 2 | OOO 9 O O - - Sl GHT DISTANCE - 8 OO zº 1.5. 94' 7OO DESI RABLE SIGHT DISTANCE |OOO FT. 6OO MI NIMUM SiGHT DISTANCE = 72O FT. 5 OO P –5O M.P 4 OO 2OO 4OO 6 OO 8OO |OOO |2OO |4OO |6OO |8OO 2OOO MINIMUM LENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVES ON SUMMITS IN FEET PEN NSYLVANIA TURN P | KE WESTERN EXTENSION VERTICAL CURVES APPLICATION OF HEADLIGHT SIGHT D | STANCE CHART NO. 3 | OOO 9 OO 8 OO LSIGHT DISTANCE - 7 OO 6 OO M|N| MUM SIGHT DISTANCE = | OOO FT. 5 OO – 5O 4 OO - 2OO 3OO 4OO 500 6OO 7OO 8OO 900 |OOO |||OO |2OO 1300 |4OO 15OO M|N|MUM LENGTH OF VERTICAL CURVES IN SAGS IN FEET PEN NSYLVANIA TURNP|KE WESTERN EXTENSION VERTICAL CURVES APPLICATION OF HEADLIGHT SIGHT DISTANCE CHART NO. 4 PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE – WESTERN EXTENSION EXPECTED STREAM DIS CHARGES FOR DRAINAGE ARE AS OF # S QUARE MILE AND MORE Area |Discharge|| Area |Discharge || Area |Discharde || Area |Discharge Sq. Mi. c.f.s. Sq.Mi. c.f.s. Sq. Mi. cf.s. 5d.Mi. c.f. s. O. 5 4 (2 T 5. 4. 2 a 7 7 | 3) 4 3) 3 O Q 2 | 2 @ 2 O O.Q., 5 29 5.5 24 O 7 | 4 4 5 (2 O (2 3 | 2 7 (2 O O.7 588, 5, Q, 24, 3, 7 | 5 4. T & O G 4 | 2 Sº O O O. 8 (244 5.7 24 Q (o | Q 5 O O O (2.5 | 3 O 4. O O. 9 Q S & 5, 8, 24 S Q, | 7 5 2 | O © Co | 3 || 7 O | O 7 5 O 5.9 2 5 2.5 | 8 5 4: 2 O (2 7 | 3 3 O | . . 8, O | Q. O 2 55 5 | 9 5 Q 2 O Q & | 3 4 4. O | . 2 8, 5 O C. 25 8,4 2 O 5 8, 2 O Ç, S) | 3 5 8 O | 3 8, S 7 (2.2 2 Q, I 2 2 | Q O 2 O 7 O | 3 7 || O ! .. 4 944 Ç. 3 2 Q, 4 | 22 C, 2 | O 7 | 3 & 5 O | , 5 S 9 O Co. 4 2 Q, T O 23 Ç, 4 O O 72 | 3 S 8, O | . Go | O 3 4. (2.5 2 (298, 24 G, 5 9 O 7 3 | 4 || || O | 7 | O 78 G.Q. 27 2 7 25 C, T & O TV 4. | 4, 24 O ! .. 8 | || 2 | Ç.7 2 755 2 (2 Q Sº G O 7 5 | 4 3 8 O | , 9 | | Q 3) (2.8) 2 78, 3 27 T 5 O TZ (o | 4 5 O 2. O | 2 O 5 Q.9) 28 || || 28 73 3 O 7 7 | 4 (2 4 O 2 . I | 24 G, T.O 28, 3 S, 2 S 75 O O 7 3 | A. T 7 O 2, 2 | 2 8, Q 7. 2 & Q, Q, 3 O T G 8, O 7 S | 4: 9 O O 2.3, | 3.2 Q, 7, 2 28, 9.4 3 | 78 (2 O 8, O | 5 O2 O 2.4 | 3 G 5 7.3 29 2 | 3 2 8 O 3 O 8 | | 5 || 5 O 2.5 | 4 O 4 7. Z! 2 S 24 S 3.3 8 2 O O 8, 2 | 5 28, O 2.Q. | 4 4 2 7.5 Z S T C, 34 8, 3 7 O 83 | 5 4 || O 2.7 | 4 7 9 7. Q. 3 O O 3 35 8 S 3 O & 4. | 5 53, O 2.8 | 5 || 7 7.7 3 O 3 O 3 Q 6, 7 O O 85 | 5 Go (2 O 2.9) | 5 5 4. 7.8 3 O 5 7 37 8, 8 7 O 8, Q, | 5 7 9 O 3. O | 5 S O 7.9 3 O 8, 3 38 S O 3 O 87 | 5 S O 3. I | Q 2 Q, 8.O 3) ( [ O 39 S | S O 88 | Go O 4 O 3 - 2 | 2 (22 8. I 3 : 3 ºf 4. O S 3, 5 O 8, 9 | (2 (2 O 3.3 | Q, 9 TZ 8.2 3 | Q 3 4 | S) 5 O S O | Q, 28 O 3.4 | 7 3 2. 8). 3 3 8, 9 4, 2 9 C, 7 O 9 | | Q 4 || O 3.5 | 7 Q 7 8.4 3 2 | Q, 4. 3, S 9, 3 O S) 2 | Q, 5 3 O 3. Co | 8, O ! 8.5 3 24 2 44 9 9 & O 9 3 | @ Q, 5 O 3.7 | 8, 3, 5 8. Q | 3 2 C, 8 4. 5 ! O || 4 O 9 4 | Q, 7 8 O 3.8 | 8 Q Sº 8, 7 3 2 9.4 4G, | O 2 9 O 95 | Q Sº O O 3,9] | 9 O 3 8). 8) 3 3 2 O 4 7 | O 4 4 O 9 (2 | 7 O 2 O 4.O | S 3 G 8.9 3 3 4 5 4 8 | O Q Sº O 9 7 | 7 || A. O 4. | S (2 S C).O 33, 7 | 4 S | | O 7 4 O 9 8 | 7 2 Q O 4.2 2 O O 2 S. 3 3 S 7 5 O | O 8 S O 9 S | 7 3, 8 O 4.3 2 O 3, 4 9.2 34 22 5 | | | O 4 O | O O | 7 5 O O 4.4 2 O Go (2 9.3 3 4. 4 TV 52 | | | 9 O | | O | 8, Q 8, O 4.5 2 O S 8, S. 4 3, 4 7 3 5 3 | | 3 4 O | 2 O | 9 & 3 O 4. (2 2 || 3 O 9.5 3.4 S 8, 54. | | 4 8, O | 3 O 2 O 9 5 O 4.7 2 Q 2 S). Q, 35 23 55 | | Q 3) O | 4 O 2 2 O 3 O 4.8) 2 || 9 3 S. 7 35 A 8, 5 Q. | | 7 7 O | 5 O 2 3) O 9 O 4. Sº 22 24 S. 8 3, 5 7 3 5-7 | | S 2 O ! (2 O 24. 4 O 5. O 2 2 5 5 S),S 3.5 S 8, 5 & | 2 O Q, O | 7 O 2 5 | Q O 5. I 22 &Q | O 3 Q 2 O 59 | 2 2 O O | 8 O 2 Q, l (2 O 5.2 2 3 ſ (2. | | 3 9, 7 O Go O | 2 3 4 O | 9 O 2 7 || 5 O 5 3 2 3 4.7 | 2. 4 O O Q | 2 4 & O 2 O O 28 2 O CHART NO. 5 PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE – WESTERN EXTENSION EXPECTED STREAM DISCHARGES FoR DRAINAGE AREAs of ; squaRE MILE AND MORE Area Discharge || Area | Discharde || Area |Discharde Area | Discharge Sq.Mi. c.f. s. Sq. Mi. c. f. s. Sq. Mi. c.f. S. Sq. Mi. c.f. s. 2 | O 29 O 7 O 7 O O G, C, 2 4 O || 2 Sº O O || || 7 5 ! O O 7 8 O O || 3 4 4 5 O O 22 O 3 O O | O 7 || O Q, Q 88 O || 3 O O O || || 7 S 2 O O 7 S O O || 3 4 7 (2 O O 23 O 3 O S 4 O 72 O Q, 75 3 O || 3 || O O || || 8 3 3 O O || 8 O O O || 3 5 O Go O O Z 4 O 3 || 3 5 O 73 O G, 8 || 7 O || 3 2 O O | | 8 7 3 O O || 8 || OO || 3 5 3 (2 O O 25 O 3 2 7.5 O 74. O Qo 88 O O || 3 3 O O | | S | 3 O O || 8, 2 O O || 3 5 (25 O O 2 (2 O 3, 3 Q, 4 O 7 5 O (2 S 4.4 O || 3 4 O O || || 9 5 3 O O || 8 3 OO || 3 5 9 5 O O 27 O 3 Z1 5 2 O T (2 O 7 O O 7 O || 3 5 O O | | S S 2 O O || 8, 21 O O || 3 Q 2 5 O O 28 O 3 5 3, S, O 77 O 7 O 7 O O || 3 C, OO || 2 O 3 O O O || 8 5 O O || 3 (2 5 4 O O 29 O 3 Q 2 5 O 78 O 7 3 3 O 3, 7 O O || 2 O Q, 9 O O || 8 C., O O || 3 Q & 4 O O 3 O O 3 7 || O O 7 9 O 7 9 5 O || 3 8 O O || 2 | O 7 O O || 8 7 OO 3 7 || 3 O O 3 || O 3 Z 9 5 O 8, O O 7 2 5 7 O || 3 S O O || 2 || 4 5 O O || 8 8 O O || 3 74. 2 O O 3, 2 O 3 & 7 & O 8 || O 7 3 | S O || 4 O O O || 2 | 8, 2 O O || 8 S OO 3 7 7 O O 33 O 3 SX (2 O O 8 2 O 7 3 8 O || 4 || O O || 2 2 | S OO || 9 OOO || 3 8 O O O O 34 O 4 O 4. 2 O 8 3 O 7 A 4 2 O || 4 2 O O || 2 2 5 (2 OO || 9 || O O || 3 & 2 9 O O 3, 5 O 24 ( 2 3 O 8 4 O 7 5 O 4 O || 4 3 O O || 2 2 S 3 O O || 9 2 O O || 3 8 5 7 O O 35 (2 O 4 2 O 3 O 8, 5 O Tº 5 G, 5 O || 24, 24 O O || 2 3 2 9 O O || 9 3 O O 3, 8 & C., O O 37 O 4 28, 3 O 8 (3 O 7 C, 2 5 O 4.5 O O || 2 3 C, 5 O O 94. OO || 39 || 5 O O 38 O 4 3 Go 2. O 8, 7 O Tº Q, 8 Q, O || 4 (2 O O 24 O | O O || 3 5 O O || 3 9 4 3 O O 3, 9 O 4 4.4 O O 8 & O T T 4. G., O || 4 7 OO || 2 4 3, 7 O O || 9 @ OO 39 7 || O O 4. OO 4, 5 | TV O 8 9 O 78. O & O 4, 8 O O || 2 4 7 2 O O 9 7 OO | A. O O O O O 4 || O 4, 5 S 4 O 9, O O 7 & Q (, O || 4 9 OO || 2 5 O 7 O O || 9 & OO | A. O 2 8, O O 4 2 O 4 G 7 O O 9 | O 7 9 2 C, O || 5 OOO || 2 5 4. 2. O O 9 S O O | A O 5 C, O O 24 3 O 4 T 4 GO S 2 O 7 9 8, 5 O 5 ! O O || 2 5 7 TV OO || || O O O O | A O 84 O O 214 O 4- 8, 22 O 9 3 O 3 O 4.5 O || 5 2 O O || 2 C, I l OO || | | O O O | A 3 5 9 O O 2.1 5 O 4 & 9 G O 94 O 8 || O 4. O 53 O O || 2 (2 4 5 O O || || 2 O O O || 4 Q, 2 C, O O 4 (2 O 24 S 7 O O 95 O 8 | Q 2 O 54. O O || 2 (, 7 S OO || || 3 O O O || 4 88 7 O O 4 / O 5 O 4 4 O Sº Q, O 8 22 l O || 5 5 O O || 2 7 || 3 O O || || 4 O O O || 5 || 4 || O O 4, 8 O 5 | | 7 O 9 7 O 8 28 O O || 5 G, O O || 2 74 7 O O || || 5 C O O || 5 3, 8 9 O O 24- 9 O 5 || 9 O O S 8, O 8 33 8 O 5 7 O O || 2 78 O O O || | Q, O O O || 5 G, 3, 2 O O 5 O O S 2 C, 2 O S 9 O 8 & 9 (2 O || 5 8, O O || 2 8 I 4 O O || || 7 O O O || 5 & 7 I O O 5 O 5 3, 3, 4 O || || O O O 8 4 5 OO || 5 S O O || 2 8 4 7 O O || || 8 O O O Q, I O 5 O O 5 2 O 5 4 O 5 O || | | O O S O 2 O O || G O O O || 2 8 8 O O O || || 9 O O O || @ 3, 3, 5 O O 5 3 O 54. 7 (2 O || || 2 O O S 5 8 O O || C. O O || 2 9 2 O O || 2 O O O O | Q, 5 C, 1 O O 5 4. O 5 5 4 7 O || || 3 O O | | O ! 2 O O || C, 2 O O || 2 9 4, 5 O O || 2 | O O O || @ 7 & 4 O O 5 5 O 5 (2 7 O || || 4 O O || || O G, 4 O O || G 3 O O || 2 9 7 7 O O || 2 2 O O O || 7 O O 3 O O 5 (2 O 5 (2 8, Q, O ! 5 O O | | | | Q, O O || Q, 4 O O || 3 O ! O O O || Z 3 O O O || 7 2 ( S) O O 5 7 O 5 T 5 (, O || | Q, O O | | | Q, Q, O O || @ 5 O O || 3 O 4, 2 O O || 24 O O O || 7 4 3 2 O O 58, O 5 8, 24 O | 7 O O || || 2 || 5 O O || G, G, O O || 3 O 7 4 O O || 25 O O O || 7 (2 4 3 O O 5 9 O 5 8, 9 3 O | 8 O O || || 2 C, 4 O O || C, 7 OO || 3 | O 5 O O || 2 (2 O O O || 7 8 5 O O O (2 O O 5 S Q, I O | 9 O O | | 3 | | O O || @ 8 O O || 3 || 3 7 O O || 2 7 O OO || 8 O 5 C, O O Q | O (2 O 2 S O || 2 O O O || || 3 5 & O O || @ 9 O O || 3 || G, 8 O O || 28 O OO || 8 2.5 S O O (22 O Gº O S Q, O || 2 | O O || || 4 O 4 O O || 7 O O O || 3 2 O O O O || 29 OO O || 8 4 5 S O O (2 3 O Q, I Q 3 O || 2 2 OO || || 4 5 O O O || 7 || O O || 3 2 3 | O O (2 4 O Q 2 3 O O || 2 3, O O || || 4 S 4 O O 72 O O || 3 2 Q, 2 O O Qo 5 O C. 2 Sº (2 O 24 O O | 5 3 9 O O 73 O O || 3 2 S 3 O O Q Q O (2 3 (, 3 O || 2 5 O O | | 5 8 2 O O || 7.4 O O || 3 3, 2 4 O O Q 7 O C. 4 28 O || 2 Q, O O | | Q. Z 5 O O || 75 O O || 3 3 5 4 O O G, 8 O Ç, 4 S 4 O || 2 7 O O | | Q, Q, 8 O O || 7 Q, O O || 3 3 & 5 O O (2 S O (2 5 5 S O 28 O O || || 7 || O O O T 7 OO || 3 4 || 5 O O CHART NO. 5 (Con't.) PENNSYLVANIA TURNP|KE – WEST ERN EXTENSION WATER WAY DATA FOR STANDARD SEM | CIRCULAR ARCHES Radius of introdos = 1/2 Span opening considered flowing O.9 full * ſe H * spangº, Nºi, º, ºgºlº"; & Pººl"###|*|iº || Alº, Pºś" 3.5" | (3.48° | 35.5 O | .22 ! 4 | | | 27.2 | 2 G.O2 3.53 | 1.5 | 79.85 44,725 4.O2 4. | 9.252 | 4.28, |.5 5 | [.5 | 52.99 36,85 25.64. | 2 O 189.28 45.52 4. | 6 a' 4.5 22. 8 | 5.O.8 1.4. T | 2 |4 O. 55 37. G 5 3.73 | 2.5 | 98.9C) 46.2 | 4.29 5 25,O2 | 5.9 O l. 3 7 | 2.5 | 47.22 258.47 3.82 | 2, 2O8.42 47. [O 4.4 3 5.5 27.84. | 6. T’2 |. 3" | > | 53.77 59.5 O 3.9 | | 2.5 2 7, 92 47.9C) 4.55 (5 3O.G.7 | 7, 55 | 75 | 2.5 | 6O42 4.O. 1 35 4.OO | 4. 22 7.4 | 48.7 | 4.67 4.5 28.O 2 | 7.73 |.58 | 4. ! (66.96 4.O.96 4.O.8 | 4.5 225 (3.9 O 49.5 | 4.78 5 3 1.8 | 18.52 |.72 8.5 | O 4.4.25 254, 37 3.O | 2O | 5 246.58 5O.32 4.9 O 5.5 35 B. G2 | 9.3 | |.84. 9 | | 2.O.8 35.45 25, 6 | 5.5 2 55.64. 5 1. 13 5.OO S’ Q 39.42 2O. 12 |.96 9.5 | | 9.73 2) G.23 3,3 O | 6 2G 5.3 | 51.95 5. (3.5 4.3.2 | 2O.93 2.O(3 |O | 27.3O 57.O2 25.4.4. | 6.5 2 74.76 52.73 5.2.1. 7 46.98 2 1.75 2. (3 | O.5 134.86 37.82 3.57 | 7 28 4-2 | 53.58 5.5 O 7.5 5 O.74. 22.58 2.25 | | | 42.47 258.62 25.39 | 7.5 2.93.64. 54.4 O 5.4 O 8, 54.5 23.4 | 2.353 | |.5 | 5O.O.8 39.42 3.8 | | 8 3O3,O8 55.25 5.49 5.5 42.58 2 1.96 |. 94- | 6 | 2 | 57.68, 4.O.23 3.92 | 8.5 3 12.5 O 5 G.O 5 5.55 (3 4.7.35 22.75 2.O 8 | 2.5 | 6 5.27 4 I.O4. 4.O.3 | 9 32 1.92 56.88 5.66 (3.5 52.1 O 22.54 2.2 | ! 3 | 72.86 4 |.86 4, 3 | 9.5 22, 1.33 57.7 | 5.74. 7 52.85 24-34 2.34. | 3.5 | 80.43 42.68 4.23 2O 34C.73 58.55 5.82 |O' 7.5 61.59 2 5. 5 2.45 | 4. | 87.93 43.49 4.252 8 6(3.325 25.96 2.56 | 4.5 | 95.42 44,252 4.4 | 8.5 7 I.O 5 26.78 2.65 | 5 2O2.98 4.5. 4. 4, 5 O Q 7 5.77 27. (3 O 2.75 | 5.5 2 | O. 52 45.98 4.58 2.5 8 O4-8 28.4 5 2.85 | (3 2 8.O'7 46.8 | 4.66 | O 8, 5.18 29.2G 2.9 | 9.5 | 3 |.O.9 38.93 3.37 §º For º jº, Area (3.5 (3O. | 8 26.2O 2.5 O | O 2, 9.66 39.55 3.53 of Waterway, Op.2nurg ana Vyzrre 7 65.92 || 20.98 2,44. | O.5 || || 48.2G | 4C).49 #á– ºfter of sianasra 52nnicircular 7.5 7 ſ. 57 27.77 2.58 | | | 5 (3.8% 4. 1.28 3.8C) -u 8 77.29 2 8.56 2.7 | 1.5 | @ 5.4.O 4. [.92 3.95 amme me ame * = * = 8.5 825.OO 29.37 2.85 | 2 | 73.96 42.87 4.O6 R As | 2 Q 88.7 O 35 O. 8 2.94. | 2.5 | 82.49 43.37 4, 18 /* | / X 9.5 94.39 5 O.99 3.O.5 | 3 | 9 |.O4. 4.4.48 4.25 O Sprina Line e / \!/ ^: | > | O | OO.O'7 3 |. & O 3. 5 | 8 | 3.5 | 99.5G 45.29 4.4 | - —--—— | O. 5 | O 5.7 | 32. G2 3.24. | 4. 2O8,O8 46. IO 4.52 S}rzan Bao > \ | | | | | .354. 3.25.4-5 3.35 | 4.5 2 ſ (3.3 | 4 (3.9 | 4.(32 *4 | 1.5 | | 7. O | 34.28 3.4-l | 5 22 5. 47.75 4.72 Span | 2 | 22, (36 3 5. 3.49 | 5.5 2 53.6 | 48.55 4.8 | 7.5 &O.74. 3O.425 2.65 | 6 242.O.9 49.38 4.90 R (Radius) - Span +2 Clear = R+(W) Sidzwall 8 87. 48 25 1.2 ) 2.8 O | (S. 5 25 O.59 5 O.2O 4.99 y - O.9 (R+ W.) x = y –W e = } 8.5 94, | 352.OO 2.94 | 7 25 9 O2 5 I.O 2, 5.O8 sin q = # c - VRFX? Area Triangle = c x 9 |OO.82 32.79 3.O7 | 7.5 2.37 53 5 1.8 (3 5. 6 Arza sectors ### & Rºx 3.1416 Q.5 | O'7. 4.3 33.59 5.2O | 8 27 5.99 52.(39 5.24 Total arza wałzrways Span (W)+(Arza Szctors) c x | O | l 4, 25 - 4.39 3.52 | O. 5 | @O.77 4.2.1 7 3.7 | Wałłzd Perimeter = span +2W+[Kert) R(O1745)] | 4. | O. 5 | 2 O.72 3 5.2O 3.4 × . 2O || | | |O | 70.32 4. 2.95 3.88, - CHART NO. 6 SELONI W -- TTV-|N|\/?] - O NO|_|_\/\]|[^C) [[9uuDA'T pļADO Kq ‘voz uolųooſ||qnd 'os|W 31n \|noļu6v go 'ſdæOTS ’n uo pesog V/LV/C] )\ONE|[\OE}}}|-|| Å LISNE LNI TTV-}NIVAJ NOISNE LXB NAJB_1SENA BX||dN}][}_L \/|N\//\T1)\SNNEd CHART NO. 7 8ſ, OH 83d SEHON | – A LISNELNI TV-NIV8 PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE 3 WESTERN EXTENSION REQUIRED CULVERT SIZES From the Tolb Of Formulo : A = Water way Area in Sq. Ft. M = Drainage Area in Acres C = Coefficient A=C\/M* l: & O O CNJ g-e O 'OS – VESV AVMSELVM OE 81ſhö38 - CHART NO. 8 PEN NSYLVANIA TURN PI KE WESTERN EXTENSION ROADWAY DRAI NAGE SHOULDERS O.5 |.. O |.5 2.O 2.5 3.O GUTTER GRADE | N 9. Dzhzrrninz, inlar spacing bu obtaining Mox. Drainagºz Argo from chor H, using roadwag, slopz, and outside arzoe draining on Ho Fhº shouldzt. 5.2.12ct a corpposite valuz of C from roadway, s\ope, and outside arcae. MEDIAL STRIP TANGENT SECTIONS - \nlø F spacino of 4.OQ Fºz H is odºquo H2 For all gradzs of O. 5 % or ovzr: 5pacing in cut sºcłion will b2 dºzrminºd by Fhe location of cross pi pºle scrying should ºr irola Fe. A H FH)2 low poir, Hs of vertical curvae, Fha inch spacing ehould be approx- innaH2 g 200 F22H SUPER ELEVATED 5 ECTION 5 - TH2 maxirnurn inle F spacings or superz12vołęd sºchions arz as followe: G RAD E – 6 O. 4. O. F. O.T. F. |, O 1.25 | FO [..Tº NMAX, SPACl NG 200' 22, F' 2.95' 33, O' 2, TO’ 4OO' 4OO CHART NO. 9 ONOO3S 83d LEE- (A) AllOOT3A NVEW $ Sº § § 3 3 2 O E 5 E E — 3 = Oſ) Or. O Lil Li- Inſ H go Orº 5 j T. H. H. > → <ſ X Cº. Li- § 5 O $3 un Uſ.) CN oo co wo st *2 S S o co to ºr to ci ci – º – c. 3 d o MO cu O GO GO uſ) ºr ro cu “2 & – co to to st grººm, sº * C C C C, ONOO3S 83d 133- (A) Ail OOTBA NVB W to O O CN: to O Uſ) c O § c O : : -: 3 : o§ QN : N- O O‘ ÇO C" 9 O O’ 1 O O" 39 Q'. | O’ 2O“ ÇO“ {» Oº 9 O” 9 Oº 2. Oº 6 Oº 40 o- 19 d 1 e e- ul - a do | S CHART NO. 3 PENNSYLVANIA TURNP |KE WESTERN EXTENSION ENTRANCE CAPACITY OF PIPE CULVERTS (From chart by FT Movis, Pennsylvania State College) à 3à: 3 . § c i on to tº o to ºr rº - O O O O O O O § | B 33 – 398 WHO Hſ)S CHART NO. 4 Gl ‘ON 18w Ho 14-g J. NT DOTHC, ~ THCIV aſ tº TITHN N \f H D O7 Oſ C Q L D S W Q Z ſ O'Z O! L 9 @ 7 9 ‘Z | Q: O Z'O I ~ /// /\ \}ºs/ Ž / j, |// A\|AZZX SS Ayººs/ Z// A sy/WAAZ/VSºžº // / /\sº AAA//jºs” // / / WWººyº/V/s/ / º /// / | / / d º }% (y 7~y ///ſºft-ſi-Z sº Žsy §º Áys/s/ ; /// #1–7 lºss; § ==/ × |Mil/l/ | Asſºsz, // | / ſ / s Ž. {X} * /Zººs/? // || || / 7% ºf ſeals/dz + 31- Y) / WP W º | N - O }º A. 4-4 . draſ Y =