The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTRUCK ROUTEI am concerned about the amount of damage to roads and bridges and the repair costs that aregoing to be suffered by the people living in Butte County if the .current site is approved for the M&T Gravel ,� - Mine. ' R First, there is the issue of road'damage. Heavy trucks cause greater pavement and bridge'wear_and contribute more to congestion than cars. An 80,000 lb., 5-axle'truck weighs as much as 20 cars but does as much damage -as 9,600 cars-$1 ' The River Road traffic study in the EIR was done in September 1999' during almond harvest and while - G school was in session-$2 The study claimed about 90%0 of the vehicles were trucks. The-impact-of cars_ -is'so slight compared to trucks that this- study.androthers--don't even consider-damagedone by=cars.� The number of trucks is much higher during the'two months of almond harvest-' To get an *a&&te ► average, a study should have been done during harvest and then outside of harvest time, -weighting each according to how long it lasts. By using the average duringagreater, truck traffic, M&T's gravel trucks. are a smaller percentage of:the total and result,, by their figures, with M&T owing only about 50% for road improvements. The latest study for River Road .was released with the agenda for taday s meeting- 3 '.It's based on recent traffic counts and'states that the percentage of trucks without the project is about 10% of-the � yT 4r--affic r aIL j So the first study figured that 90% of traffic mi that area was trucks• This latest study says 10%1 An important discrepancy The latest study, also lumps all trucks 'together, whether pickup trucks or 6-axle trucks. All trucks do not have an equal impact on roads.That is shown in the first table where the number of trucks is multiplied by factor for the amount of damage theAruck causes. A•2-axle truck has a factor ' of 1,380. A 5-axle truck is 13,780, about ten times greater damage.' Almost all of the gravel tricks ' M.be 5-axle'trucks. No explanation is given as to hovv the total impact is derived, which is the basis used for determining mine'a share. M J The_second-•study4s.,an incomplete, inadequate study.- If the size of the trucks ii the sample isn't ` measured, then the outcome is useless. • How many 5-axle trucks use the road now is a number required M. to compare impact before and after the project. The conclusion is even more questionable- We aren't , given the dates when the traffic study was done. So an' inadequate, poorly-defined study is,being presented that will cut M&T's share of maintenance costs from 50% to 20%- ' 1 How can people use poor information to arrive`at fair conclusions Chico River Road and River Road were not built to handle the volume and weight of traffic that is pnne lad. The base for this road varies from 4 to 8" with an overlay of 2"t .Butte,County Public Works, has-said thai roads_ carrying this kind of heavy traffic.should have a:15."- base and a 5"'overlay. One 2" overlay is planned for a very small part of the road with only a chip,seo.. for the majority of the road in, that area and only chip seals being planned for ten year intervals.. But-that is the only expense that is being considered when figuring M&T's share of the cost. The rest will be for the County's taxpayers ` to pay, • '� .RS ter lir- - � j .� '�� -+�a4a L:l1 �. , � '_ �4 �r.i � r., 4 r, it r4 ri. _ � - ,. � .� • !. • Next, let's look at the impact on one of the bridges that will be used. The Ord Ferry Bridge may or' ` f may not be replaced if this project is approved. It is currently substandard, being only 20 feet wide, ' considered safe, enough for a large truck and car to pass on the bridge. If it is not. replaced, .the extra truck traffic will increase.the,danger for all vehicles and decrease the,life of the bridge. -The-managing - director..•of_engineering-programs,�fo the AmericanTSociety.of..Civ.il Engineers has sa 8; "Extra weight from increased truck traffic over time willpush a bridge that's already susceptible to fatigue to reach , the end of its life sooner."*4 ' If the bridge is replaced„ M&T is computing their fair share based on the number of vehicles they, . would be adding. This is not nearly their fair share. Abridge receives greater wear than roads do from trucks. Bridges must - support the full weight of the truck rather' than just a single axle at a time, Their fair share should be computed on the impact of the gravel trucks, not on the number-. The method + being proposed would make their share no greater than if they were sending cars across the bridge. Damaged roads create: unpleasant, and potentially dangerous driving conditions for motorists and ,bicyclists, plus added'wear and tear to passenger vehicles' shock absorbers, tires; and alignment. ' According to the National Transportation' Safety Board, "Large trucks are over-represented in fatal car- truck _crashes. In 1997 over 5,000 people nationwide were killed in, crashes involving large trucks; 75% of those involved trucks weighing more than 26,000 pounds. When a ti-tick and a car collide, and a fatality occurs,°98%0 of the time a person in the car'dies"*5 According to the 2000 Census, the median 'household income for Butte County is more than $15,000 • lower than the state median. The percentage of persons below the povertylevel, is nearly 20%,: compared to only 14% for the state. *6 The costs of acceleratedhighway and road maintenance are going to be passed on to taxpayers, not those profiting from this, business. .The dangers and costs being f ' created are going to be the worst for those who are most vulnerable: r ' •,, . Donna Cook 100 Sterling Oaks Dr.', Apt. f 160 ' Chico, CA 95928 - (530) 341-6602, * 1 From "Report to the Committee on Public Works and Transportation, House of Representatives, Preserving the Nation's Investment in the Interstate lEghway System," August 1991, found at www. c zao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO/RCED-91-147 • + ' *2 Table, 4.6-8 of 2002 Draft Environmental Impact Report' see attached *3 Table A, Attachment B, 'see attached *4 Chico Enterprise -Record, front page story of 8/11/07 . * 5 National Highway' Traffic Safety Administration,. 2005' 007 *6 Butte Environmental Council Organization Overview, ' March 2007' Vi % Fv Traffic Index (TI) is a measurement used in' roadway design to determine the structural capability of a roadway. A 'I1 is based upon the number of axles loads on a roadway facility during a given time period, usually daily. An increase in TI, based. upon an increase in traffic volumes, especially heavy vehicles with 3 or more axles, would require a structural roadway design that would accommodatee the increase in loads. A substantial increase in the number of axle loads is required to change a TI. The increase in trips generated by the proposed project does, not increase the number of axle loads to the point of increasing study area roadway TI's, with exception to the segment of River Road notch of the proposed project site to Chico River Road. The roadway segment of River Road north of the proposed project access experiences a change in Traffic Index ('I1) with the addition of project trips. Table 4.6-8, Traffic index Calculations for River Road, summaries the calculations used in the determining Tl. for this roadway segment. The TI on this roadway segment increases fmin 9.5 to 10.0. TABLE 4.6-6 TRAFFIC INDEX CALCULATIONS FOR RIVER ROAD Scenario Existing ExistingWith Project Number of axles 2 axle 3 axle 4axle 5 axle 6 axle 2 axle 3 axle 4axle 5 alone 6 axle Truck. counts Icy axle number 870 '28 0 36 11 893 61 0 97 11 FSAL conversion factors' 1,380 3.680 5,880 13,780 1.3,780 1.380 3,680 i,8ti0 13,7190 13.780 I:SALs 1.2(�P,C3trfP I0=0 0 1 irXi.tnO P.336.660 < Pi).i ift Total F..SAts 1'951,300 2,947,540 Notes: C=onversion fauO rs contained in Table 603.3A, Caltrans High. wcry £kesign ,41anited, 5"' Edition. Product of truck counts and conversion factors - (truck counts)"(conversion factors) m Intersections with Limnited. Curve Radii: These are cases where the limited curve radius at an intersection may cause a truck to encroach upon an oncoming lane while malting a turning movement. We used aerial photography and .the Auto 1 urn 4.0 software package to determine if the curve radii at the northwest quadrant of the West 5`h Street/SR 32 intersection is adequate to accommodate a 55 -foot design vehicle making a right -tum form southbound SR 32 to westbound West 5`h Street without the design vehicle encroaching into the eastbound travel lane on West 5"' Street_ The curve radius (measured at about 40 feet) is sufficient to accommodate a 55 - foot design vehicle. Based on field ol»ervations, none of the other study intersections appear to have insufficient turn radii for aggregate related trucks or asphalt/cetnent trucks. Transit System Two fixed -route transit providers exist within the study area including Butte County Transit and. the.Chico Area Transit System (CATS). Butte County Transit provides fiLxed- route transit set -vice between cities in Butte Countv including Chico, Paradise, Of6ville, Palermo; Gridley and Biggs. CATS provides fixed -route transit service in the Chico M&T Chico Ranch Aline Project Draft EBt 4.6-1.4 Table A SY of roadway one chip seal 666432 Chip near GOSObT be. iu wwana �.��..��. •�� 3 seals In 30 years 83,694.521.60 over all M & T % 12.5% M & T cost 5462,473.85 Cost per ton SOAK J Current Future % Diff Counly M &T M & T Route lango I ADT % Trucksl ESAL % on mad Trucks KOT % Trucks ESAL ESAL share share Mites Total Trude River oad; er y to Chico River Road t-070-Ferry5.3 3089 9.8% 26544 55.00% 0 3159 11.ST-i-3 2730 25.1% 79.9% 20.1°k 1 0.8 Ord Ferry; CountLine to Da on Road 8.0 3150 13.2% 369960 40.00% 51 3201 14.67. 409170 110.5%, 90.4% 88.8% 9.6% 11.2% 1.2 Durham D n Road; Da Road to SR 99 to 99 10.5 1032 12.1% 109120 10.0o°k 13 1045 13.2% 122860 444470 12.6% 10.4% 90.6% 9.4% 0.4 128 Dayton Rd; Ord feu to Chlco Cit Limil 4.5 4927 9.5% 402730 30.00% 38 26 4965 1909 10.2% 12.1% 207890 15.79 86.450 13.6% 0.4 He an Lane: Da an road to Midwa to Midwa 3.2 -4.2-3793 1883 10.9°h 179720 20.00% 70 3663 11.4 388300 t6.99e Chico River Road to Chico 9.8% 332130 55.00°A 4.5 total Toed length (mites) 35.7 SY of roadway one chip seal 666432 Chip near GOSObT be. iu wwana �.��..��. •�� 3 seals In 30 years 83,694.521.60 over all M & T % 12.5% M & T cost 5462,473.85 Cost per ton SOAK J .L .. .. _. •... ..S .f v... . .rte. .. .:. .. ...T- _7:777777 -- 'LAI .... :.. t Ns , �Y l�osEMfan,:.. * naacrr. :...... . AS BUILT,NS . •. L' C. eNe �� .. .:�•:/IUIIAH:.N: DRlet (Tl'K 8�" RfD H R i 9 I CIS