Alternatives Study of Alignment

Transcription

1 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 1 of 6 Alternatives Study of Alignment 1 Objectives The following objectives were kept in view while locating the alternative bypass alignments: i) Should avoid flood prone areas and agricultural lands. ii) iii) iv) The length should be as short as possible. It should have minimum impact on the existing public utilities and settlements. It should not disturb the existing drainage system. v) The alignment should be avoid of sharp curves. vi) vii) 2 Approach Methodology The alignment should be located away from the existing built up area and should not conflict with future planned development. Traffic capacity and safety should be optimized. Topographical maps of Survey of India and satellite images from Google Earth were studied to understand the terrain, water bodies, forest areas and any major channel etc. at macro level on both sides of stretches to be bypassed. Besides, thematic maps relative to soils, land capability, drainage, relief etc. were also scanned to have better appreciation of these factors. Remote Sensing maps were also acquired for precise study. Reinforced with the generalized information from maps, site visits were made to study the details at micro level. Site visits included thorough inspections of areas on both sides of urban stretches covering the study of terrain, land uses, environmental sensitive features and developmental activities. The coordinates of these features are taken as control points by GPS instrument. This exercise enabled us to identify the potential alignments for bypass alternatives. These were marked on remote sensing maps. This was followed by another site visit by multidisciplinary team consisting of highway engineer and social and natural environmentalists to verify the feasibility of these alternative alignments and to record impacts on natural environment (water bodies/wet lands, rivers/water crossings, forests etc.), social environment (agricultural land, intensity of development, resettlement problems etc.), cultural environment (archeological properties, temples/shrines etc). This process was repeated and refinements made in alternative alignments. 3 Alignment selection Alignment selection was carried out on the basis of evaluation of various alternatives for each bypass. The improvement of the existing alignment was included as an alternative. Both qualitatively and quantitatively evaluation has been done for various factors influencing the selection process. These factors can be broadly grouped under main heads such as geometrics, cost, economic benefits and social and environmental impacts. The qualitative evaluation rates the

2 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 2 of 6 alternative as less desirable, desirable, more desirable and most desirable against each factor. The factors that were considered for qualitative comparison are: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Land availability. Effect on residential/commercial buildings. Ponds affected. Religious structures affected. Flora and fauna affected. Long term utility. Environmental Quality. Similarly quantitative evaluation was done for the following factors: i) Route length. ii) iii) iv) Number of sharp horizontal curves. Length of agricultural land affected. Length of barren land affected. v) Length of residential land affected. vi) vii) viii) ix) Length of commercial land affected. Number of road crossings. Number of river/canal crossings. Pucca / Kutcha - commercial / residential structures affected. x) Telephone/Electric poles to be shifted. The alignment alternative with the best rating has been selected. 4 Koderma Bypass The boundary of Koderma Town start from Km and ends at the start of Forest area at Km In this stretch of the project road available ROW is varying between 8 m to 30 m, also the stretch from Km to Km is very congested, this portion of the project road has major government and Private structures of the district like D.C. Office, Post Office, Tahsil Office, Govt. Hospital, Police Station, District Jail etc. The Project road in this stretch has 7 m wide carriageway and 1.5m wide earthen shoulder on both sides, Due to above mentioned facts, the scope of land acquisition for 4 lane facility in this area is very critical. Keeping in mind these facts and after discussion with NHAI officials it is proposed to Bypass this section of the Project road.

3 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 3 of 6 After various site visits and discussion we have proposed two alternative alignments for Koderma Town. These are: Alternative 1: Proposal of bypass on LHS of the Project road (Km to Km ) Alternative 2: Proposal of bypass on RHS of the Project road (km to Km ) Alternative 3: Elevated Corridor through existing alignment For making traffic free from interferences from local traffic, Project road carriageway needs to be raised so that through traffic can pass Koderma town without conflicting with local traffic. Elevated corridor will require connectivity for Koderma Girdih road through ramps/ loop. To provide Elevated corridor for Project road and Service road for local traffic it will require 28 m to 32 m RoW apart from land requirement for giving access to Koderma Girdih Road. Alternative I: The 1st alternative alignment starts from km before Koderma Town and runs in the left direction of the existing alignment it meets the existing alignment at Km thus having a total length of approx Km. Alternative II: The IInd alignment starts from Km , runs in right direction of existing alignment and meets the project road at Km , thus having a total length of Km. This alignment crosses Railway line at two locations and also cross Koderma Domchanch road, thus requiring two additional ROBs and flyover. Alternative III: The alternative III follows existing alignment on which from Km to km , thus having a total length of km, elevated corridor with 775 m approach is proposed due to the heavy congestion/ Built up area and non-availability of ROW in this stretch. The proposal of this Km elevated corridor will increase the project cost abruptly. The above three alternatives are shown in Fig-1.1 shown below & Comparative statement with merits and Demerits of three alternatives are given in below Table-1.1.

4 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 4 of 6 Km Alternative I (LHS) Koderma Domchanch Road Alternative III Existing Alignment Km Alternative II (RHS) Km Railway Line Map depicting various Bypass alternatives

5 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 5 of 6 Sl. No. Table 1.1: Comparative Statement with Merits and Demerits of Three Alternatives Description Alternative 1 (Left side) Alternative 2 ( Right Side) Alternative 3 (Existing Alignment) 1 Length Km Km Km 2 Length Bypassed Km Km N/A 3 Rail-Road Crossing Nil 2 Nil 4 Nala/Canal Crossing 3 3 Nil 5 No. of Major Cross Road Nil Length of Flyover/Vehicular Underpass/Bridge - 2 ROBs of length 100m each and 1 flyover of 50 m excluding approach Km 7 Approach Length - ( ) x 3 = 1200 m =775 m 8 Service Road/Ramp x2 = 10.8 Km 9 Land Acquisition Ha Ha Ha 10 Type of Land to be Acquired Agricultural & Wildlife Agricultural, residential & Wild life Commercial & Residential 11 Civil Cost Rs Crore Rs Crore Rs Crore 11 Advantage 1. The Alignment bypasses the congested area of Koderma Town. 2. This Alignment doesn t require any Rail Over Bridge. 3. No flyover is required. 4. Land to be acquired is mostly Agricultural. 5. Length of this alternative is less than Alternative II, hence requirement of land to be acquired is less. 1. The length of alternative passes through wildlife Sanctuary area is less as compared to Alternative I. No Bypass required.

6 Project: 4-lanning of Barhi Rajauli Section of NH-31 Sheet: 6 of 6 Sl. No. Description 12 Disadvantage Alternative 1 (Left side) 1. The only demerit is that some part of the alignment passes through Wild life Sanctuary area. Alternative 2 ( Right Side) 1. The alignment passes railway line at two places, hence two ROBs required. 2. The alignment crosses Koderma - Domchanch road, hence flyover is also required. 3. The Length of this alignment is more than other alternatives, hence land acquisition is also more. 4. R & R Cost will be high. 5. The overall impact will be increased cost. Alternative 3 (Existing Alignment) 1. The R & R would be significantly difficult due to the presence of heavily congested Built-Up section. 2. No future improvement is possible. 13 Recommendation PRIORITY I Not Recommended PRIORITY II