MOA Project #10-026

Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades

Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 68

Appropriate transitions can include extending the insulation beyond the roadway
improvements, reducing the insulation thickness, or angling the insulation downward.
Use of a frost tolerant section, an alternative to the insulated section, may be
warranted where subgrade soil has low to moderate frost susceptibility or where
groundwater is relatively deep and subgrade soil is not saturated most of the year. A
frost tolerant section could be considered at the beginning of the project, from
approximate station 508+00 to about station 520+00. Soil borings in this area
encountered shallow weathered rock, between 2.5 feet to 12 feet below ground
surface. A frost tolerant section may also be considered at the north end of the
project, between approximate stations 590+00 to 599+50. General appearance of
the pavement surface suggests that roadway performance in this segment is better
than the remainder of the alignment. A frost tolerant section in these two segments
would consist of approximately 2.25 feet of NFS fill material.
For both an insulated and frost tolerant section, a non-woven geotextile is included
along the base of the structural section to separate the native silty subgrade
materials from the imported subbase fill.
When peat is exposed in the base of the excavation, it is recommended that the peat
be excavated out and replaced with imported fill.
Retaining Walls H.
Due to the steep adjacent terrain along the project corridor, retaining walls will be
required to reduce the impacts from roadway grading and slopes. Retaining walls
should be installed as needed to minimize impacts to utilities, the environment, and
adjacent properties.
1. Retaining Wall Types
Below is a description of the four basic types of retaining walls along with their
characteristics.
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 69

Example rock-gabion retaining wall Example modular block retaining wall
Gravity: Gravity retaining walls rely on the mass of the wall structure for stability.
The wall mass must be sufficient to counteract sliding and overturning forces
from the retained soil. These systems can use stone, concrete or other heavy
material as well as mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) for stability. These are
the most common type of retaining walls and include gabions, bin walls, and
modular block concrete construction. In most cases the slope behind the wall
needs to be temporarily removed during construction. For mechanically stabilized
earth walls, the reinforcing often extends horizontally into the embankment about
as far as the exposed wall face is tall.
Piling: Piling retaining walls have structures that extend significantly below grade
to provide support to counteract horizontal forces from the retained soils.
Typically two thirds of the structure height is embedded below grade. The
structures are usually steel sheet piles or H beams. Piles are driven into the soil
while H beams can either be driven in or set into drilled holes. Quite often, the
structural face of a piling wall is covered with a facade of concrete blocks or
panels. These are some of the most expensive types of retaining walls but they
do allow construction with very little removal of soil behind the wall.
Cantilever: Cantilever retaining walls have a large effective mass due to the soil
placed over a horizontal section of the wall. These walls are typically constructed
of cast-in-place, reinforced concrete. The horizontal (cantilevered) leg of the
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 70

structure can either extend back into the retained soil or out away from the slope.
The slope behind the wall typically needs to be temporarily removed during
construction. Cantilever walls are relatively expensive due to the work required to
build concrete forms, install reinforcing, pour concrete, and provide joints
between pours. The concrete needs ample time to cure before the soil can be
replaced behind the wall.
Anchored: Anchored (or tieback) retaining walls use cables driven horizontally
into the soil to counteract opposing horizontal forces from the retained soils. The
anchors, which typically pull horizontal plates or sheets against the soil, can be
soil nails, tieback cables, or screw anchors. The soil behind the wall does not
need to be removed during construction. The anchors may need to extend into
Basic types of retaining walls
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 71

the embankment quite a ways, which can impact buried utilities or future
development.
Combination: Many retaining walls use a combination of the above types. For
example, many piling walls use anchors to reduce embedment depth and
structure strength.
2. Considerations
Below are important considerations that affect the decision to provide a retaining
wall and which type of wall should be constructed. The decision to construct a
retaining wall can be subjective and must balance the cost of installing a
retaining wall with the overall impacts to utilities, wetlands, the environment, or
adjacent properties. Impacts to wetlands often demand construction of retaining
walls due to permitting requirements to avoid or minimize wetlands impacts if
possible. Exact locations of retaining walls will require further refinement during
the design phase.
Embankment Impacts: Gravity and cantilever retaining walls typically require
some of the soil behind the wall to be temporarily removed during construction. In
some cases the slope can be cut to stand near vertical for short periods of time
to reduce impacts but OSHA embankment guidelines and worker safety must be
accounted for. Piling walls can minimize impacts to adjacent properties and
structures.
Foundation Soils: Gravity and cantilever retaining walls require a solid foundation
to resist the forces of the wall and soil. Where foundation soils are weak, a piling
or anchor wall should be considered or the weak soil replaced. The bedrock
encountered near the south end of the Golden View Drive project provides an
excellent foundation but makes driving sheet piles very difficult (see APPENDIX E
for the geotechnical report).
Groundwater/Drainage: Groundwater needs to be removed from behind the
retaining wall to reduce hydrostatic forces. Many types of wall are inherently
porous while other types, like reinforced concrete, require weep holes to be
integrated into the design to relieve pressure from water behind the wall. In areas
where substantial groundwater and glaciation is expected, a subdrain should be
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 72

considered to direct the runoff to drainage ditches or a piped storm drain
collection system.
Utilities: Some types of retaining walls impact a considerable amount of soil
behind the face of the wall. For example, modular block walls and MSE walls rely
on reinforcing geotextile fabric embedded into the soil as part of the structure.
The fabric behind the wall can impact existing utilities or limit future placement of
utilities. Anchor wall cables also extend into surrounding soils and affect utilities.
Aesthetics: Retailing walls are often very noticeable along a roadway corridor
and they should be selected to compliment the landscaping design and blend in
with the surrounding neighborhood. Sometimes retaining walls are chosen to
match existing walls on adjacent properties. Many of the existing retaining walls
along Golden View Drive are large irregular boulders. Although many PM&E
roadway project use concrete modular block retaining walls, gabion walls may be
more appropriate for this project area where residents have expressed a desire
to retain the rural feel. Gabion walls have also been used in other Anchorage
hillside areas including along Birch Road and for South Anchorage High School.
Safety Fence or Handrail: When the vertical face of the retaining wall is more
than 2.5 feet tall, a fence,
handrail, or guardrail should be
provided for safety. Moose
should be discouraged from
walking over the wall. Where
space is limited, a fence or
handrail can be placed near the
face of a reinforced concrete
wall. Most other types of wall
require the fence to be set back
in the soil behind the wall.

MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 73

Construction Schedule: In some
cases, the amount of time
required to construct a retaining
wall is very important since it
can affect impacts to adjacent
property owners or the
environment. Reinforced
concrete headwalls take a
considerable amount of time to
construct. They are typically not
a good option for stream culvert
headwalls that need to be
completed quickly to reduce
environmental impacts.
Maintenance: Retaining walls and associated fences or handrails should be
designed to require little if any maintenance. Concrete surfaces can be provided
with coatings to facilitate removal of spray paint vandalism.


Construction of gabion-type retaining wall
Construction of modular block retaining wall
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 74

Cost: The estimated
installed cost for
retaining walls varies
considerably from $45 to
more than $200 per
square foot of the
exposed vertical face.
Some of the biggest
factors include soil
conditions, wall height,
tiebacks, construction
access, type of fence and
the amount of soil to be removed behind the wall for construction. Below is a
summary of order-of-magnitude cost for various types of retaining walls for
comparison purposes. These costs include a chain link fence above the wall.
Summary of Unit Costs
Retaining Wall Type
Cost per
Square foot of
wall face,
installed
Excavation
Modular block (Keystone),
without tiebacks
$45
full excavation behind blocks,
limited to 4' height
Modular block (Keystone),
geogrid tiebacks
$60 full excavation behind geogrid
Mechanically Stabilized
Earth (MSE)
$75
with concrete face, full excavation
behind wall and tieback
Gabion Basket $75 full excavation behind wall
Reinforced concrete,
cast-in-place
$120
full excavation behind base of
structure
Soldier pile, without
tiebacks
$130
with block facade, minimal
excavation behind wall
Soldier pile, with tiebacks $190
with block facade, minimal
excavation behind wall
Sheet pile, without tiebacks $180
with block facade, no excavation
behind wall
Sheet pile, with tiebacks $210
with block facade, no excavation
behind wall
Example modular block retaining wall with railing
MOA Project #10-026
Golden View Drive Intersection & Safety Upgrades
Draft Design Study Report
March 2012 75

3. Estimated Project Cost
The conceptual drawings located in APPENDIX B indicate where retaining walls
should be considered to limit impacts to utilities, the environment or adjacent
property. The potential areas for retaining walls for the preferred alternative
(Alternative 1) are summarized below in TABLE 7. Note: this summary does not
include stream culvert headwalls.
Table 7 Summary of Retaining Walls (preferred alternative)
Purpose
Street
Approx.
Start
Station
Off-
set
Ave
Height
(ft)
Length
(ft)
Area
(sf)
Utility
Environ-
ment
Property
Golden View 528+75 Left 4.9 181 887 X
Golden View 531+27 Right 3.5 108 378 X X
Golden View 535+34 Right 5.2 28 146 X
Golden View 541+27 Right 6.4 285 1,824 X X
Golden View 543+88 Left 2.5 65 163 X
Golden View 544+69 Left 2.0 107 214 X
Golden View 546+45 Left 3.0 296 888 X
Golden View 549+72 Right 4.0 667 2,668 X X
Golden View 568+81 Right 3.4 116 394 X
Golden View 570+69 Left 3.5 572 2,002 X X
Golden View 577+45 Left 2.5 542 1,355 X
Golden View 584+65 Left 4.5 530 2,385 X
Romania 200+78 Left 4.1 38 156 X
A modular block or gabion basket type retaining wall can be used in nearly all of
the areas identified above. Assuming a unit cost from $60 to $75 for modular
block and gabion basket wall types respectively, this represents an approximate
cost of $880 thousand to $1.01 million for the recommended Alternative 1.
Traffic Calming I.
Based on speed studies and comments from local residents, speeding is a concern.
Various methods for traffic calming were investigated, including:
Vertical traffic calming measures (ex. speed hump)
Horizontal traffic calming measures (ex. neckdowns)