Está en la página 1de 110

POWER POINT PRESENTATION

ON
WIDENING & STRENGTHENING OF BARASAT
BASIRHAT ROAD (FROM 20+000 KMP TO 40+000
KMP) IN THE DISTRICT OF NORTH 24 PARGANAS

PREPARED BY
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE
ENGINEER
BARASAT DIVISION
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
GOVT. OF WEST BENGAL

BARASAAT P.W.D.
DIVISION

BARASAT

BASIRHAT
BASIRHAAT

BARASAT
BERACHAMPA

BARASAAT BASIRHAAT ROAD


SH: 0.00 KMP to 40.00 KMP

Satellite view of B.B. Road


The road under the jurisdiction of this division starts
from 0.000 KMP at Barasat (Champadali More) and
ends at Trimohini More, Basirhat at 40.000 KMP.
Of the entire stretch,
the entire stretch is State Highway,
KMP 0.000 to KMP 20.000 KMP has already taken
up for strengthening and widening to 2 lane with
paved shoulder (10m carriageway) configuration
from February, 2016
Carriageway width from KMP 20.000 KMP to

There is a history of repetitive failure at certain


stretches. The earlier works carried out in this stretch is
tabulated below:
Chainage
From
To

(KMP)

20.0
0
22.4
0
30.0
0
33.1
5
38.0
0

(KMP)

Administrative Approval
No.

Date of Completion

End of DLP

11.03.2015

10.03.2016

18.03.2014

17.03.2017

No.
22.40

170(sanction)/W/1R20/13 dt. 01/03/2013


No.

27.40

252(sanction)/W/1R216/12 dt. 05/02/2012

33.00

36.00

40.00

GO No. 437-W/1M228/15 dt. 02/09/2015


GO No. 437-W/1M228/15 dt. 02/09/2015
GO No. 437-W/1M228/15 dt. 02/09/2015

Ongoing
Expected Completion
time 31/08/2016
Ongoing
Expected Completion
time 31/08/2016
Ongoing
Expected Completion
time 31/08/2016

Expected DLP till


30/08/2019
Expected DLP till
30/08/2019
Expected DLP till
30/08/2019

Salient Features of the Project:

The proposed carriageway is a typical 2 Lane with Paved


Shoulder Carriageway configuration and 1 m Earthen Shoulder
on either side .

1.0 m
Earthe
n
Should
er

iageway
3.5 m carr

3.5 m car
riageway

1.5m
paved
Should
er

Existing carriageway is typical INTERMEDIATE Lane Carriageway


with 5.5m carriageway width and 1m hard shoulder on both
shoulders.

1.5m
paved
Should
er

1.0 m
Earthe
n
Should
er

1
Roadway Width 12 m

However, the section in details has been discussed in later part of


this presentation.

Salient Features of the


Box Drain with Built over
footpath (1.5m wide and 1.25 meter avg.
Project:

depth) has been proposed for 5050 meters length (Total length
proposed for both sides)

A total of 2700m length of the pavement section has been


recommended for raising further due to significantly low
embankment height (less than 600mm).

A total of 700m length have been proposed for resectioning (due


to repetitive failure history).

The horizontal alignment has been corrected a 33 to achieve the


minimum radius of curvature for design velocity of State Highway
(80 KM/Hr.). Though speed restriction could not be totally avoided
and proposed at 4 locations due to non-availability of ROW.

10 nos. Intersections at various chainages leading to important


destinations such as Baduria, Kankra via Gobiali, Chakla, Gobra,
Banapara, Arberia, Haroa and Malotipur have been recommended
for improvement.

10 nos. culverts have been proposed for extension, 5 nos. for


replacement and 3 nos. balancing culverts have been proposed.

A total of 760 m length has been recommended for protective


work by means of Toe wall (due to presence of adjacent water-

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

Satellite view of
the Project Stretch

North 24 Parganas is the most densely populated


district in India & this area being among the busiest
areas of the district, the road serves to a thick
population. The localities adjacent to the project
stretch of the road pass through areas such as
berachampa, kholapota, Benki, Metia and Basirhat.

There are regular buses from Berachampa, Habra,


Maslandapur, Baduria, Basirhat, Hasnabad to Barasat
and even Kolkata enrooting Barasat.

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

Due to the presence of geographically close market


areas in Barasat, Berachampa, Kholapota, Matia,
Benki Bazar, Basirhat and Berachampa, a good
number of commercial traffic ply everyday on this
road.

The road connects with SH-3 & is connected to NH


34 through NH 35 only at a distance of 2 KMs, and
both of this road being widened it is of immense
necessity to widen and strengthen the road to
accommodate the expected flow of traffic.

In the month of September, a huge number of


pilgrims travel through this road to Chakla at the
Temple at Loknath Dham.

At 40.0 KMP at Trimohini More of Basirhat every year


Ichale Sawal is organized which happens to be one of

BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

Takiis an amazing tourist spot in West Bengal. It's


just a 2 hour distance from Kolkata. It is located in
the banks of Ichamati river. To reach Taki from
Barassat on has to travel through this road.

This road at 6 KMP from the end shares international


border with Bangladesh.

Also Basirhat and Sundarban which is in vicinity have


already been declared as a separate district in West
Bengal. Considering the fact that the project road
has tremendous impact in the connectivity of these
two, the road needs to be in proper shape for the
connectivity of these two districts to be served in
need.

In the view of the above, the P.W.D, Barasat Division


has taken up the project to carry out necessary
widening and strengthening the road from 20+000
Kmp to 40+000 Kmp to 2 Lane Paved Shoulder
configuration.
TheSl. location
index
ofFeatures
the recommended
project
No.
Geometric
Description
stretch is as follows:
1

Length of the Road

40.00 KM

Project Length

20.00 KM

The proposed project originates at berachampa

Starting
Point:
Termination
point:

College More (KMP 20.000)


Co-ordinates:

22o41'27.72'' N

88o40'18.53 E

At KMP 40.000 KMP just before Trimohini More at


Basirhat
Co-ordinates:

22o40'2.58'' N

88o5111.78E

ALIGNMENT: DEFFICIENCY &


PROPOSAL

ALIGNMENT CURRECTION:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

According to IRC 73, a State Highway must maintain a minimum


design speed of 80 KMs/Hr. To maintain a minimum design speed of
80 kmph, the present alignment needs to be corrected at 33
locations. Rebuilding work at such locations has been proposed
where center line of existing road has been shifted beyond edges of
existing alignment. The chainage of such stretches have been
furnished below:
CHAINAGE

Proposed Radius

SL.
NO

FROM

TO

1
2
3
4
5
6

21+070
21+110
22+015
22+400
22+470
23+270

21+090
21+155
22+120
22+440
22+570
23+360

(m)
130
60
230
230
230
180

Extra width

Speed

(m.)

(KM/Hr.)

0.00
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60

60
40
80
80
80
70

ALIGNMENT CURRECTION:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

CHAINAGE
Proposed Radius

SL.

Extra width

Speed

(m.)

(KM/Hr.)

NO

FROM

TO

26+295

26+310

230

0.60

80

26+550

26+610

230

0.60

80

26+690

26+760

140

0.60

60

10

27+260

27+290

230

0.60

80

11

27+400

27+480

230

0.60

80

12

31+660

31+715

80

0.60

45

13

31+780

31+830

60

0.60

40

14

31+890

31+910

230

0.60

80

15

33+030

33+040

230

0.60

80

16

33+090

33+140

230

0.60

80

17

33+260

33+275

230

0.60

80

18

33+345

33+390

80

0.60

45

19

33+470

33+540

60

0.60

40

20

33+785

33+800

230

0.60

80

(m)

ALIGNMENT CURRECTION:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

CHAINAGE
Proposed Radius

SL.

Extra width

Speed

(m.)

(KM/Hr.)

NO

FROM

TO

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

33+885
33+395
34+095
34+630
34+790
35+795
35+860
36+180
36+375
38+620
39+520
39+555

33+905
34+405
34+105
34+640
34+810
35+805
35+870
36+190
36+385
38+630
39+530
39+575

230
230
230
230
230
230
230
230
230
230
230
230

0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.60

80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
80

33

39+630

39+650

230

0.60

80

(m)

ALIGNMENT CURRECTION:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

ALIGNMENT CURRECTION:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

SPEED RESTRICTION ZONE:

GEOMETRIC DESIGN OF THE


ROAD

With a guideline not to initiate Land Acquisition the alignment has

been corrected within the available ROW. Thereby, at 5 locations


the maximum radii that can be provided are 60 ,180, 140, 60 and
60 meters and the maximum speed that can be achieved at these
stretches has been estimated as

40 KM per Hr, 70 KM per Hr, 60

KM per Hr, 40 KM per Hr & 40 KM per Hr respectively.


However, it is recommended that sufficient precautionary signages
must be provided at

this zone so as to instruct for speed

restriction.
The chainage of such stretches and their corresponding speeds
have been furnished below:

From 21+000 KMP to KMP 21+200: 40 KM per Hr

From 23+200 KMP to KMP 23+400: 70 KM per Hr

From 26+650 KMP to KMP 23+850: 60 KM per Hr

CD SRUCTURES:
PRESENT SITUATION
APPRISAL & PROPOSAL

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
Cross Drainage structure is a vital infrastructure element of a road
network.
Maintaining
serviceability
of
CD
Structures
and
consequently retaining their level of reliability during their lifetime
therefore
deserves
high
priority
from
techno-economic
considerations. During preliminary reconnaissance survey and
Detailed Corridor Survey the inventory & condition of the existing
Cross Drainage structures were evaluated.
The existing CD structures are in poor condition and are present in
insufficient numbers. Therefore, alongwith retention, reconstruction
existing Cross Drainage structures, new C.D. structures for balancing
in the form of Double barrel (2 X 1.0 m NP-4) H.P. Culverts have
also been considered during preparation of this proposal and the
same has been put to estimate accordingly.

An indicative Strip plan showing existing CD structures, their


pictorial description, and Detailed lists of the retained, extended,
reconstructed cross drainage facilities along with the newly
proposed ones have been presented in the following slides:

SH:
SH: 0.00
0.00 KMP
KMP
40.00
40.00
KMP)
KMP)
MDR:
MDR: 40.00
40.00 KMP
KMP
46.40
46.40
STRIP PLAN INDICATING EXISTING CROSS-DRAINAGE
STRUCTURES
KMP)
KMP)
24 KM

20 KM

BARASAT BASIRHAT - ITINDAGHAT


ROAD (0.000 KMP to 46.400 KMP)

Ch.
Ch. 22+735
22+735
m
m
H.P.
Culvert
H.P. Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
1
1
Width
Width 10.00
10.00
m
m

27 KM

24 KM

Ch.
Ch. 22+220
22+220 m
m
Box
Culvert
Box Culvert
Span
Span 2.75
2.75 m
m
Width

9.7
m
Width 9.7 m

Ch.
24+165
Ch. 24+165
m
m
H.P.
H.P. Culvert
Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
2
2
Width
Width 7.4
7.4 m
m

Ch.
Ch. 24+810
24+810
m
m
Slab
Slab Culvert
Culvert
Span
Span 2.5
2.5 m
m
Width

9.7
Width 9.7 m
m

Ch.
24+820
Ch. 24+820
m
m
Box
Culvert
Box Culvert
Span
Span 3.4
3.4 m
m
Width

7.4
Width 7.4 m
m

Ch.
Ch. 25+185
25+185
m
m
Slab
Slab Culvert
Culvert
Span
Span 2.1
2.1 m
m
Width

9.3
Width 9.3 m
m

Ch.
Ch. 26+390
26+390
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 2.1
2.1 m
m
Width
Width 11.00
11.00
m
m

CULVERT CH: 22+735 KMP


H.P. Culvert
Dia 0.9 m X 1
Width 10.00 m
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed

CULVERT CH: 24+165 KMP


H.P. Culvert
Dia 0.9 m X 2
Width 7.4 m
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed

CULVERT CH: 24+810 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.5 m
Width 9.7 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 24+820 KMP


Box Culvert
Span 3.4 m
Width 7.4 m
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed

CULVERT CH: 25+185KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.1 m
Width 9.3 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 26+390 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.1 m
Width 11.00 m
In good Condition.
Retension Proposed

SH:
SH: 0.00
0.00 KMP
KMP
40.00
40.00
KMP)
KMP)
MDR:
MDR: 40.00
40.00 KMP
KMP
46.40
46.40
STRIP PLAN INDICATING EXISTING CROSS-DRAINAGE
STRUCTURES
KMP)
KMP)

Ch.
Ch. 28+290
28+290
m
m
H.P.
Culvert
H.P. Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
2
2
Width
Width 10.00
10.00
m
m

33 KM

Ch.
Ch. 31+075
31+075
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 4.5
4.5 m
m
Width

Width 10.4
10.4
m
m

Ch.
Ch. 33+440
33+440
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 2.5
2.5 m
m
Width

9.9
Width 9.9 m
m

Ch.
33+730
Ch. 33+730
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 2.5
2.5 m
m
Width

10.50
Width 10.50
m
m

Ch.
Ch. 28+425
28+425
m
m
H.P.
Culvert
H.P. Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
2
2
Width
Width 10.00
10.00
m
m

Ch.
Ch. 28+610
28+610
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 2.4
2.4 m
m
Width
Width 9.9
9.9 m
m

Ch.
Ch. 32+250
32+250
m
m
H.P.
H.P. Culvert
Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
2
2
Width
Width 10.2
10.2
m
m

Ch.
Ch. 29+610
29+610
m
m
Single
Single Span
Span
Bridge
Bridge
Length
Length 25.0
25.0
m
m
Width
Width 10.00
10.00
m
m

36 KM

Ch.
Ch. 27+750
27+750
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 2.4
2.4 m
m
Width
Width 9.5
9.5 m
m

30 KM

Ch.
Ch. 27+735
27+735
m
m
Slab
Culvert
Slab Culvert
Span
Span 3.0
3.0 m
m
Width

Width 10.00
10.00
m
m

33 KM

30 KM

27 KM

BARASAT BASIRHAT - ITINDAGHAT


ROAD (0.000 KMP to 46.400 KMP)

CULVERT CH: 27+735 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 3.0 m
Width 10.00 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 27+750 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.4 m
Width 9.5 m
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed

CULVERT CH: 28+290 KMP


H.P. Culvert
Dia 0.9 m X 2
Width 10.00 m

In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 28+425KMP


H.P. Culvert
Dia 0.9 m X 2
Width 10.00 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 28+610 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.4 m
Width 9.9 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 28+685 KMP


Choked and tilted
Replacement Propos

BRIDGE CH: 29+610 KMP


Single Span Bridge
Length 25.0 m
Width 10.00 m

CULVERT CH: 32+250 KMP


H.P. Culvert
Dia 0.9 m X 2
Width 10.2 m
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed

CULVERT CH: 33+440 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.5 m
Width 9.9 m

Repairing and
Extension Proposed

CULVERT CH: 33+730 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 2.5 m
Width 10.50 m
Repairing and
Retension Proposed

SH:
SH: 0.00
0.00 KMP
KMP
40.00
40.00
KMP)
KMP)
MDR:
MDR: 40.00
40.00 KMP
KMP
46.40
46.40
STRIP PLAN INDICATING EXISTING CROSS-DRAINAGE
STRUCTURES
KMP)
KMP)
39 KM

36 KM

BARASAT BASIRHAT - ITINDAGHAT


ROAD (0.000 KMP to 46.400 KMP)

40 KM

39 KM

Ch.
36+275
Ch. 36+275
m
m
Slab
Slab Culvert
Culvert
Span
Span 3.2
3.2 m
m
Width

9.5
Width 9.5 m
m

Ch.
Ch. 39+780
39+780
m
m
H.P.
Culvert
H.P. Culvert
Dia
Dia 0.9
0.9 m
mX
X
2
2
Width
Width 9.5
9.5 m
m

CULVERT CH. 36+275 KMP


Slab Culvert
Span 3.2 m
Width 9.5 m
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
EXISTING
Sl. No.

Chainage

Type of
Culvert

Overall
Width
(m)

PROPOSED
Span

Recommendation

(m)

22+220

Box Culvert

9.70

2.75

22+735

H.P.CULVERT

7.7

0.9 X 1

24+165

H.P.CULVERT

7.30

0.9 X 2

24+810

Slab Culvert

9.70

2.50

Type of
Culvert

In good Condition.
Extension Proposed
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed
Choked and tilted
Replacement Proposed
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

Overall
Width
(m)

Box Culvert

14.50

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

12.50.

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

12.50.

Slab Culvert

14.50

Slab Culvert

12.50

Choked and tilted


6

24+820

Slab Culvert

7.40

3.40

Replacement Proposed

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
EXISTING
Sl. No.

Chainage

Type of
Culvert

Overall
Width
(m)

PROPOSED
Span

Recommendation

(m)

25+185

Slab Culvert

9.30

2.10

26+390

Slab Culvert

11.00

2.10

27+735

Slab Culvert

10.00

3.00

10

27+750

Slab Culvert

9.50

2.40

11

28+290

H.P.CULVERT

10.00

0.9 X 2

Culvert
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed

28+425

H.P.CULVERT

10.00

0.9 X 2

Overall
Width
(m)

Slab Culvert

14.0

Slab Culvert

14.0

Slab Culvert

12.50

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

15.0

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

15.0

In good Condition.
Retention Proposed
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed
Chocked and Tilted.
Replacement Proposed
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed
In good Condition.

12

Type of

Extension Proposed

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
EXISTING
Sl. No.

Chainage

Type of
Culvert

Overall
Width
(m)

PROPOSED
Span

Recommendation

(m)

13

28+610

Slab Culvert

9.90

2.40

14

28+685

Box Culvert

9.70

2.60

15

29+610

Bridge

10.00

25.00

160

31+075

Box Culvert

10.40

4.50

17

32+250

H.P.CULVERT

10.20

0.9 X 2

Type of
Culvert

In good Condition.
Extension Proposed
Chocked and Tilted.
Replacement Proposed

Overall
Width
(m)

Slab Culvert

14.50

Box Culvert

12.5

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

12.50

Slab Culvert

14.0

In good Condition.
Retention Proposed
In good Condition.
Retention Proposed
Chocked and Tilted.
Replacement Proposed
In good Condition.

18

33+440

Slab Culvert

9.90

2.50

Extension Proposed

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
CROSS DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
EXISTING
Sl. No.

Chainage

Type of
Culvert

Overall
Width
(m)

PROPOSED
Span

Recommendation

(m)

13

33+730

Slab Culvert

10.50

2.50

14

36+275

Slab Culvert

9.50

3.20

15

39+780

H.P.CULVERT

9.51

3.07

Type of
Culvert

Overall
Width
(m)

In good Condition.
Reenion Proposed
In good Condition.
Extension Proposed
Chocked and Tilted.
Replacement Proposed

Slab Culvert

14.50

H.P.CULVERT
(0.9 X 2)

12.50

However, at the following locations new balancing culverts are recommended:


CH. 20+700 KMP (2 X 1.0 HP Culvert)
CH. 30+020 KMP (2 X 1.0 HP Culvert)
CH. 38+125 KMP (1.5 meter span Slab Culvert)

EXISTING CORRIDOR
APPRISAL

PRESENT CORRIDOR
APPRECIATION

ROAD INVENTORY:

The alignment map so produced after survey typically exhibit the key existing
Road inventory as follows

SL
.
NO
.

INVENTOR

Carriagewa
y Details

ON

FEATURES
Existing

DESCRIPTI

Shoulder
Details
Nature Of
Terrain

Carriageway

Width:
Lane type:
Carriageway

width:
Shoulder

Type:
Status of
Earthen

Shoulder:
Terrain
category

DETAILS

Uniform
Intermediate
5.5 m
Hard Shoulder

1000 m on 250mm thickness

Plain

PRESENT CORRIDOR
APPRECIATION

ROAD INVENTORY:
SL
.
NO
.

INVENTOR

DESCRIPTI

ON

FEATURES

Embankme
nt Height

Heights

Varying

Heights

between 0.3 & 1.6 m for most of


the length

range:
Height at

Culverts
5

Railway
Crossing

Cross6

drainage

DETAILS

Yes/ No:

Bridge
1.Major
2. Minor

Structures
. Culverts

1.5 - 2m.
No

At Matia (Ch. 29+610 ) over


Matia River, Span 1 X 24.0 m
NA
18 nos.

BARASAT BASIRHAT ROAD (0.000 KMP to 40.000 KMP)

KILOMETER WISE FEATURES OF THE ROAD


Physical Existance
CrossZone With
Carriagew Drainage Accident
Insufficien
5th
Direction
Chainage ay Width Structure
Prone
t Sight
KM Post Kilometer
Sign
(m)
s
Zone
Distance
Post
Board
(Nos.)
20 - 21
KMP
21 - 22
KMP
22 - 23
KMP
23 - 24
KMP
24 - 25
KMP
25 - 26
KMP
26 - 27
KMP
27 - 28
KMP
28 - 29
KMP
29 - 30
KMP

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

21.00
KMP

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist
Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

BARASAT BASIRHAT ROAD (0.000 KMP to 40.000 KMP)

KILOMETER WISE FEATURES OF THE ROAD


Physical Existance
CrossZone With
Carriagew Drainage Accident
Insufficien
5th
Direction
Chainage ay Width Structure
Prone
t Sight
KM Post Kilometer
Sign
(m)
s
Zone
Distance
Post
Board
(Nos.)
30 - 31
KMP
31 - 32
KMP
32 - 33
KMP
33 - 34
KMP
34 - 35
KMP
35 - 36
KMP
36 - 37
KMP
37 - 38
KMP
38 - 39
KMP

5.5

None

None

31.6 kmp 31.6 kmp


(Baki
(Baki
Bazar)
Bazar)

Exist

5.5

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

5.5

None

None

Exist

Exist

Exist

4. Geo-technical investigation finding :


CHAINAGE
(KMP)

4 DAY SOAKED CBR


5.0MM
(POINT)
(%)

20.45 km

3.15

21.60 km

2.89

22.30 km

3.03

23.60 km

2.98

24.50 km

2.89

25.60 km

2.92

26.50 km

3.10

27.50 km

2.84

28.70 km

2.95

29.40 km

3.05

30.60 km

3.10

31.50 km

3.00

4. Geo-technical investigation finding :

CHAINAGE
(KMP)

4 DAY SOAKED CBR


5.0MM
(POINT)
(%)

32.30 km

2.86

33.60 km

2.95

34.40 km

3.20

35.50 km

3.10

36.40 km

2.85

37.60 km

3.10

38.90 km

3.05

In accordance with the Guidelines of Design CBR Determination of


IRC -37:2012 the 90th percentile of these CBR values is considered as
Design CBR. The percentile graph for the collected CBRs has been
presented in the following slide.

4. Geo-technical investigation finding :

The 90th Percentile CBR was 3.11% and the Design CBR in this case is
considered as 3.1%.

5. Existing Composition Study:


Sub Grade
Mostly earthen.

Sub base
Mostly brickbats or

Base coarse
Mostly WBM or

Bituminous Course
Top Bituminous layer

Though

Jhama

WMM (at some

of thickness varying

stretches)

from 75 mm to 350

PC & SC at some
stretches

silver

sand of varying

varying

thickness

from

of

thickness

varying thickness

mm

150 mm to 200

250mm at different

from 100 mm to

chainages

mm

chainages

250mm

been

found at different
chainages

150mm

of

to

has

from

Metals

at

different

Wearing course
Mostly SDBC

at

different chainages

Another sandwiched

bituminous layer of
varying thickness from
25 mm to 250 mm at
depth of 250mm to 540
mm

from Existing

Road Level in almost


entire stretch.

However, it is recommended that the sandwiched bituminous


layer must be removed.

5. Existing Composition Study:


ON THE BASIS OF HIGHEST DEPTH OF BOTTOM LAYER OF THE
SANDWICHED BITUMINOUS LAYER, the road had been further
classified into 4 stretches of 5 KMs each and the dismantling depth
had been determined which chainages-wise are:

20
25
30
35

KMP
KMP
KMP
KMP

to
to
to
to

25
30
35
40

KMP
KMP
KMP
KMP

:
:
:
:

540
450
450
450

mm
mm
mm
mm

Now after determination of this dismantling depth it was observed


that at majority of the chainages, the entire existing crust would get
dismantled leaving no thickness to be considered as existing granular
composition while designing for strengthening.
As for example, the existing pavement composition between 22.00
KMP and 22.500 KMP is
250 mm BT at top,
followed by 50 mm Brickbats,
followed by 50 mm Sandwiched Bituminous layer,
100 mm WMM and
100 mm Brickbats (total depth 550 mm).
Now, the dismantling depth between 20 KMP & 25 KMP being 540

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE
FACILITIES
There are longitudinal drains (lined) present on piecemeal basis on
the following chainages:
CHAINAGE
SL.
DIRECTIO LENGTH
REMARKS
FROM
TO
NO
N
(m.)
Partly choked and
1

21+850 23+310

L.H.S

1460.00

reconstruction is
recommended
Partly choked and

22+120 22+215

R.H.S

95.00

reconstruction is
recommended
Partly choked and

3
4
5
6
7

22+675 22+765
22+765
23+370
24+825
25+310

23+230
23+700
25+050
25+615

R.H.S
L.H.S
L.H.S
L.H.S
L.H.S

90.00

reconstruction is

465.00
330.00
225.00
305.00

recommended
Functioning
Functioning
Functioning
Functioning

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE
FACILITIES
SL.
NO

CHAINAGE
FROM

TO

DIRECTIO LENGTH
N

(m.)

REMARKS
Choked, damaged and

26+270 26+510

L.H.S

240.00

reconstruction is
recommended

26+565 26+605

L.H.S

40.00

Functioning

10

26+635 26+815

R.H.S

180.00

Functioning

11

26+750 26+850

L.H.S

100.00

Functioning

12

28+650 28+820

L.H.S

170.00

Functioning

13

29+060 29+100

L.H.S

40.00

Functioning
Partly choked and

14
15
16

31+260 31+300
31+385 31+420
31+700 31+840

L.H.S
L.H.S
L.H.S

40.00

reconstruction is

35.00
140.00

recommended
Functioning
Functioning

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
EXISTING SURFACE DRAINAGE
FACILITIES
SL.
NO

CHAINAGE
FROM

TO

DIRECTIO LENGTH
N

(m.)

REMARKS

17

32+175 32+230

L.H.S

55.00

Functioning

18

32+250 32+300

R.H.S

50.00

Functioning

19

32+330 32+460

L.H.S

130.00

Functioning

20

32+370 32+385

R.H.S

15.00

Functioning

21

32+820 32+960

R.H.S

140.00

Functioning
Partly choked and

22

33+485 33+565

L.H.S

80.00

reconstruction is

recommended
Total length of such drain is 4425 meters which is duly insufficient.
But the drain so observed is damaged or has lost drainage properties
at stretches due to sediment or lack of suitable outlet. At these
stretches, reconstruction is recommended, also other home-stead,
market areas are identified and construction of new Surface Drain
with built-over-footpath has been suggested.

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
PRESENCE OF WATERBODIES
Protective works are carried out to stabilize the shoulders and
embankment particularly in areas where water bodies are located
adjacent to the embankment. Guard wall in the form of gravity wall
list for protective works to be carried out, chainage wise have been
attached below:
CHAINAGE
SL.
LENGTH
DIRECTION
FROM
TO
NO
(m).
1

22+730

22+740

L.H.S

10

22+930

22+950

R.H.S

20

23+110

23+135

R.H.S

25

23+255

23+270

R.H.S

15

23+480

23+515

R.H.S

35

23+540

23+575

R.H.S

35

23+880

23+905

R.H.S

25

25+050

25+065

L.H.S

15

25+270

25+310

L.H.S

40

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
PRESENCE OF WATERBODIES
SL.

CHAINAGE
DIRECTION

LENGTH

NO

FROM

TO

10

25+680

25+690

L.H.S

10

11

26+500

26+530

BOTH SIDE

60

12

26+545

26+565

L.H.S

20

13

26+640

26+680

R.H.S

40

14

32+120

32+150

L.H.S

30

15

32+130

32+140

R.H.S

10

16

32+515

32+575

L.H.S

60

17

32+695

32+720

L.H.S

25

18

32+970

32+995

L.H.S

25

19

33+000

33+050

R.H.S

50

20

33+140

33+175

L.H.S

35

(m).

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
PRESENCE OF WATERBODIES
SL.

CHAINAGE
DIRECTION

LENGTH

NO

FROM

TO

21

33+830

33+850

L.H.S

20

22

35+270

35+290

R.H.S

20

23

35+775

35+800

R.H.S

25

24

35+915

35+980

R.H.S

65

25

37+270

37+290

L.H.S

20

26

38+125

38+140

L.H.S

15

27

38+400

38+410

L.H.S

10

(m).

The total length of such stretch is 760 m. and gravity


wall is proposed at these locations.

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION:

CROSS-SECTION of Gravit wall

TRAFFIC SURVEY

DETAILED INVESTIGATION
For design of following investigations were carried out.
1. 24 x 7 CTVC at Gopalpur More (KMP 33+200)
2. Axle load survey to incorporate overloading factor (for VDF
determination) into design
3. Open traverse survey with total station.
4. Geotechnical investigation for the project stretch of 20.00 KMs.
5. The existing composition study.
6. A detail reconnaissance survey
7. ROW details collected from the DL&LRO office

24 X 7 CTVC FINDINGS :TRAFFIC SURVEY :At the time of traffic count, the avg. daily traffic is found to be
14160 in nos.
avg. commercial vehicle per day (CVPD) is 1171 in nos.
PCU (Private car Unit) per day is
13140 in nos.
Average Directional split for fast Moving vehicle is

49:51
Average Directional split for slow Moving vehicle is

50:50
AXLE LOAD FINDING :-

(Hence a 50% distribution of traffic for


1. Axle load surveying was conducted
at Gopalpurseems
More(at
KMP
lane distribution
to be
okay)
33+200)
2. The estimated Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF) was
traffic bound to Basirhat)
3. The estimated Vehicle Damage Factor (VDF) was
traffic bound to Barasat).

11.3

(for

10.9

(for

3. MSA determination :
SL.
NO.
1
2

3
4
5
6

DESCRIPTION

UNIT

VALUE

Nos. of Commercial Vehicle per Day (CVPD) at present

Nos.

1171

Years

Years

15

The Traffic Growth rate


(page - 6 cl. 4.2.2 of IRC: - 37:2012)
Opening traffic in years (1/2 year from date of observations to the
commencement of project & 1+1/2 years for completion of project)
Design Life in Years
Vehicle Damage Factor (As determined from Axle Load Survey
Study (Appendix B)

11.3

Lane Distribution factors (For 2 Lane)

.5

Findings

3. MSA determination :
A = P x (1 + r ) ^ n
A=

No. of commercial vehicles per day at the end of "n" years during
project

P=

No. of commercial vehicles per day at last count

r=

Annual growth
rate

=5%

n=

Nos. of years

=2 years

Therefor
1171 x (1 +
e,
A = 5/100)^2

1291.03

3. MSA determination :
Ns =

365 x A x ((1+r)^t-1) x F x L / r

A =

No. of commercial vehicles per day at the end of project


= 1291.03

r =

Annual growth rate

t =

Design life in yrs

F =

Vehicle damage Factor

L =

Lane Distribution Factor

= 5%
= 15 yrs
= 11.3
= 0.5
Ns

= 57451230.8

(say)
Therefore , Ns

5.75E+07

57.46

MSA

PAVEMENT DESIGN

PAVEMENT COMPOSITION DESIGN


The following elaborate the design considerations made in the
pavement design.
Design Traffic: 57.46 msa
Design CBR: 3.1 %
Design Guidelines: Plate 1 & Plate - 2, Page 26 of IRC 37:2012
The required thickness appears to be as follows:
Traffic
CBR
(%)
(%)

57.46 MSA
Total
Pavement
Thickness
(mm)

3.10%

805.4914

Pavement Composition
Bituminous Coarse
Granular
Base
Wearing
Binder
Coarse
Coarse
Coarse
(mm)
(mm)
(mm)

41.49

137.33

250

Granular
Sub-base
Coarse
(mm)

375

Though from consideration of co-efficient of permeability, the


requirement is 197 m/day (closest greater value is for GSB IV), as
per recommendation of MORT&H, GSB V has been recommended as
the Drainage GSB Layer extended for the entire formation width.
The underlying GSB Layer has been recommended as GSB I due to
low permeability and high 30% CBR.

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION


1200
Also a Needle
punched1000
Nonwoven
Synthetic
Paving Fabric
800
is
recommended
600
in between
two layers of
DBM (70 mm
400
each)
200

40
140
250
175
200
150

Across Enire Width

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION

Also

consolidated

capping

layer

of

thickness

150mm

comprising of 3:1 by volume of stone-dust and sand has been


recommended to be laid under GSB for improvement of subgrade CBR.

Also at stretches where the existing granular layer (Brickbats)


is still remaining after dismantling, it is recommended to
recompact (upto 300 mm depth) the subgrade soil with the
granular crust.

At stretches where the height of the embankment has been


raised or embankment is rebuilt, a 30:70 by volume fly-ash and
medium sand has been recommended to be utilized for
preparation of sub-grade.

PROPOSED CROSS-SECION:
i) Carriageway Width
Determination:
The Level of Service (LOS) for Rural highway is LOS B (page - 8
I) cl. 6.1 of IRC: - 64:1990)

II)

III)

The desired Design Life for State Highway is 15 years (page - 6


cl. 4.3.2 of IRC: - 37:2012)
The average daily PCU from 24X7 Classified Traffic Survey is
13140

IV) The Traffic Growth rate is 5% (page - 6 cl. 4.2.2 of IRC: - 37:2012)

V)

The expected traffic in terms of PCU at the end of design life as


per Eqn. 4.6 of page - 9 of IRC 37: 2012
A

P x (1 + r ) ^ n
Annual growth

r=

rate

5%

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION


For 2 lane road with earthen shoulders,
II) Qmax
With level of service

pcu/da
15000 y

'B' DSV
(Page - 12, Table - 5, of IRC 64:1990)
Also, minimum 1.5 m wide paved shoulder increases the capacity by
15%, therefore the service volume for 2 lane wih paved shoulder
road is 15000+15% of 15000 = 17250.
Again, the design service volume of 2 lane divided carriageway is
3500 pcu / day
(Page - 13, Cl. 11.1, of IRC 64:1990)
Considering the volume of traffic at the end of the design life 30117
pcu
the required Carriageway Type is 4 Lane Divided carriageway.
But due to constraint of road land width it is recommended to go
for 2 lane with paved shoulder configuration at present.

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION


ii) Roadway Width
Determination
The Roadway Width for SH shall
be

(Table - 5, Sl. No. 1 of Page - 8 of IRC

12.00

73:1980)
iii) Cross - slope
determination
(IRC - 73:
I) For carriageway
II) For earth

1980)
(IRC -

2.0 %

73:1980)

3.0 %

OPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION:

the basis of that the following cross-section has been recommended:

PROPOSED CROSS-SECTION (T-02)

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
AREA NEEDING SPECIAL TREATMENT:
Depending upon the existing road condition, soil investigation report, existing
Composition study, stretches of the project road need to be rebuilt & therefore
considered for resectioning in this Detailed Project Report. A chainage-wise
details of the proposed resectioning have been presented in the following table:
CHAINAGE

REASON FOR

SL.
NO

FROM

TO

22+800

23+700

REBUILDING
(m)
Low Embankment

LENGTH
(m.)

Type of Subgrade Proposed

1000.0

Compacted 500 mm layer of

30% sand & 70% Flyash mix

Resectioning
proposed for
repeated failure due

23+700

24+400

to the presence one

700.00

to two nos. of

Compacted 500 mm layer of


30% sand & 70% Flyash mix

sandwiched
bituminous layers

34+000

34+900

Low Embankment

900.00

36+300

37+100

Low Embankment

800.00

Compacted 500 mm layer of


30% sand & 70% Flyash mix
Compacted 500 mm layer of
30% sand & 70% Flyash mix

OPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION:

the basis of that the following cross-section has been recommended:

PROPOSED CROSS-SECTION (T-01)

PROPOSED PAVEMENT COMPOSITION:

PROPOSED CROSS-SECTION (T-05) with Gravit wall on one side

PROPOSED CROSS-SECTION (T-06) with Gravit wall on both sides

SAFETY MEASURES

MAJOR INTERSECTIONS:

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

All of the mentioned intersections carry huge number of passengers to busy


parts of the state like Taki, Baduria, Habra, Maslandapur, Chakla, Haroa to name
a few. The traffic pattern indicates significant passage of both passengers and
commercial goods. Therefore, it is recommended to improve the intersections
and also provide Bus-bays at nearby locations. The following is the list of
significant
intersections along the corridor:
SL.
CHAINAGE
TYPE
DIRECTION
DESTINATION
NO
BADURIA on LHS &

21+835

LHS & RHS

22+535

LHS

BADURIA

23+475

RHS

GOBIALI TO KANKRA

26+065

RHS

CHAKLA

26+260

LHS

GOBRA

28+430

LHS

BANAPARA

29+720

LHS

ARBERIA

31+815

RHS

MALOTIPUR

33+515

RHS

HAROA

10

35+640

LHS

BADURIA

VILLAGE on RHS

BERACHAMPA MARKET

Berachampa marke

BERACHAMPA BADURIA MORE

SWARUPNAGAR

MATIA BAZAR

MATIA BAZAR

BENKI MORE

GOPALPUR BAZAR MORE

KHOLAPOTA BAZAR

MAJOR INTERSECTIONS:

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

CH: 22+535

CH: 21+835

MAJOR INTERSECTIONS:

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

CH:
23+475

CH:
26+065

CH: 26+260

&

CH: 28+430

MAJOR INTERSECTIONS:

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

Clockwise from left


1.
2.
3.
4.

CH.
CH.
CH.
CH.

29+720
31.815
33+515
35.640

MINOR INTERSECTIONS:
However,

some

minor

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

intersections

with

brick-pavement/concrete

road

or

bituminous roads with low to very low traffic and pedestrian movement were also
identified all along the road. they were characterized as minor intersections and
they were also recommended for further development but to a limited extent.
The following is the list of minor intersection to be proposed under improvement
SL.
CHAINAGE
TYPE
DIRECTION
CONNECTIVITY
NO
1

21+300

LHS

VILLAGE

26+210

RHS

VILLAGE

26+585

RHS

BEGAMPUR

27+670

RHS

PARA

27+805

LHS

PANIGOBRA

28+560

LHS

DHANNYAGURIA

28+980

LHS

DHANNYAGURIA

29+140

LHS

DHANNYAGURIA

30+070

LHS

TARAGUNIA

10

32+490

LHS

SANGBERIA

11

33+750

LHS

DHANNYAGURIA

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
SL.

CHAINAGE

TYPE

DIRECTION

12

34+205

LHS

RAHARHATI

13

35+150

RHS

MOYNALI

14

36+540

LHS

KANTHALTALA GHAT

15

37+245

LHS

SRIRAMPUR

16

38+170

LHS

HARISHPUR

17

38+440

LHS

HARISHPUR

18

38+770

RHS

BHABANIPUR

19

38+920

RHS

BHABANIPUR

20

39+025

RHS

BHABANIPUR

21

39+165

RHS

BHABANIPUR

22

39+510

RHS

VILLAGE

23

39+655

RHS

VILLAGE

24

39+720

RHS

VILLAGE

25

39+795

LHS

VILLAGE

NO

CONNECTIVITY

MINOR INTERSECTIONS:

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

The following is the minor intersection improvement plan as developed for this
road

They were improved with

Additional Area

MEDIAN Area

MEDIAN length

(sqm.)

(sqm.)

(m)

36.319

39.0344

32.3901

SALIENT FEATURES
PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINSAPPRECIATION
WITH BUILT OVER FOOTPATH
R.C.C. covered drain drain with BUILT OVER FOOTPATH AND SIDE
RAILING has been proposed to drain out the surface water easily & to
safe guard the road surface from water logging as well as RESTRICT
THE ENTRY OF PEDESTRIANS IN THE MAIN CARRIAGEWAY. The
chainage wise length of proposed surface drain has been tabulated
below:
SL.
NO
1
2
3
4
6
7

CHAINAGE
FROM

TO

21+27

21+50

0
26+13

0
26+47

0
26+15

0
26+44

0
29+29

0
29+43

0
31+75

0
32+09

0
31+80

0
32+10

0
33+53

0
33+77

ADJACENT BUILT UP

LENGTH

AREA

(m.)

DIRECTION

BADURIA MORE

460.00

Both Side

SWARUPNAGAR

340.00

R.H.S

SWARUPNAGAR

290.00

L.H.S

DHANYAKURIA

280.00

Both Side

BENKI MORE

340.00

L.H.S

BENKI MORE

300.00

R.H.S

SALIENT FEATURES
PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINSAPPRECIATION
WITH BUILT OVER FOOTPATH
SL.
NO
11
12
13
14

CHAINAGE

ADJACENT BUILT UP

LENGTH

AREA

(m.)

FROM

TO

37+25

37+70

RAGHUNATHPUR

0
37+15

0
37+27

MORE
RAGHUNATHPUR

0
37+30

0
37+70

MORE
RAGHUNATHPUR

0
38+02

0
38+12

MORE

450.00

R.H.S

120.00

L.H.S

400.00

L.H.S

BHABANIPUR MORE

200.00

Both Side

BHABANIPUR MORE

600.00

Both Side

otal Length of5the Surface


drain proposed is 5050 metre.
5
15

39+70

40+00

DIRECTION

SALIENT FEATURES
PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINSAPPRECIATION
WITH BUILT OVER FOOTPATH

CROSS SECTIONS

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

Proposed Covered Drain section with Built-over Footpath

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION
In addition adequate numbers of
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)

Road signage
Road marking
Road delineator
Road stud
Raised pavement Marker (CATs EYE)
Hazard Marker at CD locations
2 Nos. of GANTR mount Overhead Signage
Direction and Place Identification Signages have been
incorporated in the estimate.

i) Also a cost provision of 2.5% has been incorporated in the


estimate to take care of safety during construction.

ROAD SIDE AMENITIES

BUS BAY AND BUS STOPS

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

During preparation of DPR it was evaluated that there are numerous


bus stoppages which unless addressed may showcase mixed traffic
condition and hamper the unrestricted movement of the traffic once
the road is constructed. Therefore, a separate provision for Bus Bay
needed to be considered.

However, 16 nos. separate bus-bays with bus-shelters are


recommended at 8 locations (2 in nos. at each location on either
sides and staggered) and the name of the adjacent localities are as
follows:

Berachampa
Swarupnagar
Kholapota
Benki
Metia
Dhanyakuria
Gopalpur and
Bhabanipur

The length of each bus-bay is 95 metres and the width is typically


kept at 5.5 metres and the cross-sectional specification is same as
that of the main carriageway.

NEED FOR BUS BAYS

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

NEED FOR BUS BAYS

SALIENT FEATURES
APPRECIATION

COST ESTIMATE:

The source & lead of different construction materials


were evaluated and they are as follows:

MATERIAL SPECIFICATION
Coarse Aggregate

LEAD
31 KMs

(Pakur Quarry Material)


Sand

Barasat

Railway

Stack-yard
Locally Available

(Conform to IS: 383-1970)


Brick

Locally Available

Cement
(OPC 33/43/53 Grade)
VG - 40 Bitumen

SOURCE

173 KMs

(30/40 Grade Bitumen)


Bitumen Emulsion

72 KMs

(MS Type)
Penetration Grade Bitumen

72 KMs

(10/20 Grade Bitumen)

55 KMs

Locally Available
Haldia IOCL Refinery
Dhulagarh
Dhulagarh

Reinforcement Steel
(Fe 415 /Fe 500 /Fe 500D , conforms to

Kolkata

IS: 1786)
MORT&H Empanelled

Expansion Joint
Carried Earth

Suppliers
Land
Arranged
Lead: 4 KMs

Contractor

by

COST ESTIMATE
The aggregate considered is Pakur stone material, rates of which are
noted in Vol-III, (Roads & Bridges Works), PW (WB) SOR (rates upto 6 th
Corrigenda were taken)

So far soil for earth work is concerned, the borrow area will be finalized
only after obtaining satisfactory test results in accordance MORT&H
specification.

Plenty of bricks, sand and cement suppliers are available along side of the
corridor.

COST ABSTRACT:
Sl.
No.

Cost
(in Rupees Lakhs)

Description of Items

Cost of Earth Work

Cost of Dismantling/ Construction of SubBase & Base Course

185.39

4601.25

Cost of Bituminous Work

Cost of Paving Fabric

Cost of Road Furniture & Traffic Safety


Measures

318.44

Cost of Intersection Improvement & Busbays

811.66

Cost of Protective Work

A
b.

Cost of Guard-wall
Cost of Bullah Piling

760 metres
400 meters

133.68
17.15

c.

Cost of Dumping Gunny bags filled with soil

12800 Nos.

1.92

Cost of Cross-Drainage Work

3485.7
268.84

152.75

327.86

COST ABSTRACT:
Sl.
No.

Cost
(in Rupees Lakhs)

Description of Items

Cost of 2 X 1 M HP Culvert

8 Nos.

Cost of 1.5 m Span Slab Culvert

1 Nos.

C
D

Cost of Extension (by 3.00 metres) of 2 X 2.0


m Double Vented Box Culvert
Cost of 3.0 X 3.0 m Triple Vented Box
Culvert

Cost of Bus Stop

Cost of Surface Drain

10

Cost of Horticulture

12 Nos.
1Nos.
16 Nos.
5050 meters

50.2
22.78
196.24
58.64
58.97
927.49
135.21

(A) Sub-total Rs. in Lakhs

11273.55

(B) Sub-total without 1% L.W. Cess Rs. in Lakhs

11161.94

Add 3.00% as contingency Rs. in Lakhs

334.86

COST ABSTRACT:
Sl.
No.

Description of Items

Cost

Add 0.50% as cost towards Outsource of DPR Rs. in Lakhs

55.81

Add L.W. Cess Rs. in Lakhs


Add 2.5 % as cost of Quality Control &
Supervision Rs. in Lakhs

111.62
281.84

(B) Sub-total Rs. in Lakhs

11946.06

Cost of Utility Shifting of WBSEDCL Rs. in Lakhs

701.02

Cost of Utility Shifting of PHE (20 KMP to 22.00


KMP) Rs. in Lakhs

144.78

Basirhat PHE Rs. in Lakhs

170.23

Add 2.5 % as cost of Safety during construction Rs. in Lakhs

298.65

Total Rs. in Lakhs

13260.74

Say Rs. in Lakhs

13260.74

(In Words: Rupees One Thirty Two Crores Sixty Seven Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand only)

PROJECT COST SYNOPSYS


Sl.
No.

Cost Head

Total Cost
(in Rupees Lakhs)

Cost/KM
(in Rupees Lakhs)

Cost of Road Construction

8541.16

427.06

Cost of Protective Work

152.75

7.64

Cost of CD Structures

327.86

16.40

Cost of Surface Drain

927.49

46.37

Cost of traffic Safety and Road


Furniture

1130.10

56.51

Cos of Horticulture

135.21

6.76

Cost of Utility Shifting

1016.03

50.80

Total Projectt Cost

13260.74

663.04

THANK YOU