Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-29 Rail Summary MinutesRAIL COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 9 Special Meeting March 29, 2023 The Rail Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at 3:32 P.M. Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Veenker (left at 4:35) Present Remotely: None Absent: CALL TO ORDER Chair Burt called the meeting to order and asked the clerk to call roll. PUBLIC COMMENT 1. Rob Levitsky spoke about the potential of shutting down Churchill and rerouting of cars to Embarcadero and Oregon. It was estimated roughly 7000 cars would reroute to Embarcadero if Churchill was closed. He opposed this closure and wanted Churchill to stay open with a viaduct or partial solution. Verbal Update on Interagency Activities A. Caltrain Chief Transportation Official Phil Kamhi spoke on behalf of Caltrain per their attached presentation. Caltrain has been conducting field surveys to inspect the San Francisquito Creek Bridge for storm damage and also monitoring rising water levels. Caltrain is moving quickly to initiate a project to repair erosion caused by storms and plans to restore the embankment as part of this. Public Works and the Office of Transportation have been coordinating with Caltrain, Menlo Park, Stanford, San Francisquito JPA, and Valley Water on this project. Caltrain staff is working to institute emergency procurement procedures, including design, environmental permits, and implementation of construction management, to address this urgently. This repair does not impact the grade separation or bridge replacement projects. According to the 1996 maintenance agreement, Palo Alto is to maintain the pedestrian bridge SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 but Menlo Park is responsible for half of the costs. Members of the Caltrain Board were updated on this during the Finance Committee meeting on March 27, and Caltrain plans to continue to coordinate with the above agencies to provide emerging updates. Chair Pat Burt asked for an update on the bidding of the Churchill bike and ped improvements. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated Caltrain was unable to secure a successful bid for their portion of the work on the Churchill Avenue section 130 project. They are combining it with a larger project in order to solicit more bids. Senior Engineer Ripon Bhatia explained the project scope involves the pre-signal and signal modification at the intersection of Alma and Churchill and is a fully grant-funded project. This is a joint project with JPB and the City and includes safety improvement for the traffic signal as well as widening the pedestrian ramp and pathway to provide for more storage and passthrough along Churchill Avenue across the railroad tracks. The City and JPB are each doing procurement on their parts of the work. JPB was unable to secure a contractor and is lumping the project to make it more attractive. Chair Burt clarified that the pedestrian improvements are westbound and asked if there would be improvements toward the mass of Paly riders going the wrong way against traffic in the afternoon. He questioned what improvements would occur regarding the signal optimization. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated bicycles that use the vehicular lane for bike traffic continue to do so. As part of the evaluation of the traffic signal timing, the previous signal timings have been enhanced to meet current codes and allow pedestrians to cross more safely. Council Member Lauing asked about the current timetable. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated Caltrain and the City are each bidding their projects and will have to coordinate with both contractors to ensure the phasing works together. Chair Burt questioned whether the signal being able to respond to the preemption trigger was a result of Positive Train Control. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated there are stationary detectors on the rail tracks in the existing scenarios but they are not Positive Train Control based. Council Member Veenker wanted to continue to prioritize the eastbound Churchill crossing for the Paly students returning home after school. Chair Burt was concerned that reinforcing the San Francisquito Creek's north bank might risk shifting erosion to the south bank and the El Palo Alto Tree. He requested that Caltrain have an expert look at the hydrologic impact there. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated that would be brought to Caltrain's attention. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 B. VTA – There were no VTA updates. C. City Staff Chief Transportation Official Kamhi noted Caltrain had meetings throughout March regarding the Corridor Crossings Strategy. Kimley-Horn, the consultant, shared the project objectives and the timeline of approximately 1 year. Creating the crossing delivery guidelines will provide clear guidance for delivery of a rail crossings project. On Thursday, March 23, Staff attended a meeting with City of Menlo Park Staff on the quiet zone study, which includes the Palo Alto Avenue-Alma crossing. Conceptual plans with proposed improvements were presented, and the project was very well received. Staff plans to share the project with various commissions and committees for feedback before bringing it to Rail Committee and seeking City Council approval sometime this summer. Chair Burt understood the measures needed at Palo Alto Avenue were nominal, whereas the ones at Menlo Park and Palo Alto other crossings were more significant. He questioned if the extent of the work at Palo Alto Avenue was raising the center median, what the cost of the Menlo Park crossings was, and whether those were comparable to other Palo Alto crossings. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated there was no study performed on other Palo Alto crossings. For Menlo Park, the cost is much higher but they only need to do two of four crossings to be considered a quiet zone. Senior Engineer Ripon Bhatia explained the median had to be rebuilt and extended in length to 100 feet. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi believed the total for all of the crossings was $5M but the cost depends on what is needed at the other intersections. Chair Burt wanted to make it clear to the public that other crossings may not be accomplished as quickly as Palo Alto Avenue, though they would still be pursued. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi believed the plan would be a feasibility study for those locations because there are a lot of regulatory bodies to involve but also a lot of grant funding available. Public Comment: 1. Adrian Brandt stated the FRA has a very detailed quiet zone risk index calculator to determine what measures would be sufficient to meet the criteria to qualify for quiet zone. He was unsure the other crossings would be more difficult but agreed there would be more cost. He noted that the High-Speed Rail Authority is committed to SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 paying for quad gates at all remaining crossings and felt they should pay for or reimburse cities for quad gates because they would have to do it anyway. Action Items 1. Review and discuss the Grade Separation Evaluation Criteria and provide a recommendation to the City Council with any proposed amendments Chief Transportation Official Philip Kamhi explained that in 2017, City Council adopted criteria for the selection of a preferred alternative for the locations. Since a lot of work has been done since then, that criteria is being reviewed. He suggested reviewing items one by one. Chair Pat Burt pointed out that the staff report provided a multipage set of criteria and included relevant portions of the Comprehensive Plan and the existing Bike and Ped Master Plan to compare those guiding documents to the criteria and make sure they are well aligned. He believed the criteria were still fundamentally on target but needed some refinement. Public Comments: 1. Stephen Rosenblum, speaking as a representative for five residents, strongly supported the viaduct as the best solution for all the grade crossings under consideration in Palo Alto. A citywide viaduct does not favor one crossing over another, creates a green space on the former right-of-way from Mountain View to University Avenue, and has minimal interference with water flow and minimal utility relocation. Aside from a bored tunnel, it also provides the best connectivity after construction and the least interference with vehicular and pedestrian movement. He compared the viaduct and partial underpass options using Churchill as an example, showing illustrations and videos depicting each option, with the viaduct being much simpler. 2. Penny Ellson suggested two changes to the criteria. Under Item B, she asked to consider changing the words "reduce delay and congestion" to "maintain corridor travel times," which is more consistent with current Comp Plan transportation goals and performance measures for the Charleston-Arastradero plan. Under Item C, she requested taking the current language further to include "through and after grade separation construction." In addition, she suggested to grade separate east-west bicycle-pedestrian school routes on City of Palo Alto designated school commute corridors from north-south Alma automobile traffic as well as the rails where feasible. 3. Alan Wachtel stated the evaluation criteria for bicycle and pedestrian traffic focuses almost exclusively on separation from vehicular traffic and in this project, that means grade separation. As a result, the underpass alternative was rated most highly for bicycle and pedestrian traffic, but he felt it was the worst option for everyone, with significant drawbacks. It requires navigating steep upgrades and does not connect SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 directly to existing travel routes; the connections to nearby routes are very difficult with narrow sidewalks, sharp turns, and blind corners; and the flyovers make it impossible to construct complete interchanges at Meadow and Charleston so vehicular traffic is prevented from turning onto Alma for some movements. 4. Adrian Brandt agreed with Mr. Rosenblum and Mr. Wachtel and extended support for viaducts, which he stated were not the cheapest option but were the best. He felt the criteria should weigh heavily that all existing turning movements are preserved with no circuitous movements required by the end solution, as in the underpass alternatives. Underpasses will flood and require in-perpetuity expenses and pumping systems that work even when the power goes out. There have been three fatalities in the last two years on grade separation underpasses that flooded. Council Member Vicki Veenker felt the criteria still looked good but that it was healthy to talk them through from time to time. She did not feel it would take a tremendous amount of discussion. Regarding the Churchill crossing, she asked if the Mariposa residents near the crossing had a preference, with the roadway grading issue but also a possible privacy aspect with the elevated train. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated those concerns had all come up and were part of the reason the viaduct had been previously removed from consideration. Chair Burt added that Caltrain was open to considering a different bridge deck design that reduces the deck, with the underpass shallower as a result. The impacts have not yet been modeled. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi noted the item was to discuss evaluation criteria rather than design alternatives and wanted to make sure it did not get too far off topic. Chair Burt felt that looking at different alternatives informed the consideration of the criteria and that there was some latitude as long as the discussion did not turn to recommendations for alternatives. Council Member Veenker asked if the Kellogg bike-ped tunnel would happen with either of the two options at Churchill. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi clarified that the bike-ped tunnel is part of the partial underpass option for both Kellogg and Seale because the Churchill partial underpass does not accommodate bike and peds at Churchill. Chair Burt stated the Rail Committee had previously strongly commented against further evaluation of the Kellogg option but that has not yet been endorsed by Council. Council Member Vicki Veenker left at 4:35 P.M. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 Chair Burt listed the 3 reference documents that relate to the criteria: the Comprehensive Plan, the current Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, and the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan. Council Member Ed Lauing questioned whether all criteria, A through J, were all applicable or if the intention was to do the best possible. Chair Burt stated all criteria matter and are treated equally in the document but ultimately need to be weighed and balanced as part of decision-making. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi added that some impacts are subjective and might be more specific to someone living closer to a crossing versus using it as a commute path, for example. Chair of Expanded Community Advisory Panel Nadia Naik stated that A through J were the City Council criteria and the rest were things that came up in XCAP's work. The matrix represents the end of XCAP's work but not the Council decisions taken since then. The matrix shows the South Palo Alto tunnels and the viaduct for South Palo Alto as alternatives but those have since been eliminated, and at Churchill, the viaduct had already been eliminated with a decision made as a Council for a preference for partial underpass. The matrix is a reference point but is not necessarily accurate for the alternatives still under consideration or weighed based on importance. Weighting was very subjective and also subject to policy issues. There was discussion about updating new committee members on previous deep dives on these issues. Chair Burt commented that there is now a policy to adopt best practices on lower-carbon concrete and all the alternatives have more or less concrete. He also noted that as sea level rise occurs, saltwater pushes freshwater toward the surface, which will impact some portions of the community and potentially subterranean construction. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi believed both of those items could be added under environmental impacts. Council Member Lauing expected the next Comprehensive Plan would talk more about climate preservation and climate change and believed there would be more goals and objectives in the next Comp Plan. Chair Burt stated a number of the issues are sub-issues with deeper context for some of the categories already in the criteria. Bicycle and pedestrian ability to move safely and connectedness were addressed in the plans. Comp Plan Program T1.19.3 talks about increasing the number of east-west pedestrian-bicycle crossings across Alma and the Caltrain corridor, particularly south of Oregon Expressway. Program T3.15.2 talks about conducing a study to evaluate the implications of grade separation on bike and ped circulation. The school district has provided the dot maps related to the Churchill area crossing. He mentioned the City having previously worked with a company using advanced sensor technology to pick up bicycle travel. He noted that the Comp Plan lists, "Minimizing the use of toxic and hazardous materials and SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 promote the use of alternative materials and practices that are environmentally benign," which helps on the concrete issue. Policy N6.13 talks about minimizing noise spillover from rail- related activities. On the Bike and Ped Plan, Program T21 is, "Study projects to depress bikeways and pedestrian walkways under Alma and the Caltrain tracks." He felt the focus should be on the safest and easiest to navigate as opposed to necessarily depressed options. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi thought the current language in the criteria of "Facilitate movement across the corridor for all modes of transportation" may speak to that. Chair Burt noted other references to safety. The criteria needs to include not using designs that significantly induce greater traffic. The paradox is that improving crossings can make a roadway become an attraction for greater traffic. There are ways to mitigate that, but a better vehicular intersection almost by design induces traffic, solving one problem and creating another. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi noted there is some conflict between Item B, "Reduce delay and congestion for automobile traffic at rail crossings," and induced demand. Chair Burt discussed, on the Bike Plan page 7, "Cal Ave-Alma undercrossing rebuild or retrofit." He mentioned looking at converting the current California Avenue Tunnel to strictly pedestrian and putting a parallel bike-only tunnel on the north side. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi anticipated significant community impact on that in the Bike and Ped Plan. There was discussion on the goals of this meeting. Chair Burt stated there would be discussion of input and then of how that might be translated into specific criteria recommendations. He hoped to flesh things out today and have Staff use the input toward recommendations for language changes, with a short discussion at the next Rail Committee meeting to refer to Council. Council Member Lauing asked about the issue of eminent domain. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated it is typically referred to as right-of-way negotiation, which was included under F, "minimize right-of-way acquisition." Council Member Lauing felt "Facilitate movement across the corridor for all modes of transportation" encompassed enough. He clarified that Item B regarding traffic congestion at rail crossings meant when the new rail crossings are up. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated the implication was to look at the level of service before and after grade separation in the same scenarios. Council Member Lauing questioned the meaning of visual impacts as the whole corridor would be disrupted. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated that was very challenging to apply and favored some alternatives over others because some have less visual changes. It specifically says, "Minimize visual changes along the rail corridor." Chair Burt stated there are also subjective aesthetics and wanted to capture those themes more broadly. He stated he struggled to figure out what was conveyed with the graphics on each page with the visual codes and that it needed a better explanation. Section E talks about finance with feasible funding sources, which has evolved over the years. It is still relevant, but the sources are hopefully more expansive than originally thought. Regarding right-of-way acquisition, it was settled on that it was not "prohibit" but "minimize." Under J, it talks about minimizing disruption and duration of construction. When applying this, it often has a binary approach to the different options, but there is also a layer of additional technical criteria of design and construction methods, for example jackbox construction, which drastically reduces construction time and impacts. The Caltrain consultants plan on having updated technical design criteria by the end of the year and, after pushback, stated they intend to get back with portions of it sooner. Caltrain also plans to look into possibly an answer about the 4-track location sooner in the process. When applying a given criterion on a given alternative, there may need to be options for with and without change to the technical standards. There may be one decision with the current criteria but another preferred alternative if there is latitude. Under M, he asked if the cities own the liability for the long-term maintenance on grade separations. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated some alternatives may have more maintenance and more City responsibility. Staff would have to dive deeper into that. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated long-term maintenance should be added to item E, cost. Chair Burt asked if Utility Staff was able to provide much on utility relocation impacts and costs. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi believed it was preliminary. Senior Engineer Bhatia believed AECOM was able to get some high-level major infrastructure information. Chair Burt referenced a recent report on what goes wrong with transportation megaprojects, with utility relocation being one of the top aspects of projects coming in over budget. Geotechnical studies have been identified as the next expenditure, but filling in more specifics on utilities should be done as soon as possible, recognizing it as a major unanticipated cost impact. Alternatives that go below grade typically have the greatest utility impact; it could look like a great alternative but with a large portion of the cost left out. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi felt that could be added to construction or cost. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 9 (Sp.) Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 3/29/2023 Chair Burt again mentioned wanting to balance facilitating movement across the corridor for all modes of transportation with not having a traffic inducement making the corridor become far more congested. Under B, "Reduce delay and congestion for vehicular traffic," is about some bottlenecks, like at Churchill, and this has to be captured as two sides of the same coin. He understood the easement of Southbound Alma's right turn pocket intrusion into Caltrain right- of-way was expired. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi was unsure about that easement but the stated the easement for the bike-ped path was currently being negotiated. He stated Staff will package this up and bring it back as a short item. NEXT STEPS AND FUTURE AGENDAS Chief Transportation Official Philip Kamhi listed three upcoming items: the current item of the criteria; the agreement with Caltrain, which is in a much better place than previously; and the recommended refinements to the underpass alternatives, assuming that is completed in time. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 5:40 P.M.