Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-05-23 Rail Summary MinutesRAIL COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 10 Special Meeting May 23, 2023 The Rail Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at 2:03 P.M. Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Veenker Present Remotely: Absent: CALL TO ORDER Chair Burt called the meeting to order, and roll was taken. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no requests to speak. VERBAL UPDATE ON INTERAGENCY ACTIVITIES A. Caltrain – There was no one present from Caltrain. B. VTA – There was no one present from VTA. C. City Staff Chief Transportation Official Philip Kamhi noted there was ongoing cooperation on the San Francisquito Creek Bridge emergency repairs between the Public Works, Office of Transportation, Caltrain, and Menlo Park staff. There was a workshop held on May 17 on the Caltrain Corridor Study focusing on project objectives, timeline, and hypothetical scenarios based on funding availability. There will be an in-person local policymakers group meeting on May 25 in Palo Alto. He stated Staff hoped to get the Quiet Zone Study to Council for review before the break. There was an ad hoc VTA grade separation meeting, and preferred alternatives were selected for Mary Avenue and Sunnyvale Avenue. Chair Pat Burt stated one of the biggest takeaways from the VTA ad hoc meeting was Sunnyvale's updates on the bike and ped crossings, with costs much higher than previously SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 projected. He expected Palo Alto would have to factor in higher cost estimates. There was also a better understanding of the design of the Rengstdorff project with a trestle bridge that will reduce construction time as well as bridge deck thickness, reducing the impacts of the underpass and other factors. He gave more information on the upcoming Caltrain Local Policymaker Group meeting. ACTION ITEMS 1. Review the Conceptual Plan for Quiet Zone implementation at Palo Alto Avenue/Alma Street and Recommend to the City Council for Approval Chief Transportation Official Philip Kamhi noted that this is a review of the conceptual plan for Quiet Zone implementation that would, pending Rail Committee approval, be sent to Council in late June for approval. Consultant Peter Meyehofer gave an overview of the Quiet Zone study, including the process and work to date. He explained basics on the use of train horns and the purpose of a Quiet Zone. Most crossings would not qualify for Quiet Zones in their current state, and upgrades were typically needed to make them safe enough that a horn does not need to sound. Phase 1 of the process was the study, which was currently close to completion, followed by Phase 2, implementation. The Quiet Zone being discussed here spans about 1.5 miles, from Encinal Avenue to the Palo Alto Alma street crossing. The safety improvements needed at the Palo Alto/Alma crossing were a raised median and refreshed roadway striping but not four-quadrant gates or sidewalk realignment. The next phase included final design and permitting through CPUC and Caltrain, getting funding, and then construction. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. Ron Roth, 101 Alma Street, stated the train horn woke him up at 5 a.m. most weekdays, and he would appreciate anything that can be done to provide a little more peace and quiet. 2. Sheree Roth spoke on behalf of everyone at 101 Alma Street who were all waiting for the Quiet Zone project to complete as they were all negatively affected by the train horn. She asked if it was possible to get a copy of the report. Chair Burt noted the PowerPoint was linked to the agenda item. Consultant Meyehofer added the draft report has not been completed yet but will be issued soon. 3. Adrian Brandt, member of Caltrain Citizens Advisory Committee, noted there were extremely few crashes or incidents on the Caltrain line related to drive-arounds, which SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 was what the quad gate and raised median were designed to prevent. He felt there was no reason that would increase with the Quiet Zone. He also noted there were measures in place to ensure the crossings are working correctly, with signals to the oncoming train that there is no need to blow the horn. 4. Martin Sommer [inaudible] Rail Committee, City Council and working with Menlo Park City Council as well. He stated he lives directly across from the University Avenue Station and asked if this would also quiet the horns at University Avenue Station, which is already grade separated. Consultant Meyehofer believed that the horns Mr. Sommer heard were the advance horns of trains coming to Alma Street. Even with the Quiet Zone, there will still be bells on the crossings themselves. The Quiet Zone would decrease the train horns, which are the much louder component. Council Member Vicki Veenker asked if there would be any incremental safety improvement and what the increased cost would be for the four-quad gates in addition to the raised median. Consultant Meyehofer explained that raised medians and four-quad gates do essentially the same things in terms of not allowing vehicles to go around. There was already a sidewalk at that crossing with channelization, so it was unlikely a pedestrian would accidentally walk into the roadway and cross tracks. There was a significant exponential difference in cost, on the order of 10 times, with cost to put in new gate assemblies and realign the sidewalks around those assemblies, costs for ped gates and swing gates, costs for extending the crossings to handle the sidewalk realignments, etc. It was a domino effect. Council Member Ed Lauing questioned why this takes two years and asked if the public outreach is complete. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated the longer part of the project will be getting the approval. Caltrain and CPUC approval are needed, followed by design and construction. Up to 24 months is considered fast. He would love to see it happen even sooner if everything goes better than hoped. The final outreach will be the City Council meeting following Rail Committee approval and again in the design phase. Nadia Naik added that this was a quality of life issue. She noted that there should be a pull-off area at the crossing for cars that may unexpectedly get caught on the tracks at the light. Chair Burt stated there was a broader question for the future about gaining control of the light at El Camino and, if so, if there was a way to have the funds Caltrans would normally spend on that transferred to Palo Alto. He questioned the cost breakdown of design and construction versus permitting. He asked if there were prospective outside funding sources aside from Measure B dollars. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Senior Engineer Ripon Bhatia stated it was about $30- to $40,000 for design and permitting about $120- to $140,000 for the construction, with some contingencies. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi explained there were various funding sources and agencies like the High-Speed Rail Authority as this could actually help them as well. He stated funding sources would be explored while going through the design process. Chair Burt was interested in perpendicular gates to narrow the entrance to the tracks and also act as a cue that it was not a place to turn. MOTION: Council Member Veenker moved, seconded by Council Member Lauing, to recommend the City Council approval of the Conceptual Plan for Quiet Zone implementation at Palo Alto Avenue/Alma Street MOTION PASSED: 3-0 2. Approve the Refined Conceptual Plans for the Partial Underpass Alternative at Churchill Avenue and the Underpass Alternatives at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road Chief Transportation Official Philip Kamhi stated there was a direction by City Council to do additional refinements to the underpass alternatives. The Rail Committee helped to refine that further last year, and AECOM and City Staff had made those refinements and were here to present them today. Senior Engineer Ripon Bhatia explained that the three underpass alternatives that were looked at were Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston. Consultant Peter Destefano agreed that two years was a relatively short duration for the project. He first discussed the design updates at Churchill Avenue. In this design, the ramp width in the center of Kellogg was increased from 10 to 12 feet to provide more room for peds and bikes. Kellogg was also widened to provide 16-foot lanes to accommodate emergency vehicles. Tree removals and relocation of overhead electrical lines but no property acquisitions were required for the widening. A 4-foot landscape strip was added at Alma to provide a safer, more pleasant experience for pedestrians, which required partial property acquisitions for about ¼ mile. Revisions to the ramp layout on the west side of the tunnel near the high school minimized potential conflicts with bicyclists traveling in opposite directions along the Embarcadero bike path. This wider footprint meant the bleachers at the high school would have to be reconstructed. The width of the ped-bike path at Churchill was also increased to 12 feet. The bridge geometry over Churchill was modified to reduce the span length and minimize property impacts, with removal of the center bridge column further north, with reduction in construction costs. The pedestrian bridge over Churchill was widened 2 feet, and the southwest edge of the deck was rounded to provide better line of sight for cyclists. PUBLIC COMMENT SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 1. Mike Price stated the right-hand turn pocket on Churchill Avenue turning south on Alma was smaller than the current one, which is hardly adequate, and asked why not just eliminate it. Consultant Gary Black stated there was a tradeoff involved. The longer the lane is, the more functional it is, but there are additional width considerations of lengthening the right turn lane. It benefits the operation to have the turn lane there even though it is shorter than the existing lane. There was further discussion about this. 2. Martin Sommer asked for clarification on the triple bike path between the tracks and the stadium. He did not feel it was the optimal solution. Consultant Destefano explained that the previous configuration created potential conflicts with bicyclists traveling in opposite directions. Council Member Lauing asked for more information about the partial property acquisition on the ¼ mile along Alma. He wanted to verify that this design did not require additional land at Mariposa. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated adding a 4-foot buffer involved additional right of way from 10 to 12 homes. Consultant Destefano added it was from just north of Kellogg to just south of Coleridge, about a dozen homes. This was to provide a buffer between pedestrians and motor vehicles traveling at relatively high speeds on Alma. Some acquisition of land was still required at the home on Mariposa but much less than previously. Chair Burt requested the presentation on Seale be done at this point as it was part of the Churchill area. Consultant Destefano presented the Seale Avenue crossing design. The east side of the tracks had a very similar configuration to Kellogg, but the west side, with the open space and tennis courts, had a lot more flexibility for the design. The tunnel spanned completely underneath the right of way, so there were no issues with the ramps and openings of the tunnel being within the right of way. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi added that while there was a lot more flexibility than with Kellogg, there was also not a path to connect to going out of the park. Chair Burt felt this committee should go back to the Council with a recommendation on whether any more effort should be put into the bike and ped crossing at Kellogg versus at Seale. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Chief Transportation Official Kamhi believed that would be discussed in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, with grade crossing discussions frontloaded as part of the outreach process. Council Member Veenker wanted to know more about the bleacher reconstruction, how extensive it would be and the role of PAUSD. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi explained the current layout overlaps a portion of the current bleachers. There was not a conceptual design at this point. Chair Burt stated it was not possible to relocate the bleachers. If not possible to build underneath, either the size of the bleachers would need to be reduced or the entire field would need to be moved. Senior Engineer Bhatia added that there was added complexity because the Embarcadero bike path was also in Caltrains' right of way, meaning it would be a three-party agreement and require negotiations. Council Member Veenker was interested in continuing to look at Seale. She asked if there was a sense of the students' use of the crossings. Chair Burt stated the dot map was now available and added that the students north of Embarcadero would be able to use the soon-to-be-improved connection between Emerson and the underpass. There was further discussion about this. Nadia Naik questioned if the right turn signal at the Churchill Avenue turn pocket allowed a right on red during the modeling. Part of the reason it backs up now was the train preemption, but with grade separation, there will be more control of the light. She also asked if the light on El Camino and Churchill was controlled by Caltrans. If both lights were controlled by the City, the turn pocket could possibly be removed; if not, the turn pocket was needed for a right on red. Consultant Gary Black stated this configuration would allow right turn on red. The signal design or phasing had not been explored yet. With the modeling, there was no queueing back to El Camino. There was further discussion about this. Ms. Naik asked if a thinner bridge deck design would impact the length of the separation along Mariposa. Consultant Destefano stated reducing the bridge deck would help because the roads would not have to be as deep and low in elevation. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Senior Engineer Bhatia stated every effort would be made to make sure it was minimized in the design phases. The western constraint point would be the minimum depth needed under the bridge. Ms. Naik added that this design still needed to be approved by Caltrain and was not a final plan. Council Member Veenker wanted to understand more about the 4-foot setback or buffer. Senior Engineer Bhatia stated different options were looked at. Vertical barriers have side distance issues when exiting driveways. Based on previous discussions of the Rail Committee, this also provides opportunity for landscaping and making the frontage nicer. Ms. Naik added that without the 4-foot buffer, it was essentially just sidewalk and then road. Walking along with cars zipping past, there would be not a tree or barrier. The conversation went toward putting at least a planting strip in to place walkers further inward and also allow for the garbage can issue. It was clarified that this was an issue regardless of the location of the bike-ped crossing. The changes on Seale would be similar to those of Kellogg. PUBLIC COMMENT 1. Kerry Yarkin reminded the Committee of option 2, Churchill closure plus mitigations, which was the XCAP recommendation and a straightforward plan. She suggested looking at bicycles and pedestrians going from Churchill to Stamford because it is not just Paly people using Churchill. She felt this plan prioritized cars rather than bicycles and pedestrians. 2. Penny Ellson thought Seale was the better option for this part of town. She asked if, in addition to frontloading the Kellogg versus Seale decision, the decision about a dedicated bicycle-pedestrian crossing for South Palo Alto would be made simultaneously. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated the scope of the BPTP includes both of those decisions to follow the initial phase of gathering information and community outreach. There was not a north or south designation; it was just to identify additional grade crossings for bicycles and pedestrians as potential projects. The work ahead of that will be to prioritize projects. Ms. Naik clarified that the reason there are drawings for Kellogg and not the bike-ped crossings in South Palo Alto was because the one at Kellogg was directly tied to that specific grade separation project. It was clarified that Charleston and East Meadow were prioritized over Churchill by Council direction. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Consultant Destefano reviewed the design updates for Meadow Drive. The width of the ped- bike ramps was increased from 10 to 12 feet in select locations, as was the ped-bike bridge over Meadow. The 90-degree corners on the bridges were rounded to provide better line of sight and turning movement for bicyclists. There was a cul-de-sac layout to prohibit vehicular access from northbound Park onto Meadow because of the elevation difference. He also reviewed updates for Charleston. The ped-bike path on the north side was extended east to Carlson Court. The path width was about 10 to 12 feet. There would likely be a relocation of utility poles, with undergrounding of electrical lines preferred. The path on the north side of the roundabout was increased to 20 feet to provide a uniform width. There was a 4-foot buffer or planting strip proposed along Alma and around the south side of the roundabout. There were revised striping reconfigurations for better traffic operations, and the roundabout was modified to provide a single lane on the east and west ends. Consultant Black discussed the alternative for separate bike-ped paths on each side of Meadow and Charleston instead of the combined path on one side. There would no longer be any ramp connections possible between Alma and East Meadow. Without the ramp connections, any traffic interfacing with Alma in that area would need to use Charleston. The resulting increase in traffic at Charleston would overwhelm the capacity of the design, with very long vehicular delays and backups through the roundabout. This idea was a nonstarter. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi reviewed the next steps: pending additional studies to Rail Committee for review, Rail Committee review and recommendation of preferred alternatives, and City Council approval of selection to move to next phase of design. PUBLIC COMMENT: 1. Penny Ellson was concerned about increased traffic through neighborhood school commute routes if cars cannot turn at Alma-Meadow. She asked how traffic gets to Charleston with the turning movements removed and whether school commutes had been looked at through the entire process. 2. Steve Rosenblum had spoken previously, comparing the Churchill partial underpass to the viaduct alternative. He again urged the committee to look at the viaduct option and again listed the reasons he believed it was the preferred option. 3. Chenjie Luo asked if the initiative at Meadow and Charleston was considered for a Quiet Zone to solve the long-term problem of making Caltrain safer. He questioned the timeline and whether there would be continuous discussion until the perfect solution was found or if there was an external agenda, such as a funding cycle, that needed to be aligned. Chair Burt mentioned previous interest in exploring a dedicated bike and ped crossing in the vicinity of Lindero on the east and Robles Park on the west, presumably requiring acquisition of one property on Park Boulevard. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated that was on the list to look at. He stated that each of the grade separation alternatives keeps the same bike and ped networks connected and just changes the access. Council Member Veenker asked for more information on the property impacts. Consultant Destefano stated there were two entire parcel acquisitions on the south side of the roundabout and now partial acquisitions on the north side because of the increased bike-ped path width. At the Alma crossing, there were additional property impacts with more significant partial acquisitions on the south side and the north side acquisitions do not change. Council Member Veenker did not want to take that lightly and wanted to factor that in. There was further discussion about potential property acquisitions. Chair Burt questioned why the bike and ped path on the north side of Charleston needed to be 20 feet. Consultant Destefano stated there were retaining walls on each side, and 10 feet in each direction seemed appropriate. Senior Engineer Bhatia added that Safe Routes to School and PAUSD input also guided that width. There was discussion about whether this recommendation needed to be sent to Council and the procedure going forward. Ms. Naik stated the traffic study had originally looked at whether the underpass worked well with the circle being at Mumford. She asked if moving the circle away from Mumford and closer to the intersection impacted the results of the traffic study. Consultant Baker stated the study had been updated, with a new simulation on the city website showing how the roundabout would operate in the current plan location. Senior Engineer Bhatia added the level of service was the same. Ms. Naik also mentioned letters by several members of the public relating to the fact that this is all still going to be impacted by whether there is a decision on four tracks, bridge deck thickness, construction methods, etc. Regarding the new bike-ped crossing concept between Meadow and Charleston, the underpass was designed with the understanding of the main traffic movements but it had not been considered where the majority of the bikes are coming and going from. She recommended putting this recommendation in with caveats that when looking at designs again, things like dot maps, new housing allocations, etc., should be considered. That did not need to be done at this phase. Chair Burt asked whether the dot maps support focusing on Seale over Kellogg. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 10 Sp. Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 5/23/2023 Chief Transportation Official Kamhi stated there was not a definitive answer from the dot maps alone and hoped to look at it in conjunction with collecting public feedback. Through this process of refinements, additional benefits to Seale were recognized. Chair Burt believed the Committee was supportive of the refined conceptual plans for Charleston and East Meadow. Council Member Lauing was interested in minimizing acquisitions. Chief Transportation Official Kamhi questioned whether there was consensus on the extra landscaping on Churchill. There was some clarification on this. There was discussion about the wording of the motion. MOTION: Chair Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Lauing, to approve the refined conceptual plans for the purpose of forwarding to Caltrain for their review for the partial Underpass Alternative at Churchill Avenue and the Underpass Alternatives at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road with the following clarifications 1) Support the 4-foot buffer refinement along Alma 2) Focus on the Seale bike ped crossing over Kellogg 3) No change to the bike-ped configuration at Charleston 4) No action is being taken at the trench alternative at this time and will be the subject of a future agenda item MOTION PASSED: 3-0 NEXT STEPS AND FUTURE AGENDAS Future agenda items to be discussed were reviewing the viaduct in the context of the revised criteria and the scope of additional work required on the part of the consultants with additional components added into the matrix, with consideration of the scope of inclusion of elimination of any alternatives from consideration. The next meeting will be on June 20, 2023, with no meeting in July. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 5:06 P.M.