Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 404-10City of Palo Alto City Manager's Report ..... __ ._---_ ... -.--..... --.--.. ----~.---.----.---.------.. ------~.--- TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 1, 2010 CMR: 404:10 REPORT TYPE: Information SUBJECT: High Speed Rail Update Discussion The following is a brief update on High Speed Rail (HSR) items for the City Council. The most recent HSR meeting outside of the regular Palo Alto HSR Committee meetings was a Technical Working Group (TWG) meeting held in Mountain View on Thursday, October 21 st . At this meeting there was a PowerPoint presentation (attached for reference) by PBS&J, the environmental consulting firm preparing the Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Impact Statement (ElS) on behalf of the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). This professional services firm provides expertise in engineering, environmental science, architecture, planning, and construction. PBS&J outlined the Project EIRIEIS HSR noise and visual impacts methodology. The presentation starts to provide more details on these HSR impacts. In addition, the Peninsula Rail Program (PRP) staff provided statewide updates on: • American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding. The CHSRA is planning to review the criteria for the awarding of ARRA funding for eligible California rail sections at their November meeting. Considerations include, but are not limited to, project schedule impacts, work sequencing, testing of HSR trains, investment offederal and state funds, and other related factors. • Belgian Presentation to State Assembly Select Committee on HSR. A PowerPoint presentation was given highlighting the Belgian TUC Rail, a HSR line that connects Brussels with other Belgian cities (attached). ---Statebudget TheCHSRA-currentL~approxjmately fifte~n.Jlllfilled p-Dsitionsdue tD __ the lack of funds to fill these positions. CMR: 404:10 Page 1 of3 8 Corridor updates • BART Warm Springs Station tours. Tours were held Tuesday, October 26th and Thursday, October 28th • The tours offered participants a chance to see at-grade and trench rail configurations. • The CHSRA provided a handout on Sound and High Speed Trains at the October TWG meeting (attached). This document is intended to clarify expectations and considerations that the CHSRA is using as it addresses issues related to sound. • Fifteen percent (15%) design engineering. The 15% engineering design package will be completed with the Project EIRIEIS. • HSR Station workshops. Redwood City had one preliminary workshop in mid-October with staff and they are going to have another workshop on November 3rd • Also, there was a station workshop meeting in Millbrae on October .28. Attached is a letter sent from Caltrain to Parsons Brinkerhoff regarding ~SR station area development policies. • Project EIRIEIS. The current schedule is for the Project EIRIEIS to be published at the end of December 2010. It is then anticipated that the CHSRA will certify the document at their Board meeting in early January 2011 and give agencies 45 days to respond. However, PRP staff indicated this schedule may change including having the EIRIEIS published a month or more later. The public agencies at the TWG meeting uniformly expressed their opinion that a 45 day comment period is too short and all the agencies present asked for a minimum of 90 days to respond. • Supplemental Alternative Analysis Report (SAAR) Addendum. The CHSRA is working on an addendum to the SAAR released in August 2010 which updates and provides corrections to the original SAAR document. CHSRA staff expect this addendum to be published in the next thirty days. • Visual simulations. The CHSRA is still considering the requests of cities to get visual simulations of the HSR track options. The City of Palo Alto has requested a visualization at the Churchill Avenue location. Additional Items • Property ValuelEconomic Analysis. The City selected Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) to complete this work. A contract is expected to be executed in early November and the work completed in approximately-6g-te-9Uay~s.~-- CMR: 404:10 Page 2 of3 PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD APPROVAL: Deputy City Manager CITYMANAGERj\PPROVAL: e~0A<UJ~ JME~KEENE . , ~ity Manager ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1-PBS&J PowerPoint presentation Attachment 2-Belgian TUC HSR PowerPoint presentation Attachment 3 -CHSRA Sound and High Speed Trains handout Attachment 4-Caltrain October 1,2010 letter to Parsons Brinkerhoff Inc. CMR: 404:10 Page 3 of3 1 Technical Working Group Meeting Peninsula Rail Program October 21, 2010 2 TWG Agenda •Review of TWG and PWG summaries •Presentation –Draft EIR/EIS Impact Methodology for Noise and Visual Analyses •Statewide update •Corridor update •Other Business 3 Draft Environmental Impact Report/ Environmental Impact Statement Methodology for Noise and Visual Analyses Rod Jeung, PBS&J 4 Noise • Follows guidelines of the Federal Railroad Administration (2005 FRA Guidance Manual) • Identify affected land uses / receptors • Measure existing noise conditions • Estimate impact based on relative increase in noise exposure • Classify impact based on relative increase in noise: •Severe • Moderate • No impact 5 Noise Methodology 6 “Typical” Noise Levels with Current Caltrain Operations (Ldn at 100 feet)* • Caltrain (no horns): 65 dBA • Caltrain (no horns) and near aircraft operations: <76 dBA • Caltrain (with train horns): 77 dBA * Ldn is a noise descriptor for a 24-hour noise exposure, taking into account fluctuations throughout the day and more heavily weighting events between 10pm and 7am to account for greater nighttime sensitivity to noise. This descriptor is used by FRA to classify impacts to residential uses , hotels, and motels and other land uses that have nighttime or sleep activities; reflects changes in duration, frequency, and schedule of transit events; correlates well with the results of attitudinal surveys of residential noise impact; and is commonly used by local General Plans to define noise/land use compatibility. 7 Increase in Noise Levels (in dBA) that Result in Different Impacts 8 Numerous Factors affect Noise Impact • Noise sources/technology • Operations • Number of HST, Caltrain, and freight trains • Number of trains during day versus night • Track profile and train speeds • Relationship between noise source and receptor • Distance between noise source and receptor • Intervening structures • Ground surface Effects of Distance and Speed 9 Note: HST operations on aerial structures could be 1 to 2 dBA higher than at ground level and if in a trench could be 5 to 7 dBA lower than at ground level. Sound barriers could further improve these sound levels. This curve reflects technology from 1995. Newer train designs proposed for the California HST System are expected to be 5 to 6 dBA quieter than the levels presented above. Source: FRA High-Speed Ground Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, October 2005. . , . , Downtown City Background ldn "Very Noisy" Urban Residential Area ldn __ "Quiet" Urban Residential Area ldn What the EIR/EIS will contain •Impacts from train operations •Impacts from stations, maintenance facility, ancillary facilities, related traffic, and construction •Impacts by city with and without mitigations •Maps delineating where severe impacts would occur and mitigation is needed •Effectiveness of sound walls at reducing severe impacts 10 11 Aesthetics / Visual Quality 12 Aesthetics & Visual Quality Methodology •Use of local General Plans to identify visual resources, scenic corridors, and views •Use of Federal Highway Administration Visual Impact Assessment •Use of computer-generated visual simulations from key vantage points • Follows guidelines of the Federal Highway Administration 13 Methodology continued 14 Visual Setting, Resources, and Character •Visual surveys, worksheets, and photo- documentation to rate existing visual resources and viewers •Visual typologies identified to establish existing character •125 key viewpoints identified to define potential effects to views Six Visual Typologies 15 16 SAN FRANCISCO COO"'" SAN MATEO COUNTY San Mateo Belmont ""'~, o Prefene::l StCltion _ Downtown o Potential Station _ Industrial and Utility o Potential Maintenance Facility _ Open Space C':::-J City Limits Residential _ Urban Moderate D:!nsity _ Urban High Density What the EIR/EIS will contain • Impacts from elements that substantially degrade or obstruct important scenic views from public areas • View blockage from a scenic road or interference with views of important scenic resources 17 18 What the EIR/EIS will contain • Impacts from new structures that are more massive than existing development • Loss of visual resources, e.g., rows of trees, historic resources, open space/parks, landmarks • Impacts from new light and glare sources and shadows 19 Statewide/Caltrain Update •ARRA funding •State budget summary • Belgian presentation to State Assembly’s Select Committee on High Speed Rail 20 Corridor Update •Cities/Counties/Agencies •Caltrain Update •Supplemental AA addendum •Visual simulations •HST station workshops •Office Hours recap and next round •PWG meeting format •BART tour 21 Other Business BART Tour: To reserve a spot, please contact: Morgan Galli at mgalli@hntb.com Next Meeting: Thursday, November 18 3:00 –5:00 PM San Mateo Library, 55 W. Third Ave. Flexible thinking, reliable results Assembly Hearing Assembly Select Committee on High Speed Rail for California October 6, 2010 High Speed Railway Lines Integration Noise & Vibration Development "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.”Joseph M. Borremans 210/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Innovative design of viaducts reducing construction depth Height visible screen Railway viaduct Classic design Railway viaduct TUC RAIL design 310/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Noise reduction through innovative design of the viaduct structure Reduction of the construction depth + noise barrier 410/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Cut-and -cover tunnels Advantages of the “Cut-and-Cover” techniques: -reduce landscape impact by restoring the landscape above the tunnel construction -reduce noise -less expensive solution than a complete bored tunnel 510/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Noise reduction panels 610/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Noise reduction panels of natural material (e.g. wood) 710/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Special damping elastic pads are widely used in very sensitive to vibrations areas (for instance in tunnels, under city, etc.). Vibration reduction These devices can be placed between the rail and the sleepers: Or under the sleepers on the platform: Elastic baseplate pad rubber sleeper pad 810/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” • •Mass-spring systems can also be used under slab tracks: • Vibration reduction Under the balast : Sub -Ballast mats In tunnel or on bridge/viaduct In open track 1010/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Development around Brussels South 1110/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Development of intermodal transport systems 1210/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Development in Antwerp (Central) Using the existing structure of the old railway station at Antwerp-Central → 2 levels added → integration of commercial zones iii ___ ..;, -.r' •• '.r".'_'c.r •• ~ ... ..I."'.' M.' , ,~ .. -",,,"'''',, .. ,,.,, .~, ............ "~ .... ,, '", .. , ./ , i re ' • • aM. 1310/06/10 HS lines & the Environment "Information published by TUC RAIL in the present document is general in nature and non-contractual. All rights reserved.” Transformation in Liège CALIFORNIA High-Speed Rail Authority Key Points -Sound and High-Speed Trains • Sound is a key concern for those who live or work near a train. That's why the Federal Railroad Administration has developed rigorous procedures to measure potential noise impacts and guide the California High-Speed Rail Authority in designing its system to address these concerns. • High-speed trains create four kinds of sound: Rolling -sound from the wheelS as trains move along the tracks. Propulsion -sound from motors and gears that make the train move. Equipment -sound from cooling fans and air conditioners. Aerodynamic -sound from the flow of air moving past the train at high speed. • The Authority will take into account what people will hear and when they'll hear it. Operating under federal guidelines, the Authority will look at the use of properties nearby (such as homes, schools, churches and libraries) and e)(amine how a wide variety of factors, like the distance from the tracks, other sources of sound, and the presence of buildings, will impact people nearby. • The review will look at two key measurements: Hourly Equivalent Sound Level, which measures the moment-to-moment fluctuations in sound over a single hour -taking into account both the number of trains and the time they take to pass by -the best measure for aSsessing the impacts on offices, schools and libraries. The other, Oay­ Night Sound Level, looks at sound fluctuations over a full 24 hours, taking into account the heightened sensitivity in residential areas to sounds made late at night. What You Can Expect For offices, schools and libraries: • In urban and highly developed suburban areas, a high-speed train traveling 125 mph will produce an hourly equivalent sound level of about 73 decibels from a distance of 100 feet -less than a commuter train with a blowing horn. For residential neighborhoods: • In downtown city settings, high-speed trains -even at their 220-mph top speed -will be no"louder than existing noise from traffic and other sources over 24 hours. • In noisy urban residential areas, high-speed trains -even at top speed -will be within existing noise levels for everyone 250.feet or farther from the tracks. • In quiet residential areas, high-speed trains -depending upon speed -could affect noise levels for listeners within 1,000 feet of the tracks. • Unlike existing freight trains that often operate late at night with diesel engines, bells and horns, high-speed trains alongside these same tracks don't use bells or whistles and won't have scheduled passenger service between midnight and 5 a.m. 1 Some Good News • High-speed trains are generally quieter than conventional trains. Because high-speed trains are electrically powered, there's no noisy diesel engine, so a high­ speed train has to travel about 150 mph before it makes as much sound as a commuter train at 79 mph. And because California's high-speed trains will be grade-separated (they'll go over or under streets and roads) there's no need for noisy bells or horns required at existing level crossings. • Fast trains make for shorter sounds. A train moving at 220 miles per hour -the top speed of California's high-speed trains -will only be heard for about four seconds. Sy comparison, a 50-car freight train traveling at 30 miles an hour can be heard for 60 seconds. • High-speed trains won't keep you up at night. Unlike freight rail trains, which often run late at night, high-speed train serVice generally will not be running between midnight and 5 a.m., minimizing nighttime disruptions for homeowners nearby. Keep in Mind • Newer train designs are getting quieter. While the federal guidelines are based on trains in use in 1995, newer trains often make substantially less noise. While the Authority is using the federal guidelines for planning purposes, the trains ultimately put in service will likely be much quieter. • Engineering, design and mitigation make a big difference. Sound engineers and train builders have more than 40 years of experience measuring, evaluating and addressing the noise impacts from high-speed trains -and good mitigation measures are in place and working around the world: o For a train traveling less than 160 mph, a six to 12-foot sound barrier reduces noise by 5 to 9 decibels (the ear perceives a 10-decibel reduction as cutting the sound in half). o The sound from a high-speed train operating on an aerial structure could be one or two decibels higher than at ground level. o The sound from a high-speed train operating in an open trench could be five to seven decibels lower than at ground level. • Counteracting sound will be part of the plan. As part of its planning process, the Authority is conducting a detailed environmental review of alternatives for building each part of the project. Once formal draft environmental impact reports are issued, the Authority will work with the public and local, state and federal agencies to consider feasible mitigation measures to reduce sound impacts. • Get informed and be heard. The California High-Speed Rail Authority has issued a detailed fact sheet and posted it on our website so that people concerned about these issues can understand them and participate in the process. Your feedback will help make sure California's high-speed train project becomes a good neighbor to the communities it serves. BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2010 SEAN ELSEERND, CHAIR MARK CHURCH, VICE CHAIR OMAR Ammo JosE ClsNERos NATHANIEL P. FORD, SR, DON GAGE ASH KALRA ARTHUR L. LLOYD KEN YEAGER MICHAEL. J. SCANLON EXECUTFVE DIRECTOR October 1, 2010 Mr. William Gimpel, AICP Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc 303 Second Street Suite 700 North San Francisco, CA 94107 Re: HST Station Area Development Policies Dear Mr. Gimpel: Thank you for the opportunity to provide continents to the California High Speed Rail Authority (Authority) on the proposed HST Station Area Development Policies. The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) applauds the Authority for highlighting the importance of: (1) Station location in multi -modal transportation hubs; (2) Station area development consistent with smart growth principles; and (3) Local agencies lead role in ensuring a bottom -up approach to land use and access planning. Complementary to the HSR principles, the JPB encourages cities to implement TOD along the Caltrain corridor as guided by the Caltrain Access Policy http://www.caltrain. com/Assets/Public+Affairs/ndf/Comprehensive+Access+P olicv.pd f JPB's primary interest in station area planning is the opportunity presented to maximize ridership, grow sustainably and link land use patterns with transit service systems. The following provides specific comments to the above referenced document: • Update Station Area Plans. At most Caltrain stations, there exist plans that include TOD. Since the potential HSR station areas are significantly built up and/or have existing plans for TOD, the focus of the HSR station area policy for this region would be more applicable if it focused on assisting local agencies in assessing how the HSR system will impact the existing environment and plans and preparing updated station area plan to accommodate HSR. We need to understand how Caltrain stations are impacted by changes to Caltrain service resulting from the addition of HSR service on the Caltrain right of way. PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD 1250 San Carlos Ave. — P.O. Box 3006 San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 650.508.6269 Mr. William Gimpel Page 2 October h 2010 • Access Plans. Typically, coupled with station area plans, it is essential to develop comprehensive access plans. In keeping with smart growth and sustainable principles, it is good to limit parking in the immediate station area and prioritize "green" transportation modes of access. However, we will need HSR assistance in understanding the implications of that policy decision. If a HSR rider is unable to park near the station because the supply has been limited, what will that rider do? What level of demand will there be on the local feeder service? How will the parking demand impact local neighborhoods and land uses throughout the HSR station city? These questions will need to be addressed to inform the development of an access plan. • Funding. There is appreciation for HSR's commitment to provide a 20 percent (up to $200K) match for station area planning. With that said, it is important to know that local agencies do not have the resources to find the remaining 80 percent of the funding Given that the need for these planning efforts are necessary for HSR, we request HSR to identify a complete funding strategy for local station area plans as well as the anticipated local capital investment and O/M needs. • Environmental Process. Please provide an explanation of how the encouraged station area planning process relate to the HSR project environmental process. Our understanding is that the draft HSR environmental document will be released at the end of this year. Three months is not enough time to complete the referenced planning efforts. How will the station area planning efforts tie into the HSR project advancement process? Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions and/or would like to meet, please contact me at 650.622.7843. Sincerely, Marian Lee, AICP Executive Officer, Planning and Development Cc: Michael J. Scanlon Mark Simon Robert Doty