Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-09-16 Rail Committee Summary MintuesRAIL COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 8 Regular Meeting September 16, 2025 The Rail Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Community Meeting Room and by virtual teleconference at virtual teleconference at 2:30 PM Present In-Person: Burt (Chair), Lythcott-Haims, Lauing Absent: None Call to Order Chair Burt called the meeting to order. The clerk called the roll announcing a quorum. Public Comments No requests to speak. Verbal Updates on Interagency Activities A. Caltrain Mike Meader, Caltrain Chief Safety Officer, provided a slide presentation updating safety upgrades in Palo Alto focused on enhancing grade crossing safety including high-security fencing, Churchill Intersection safety, and pilot and next steps. Navdeep Dhaliwal, Government Community Affairs Manager Caltrain, Chair Burt added the innovations done at Broadway were primarily to address vehicular safety issues. The rail sentry and anti-intrusion mats are highly protective of deliberate intrusion by people. The existing detection technology the City installed in 2016 will remain in place and this will be additive to that. Mayor Lauing expressed appreciation of the safety upgrades. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims had questions about activation time. Mr. Meader replied the AI looks at typical behavior of vehicles on the roadway and pedestrians at different times of day so the activation time depends on that. If a pedestrian steps off the roadway, an alert will be received in two seconds. The system can also distinguish between bicycles, people, raccoons, and all those kinds of things. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims queried if a train is constantly crossing the anti-trespass panel, how does the material not get damaged and how long will it last. Mr. Meader responded the manufacturer says those will last about 20 years. The conical pyramids are about six inches tall. They are vulcanized rubber and do not actually sit on the tracks so the train can still go by but it takes away the ability to walk anywhere around those. Chair Burt commended City Staff, Caltrain, and VTA for recognizing the sense of urgency on the safety issues. Ms. Dhaliwal announced the one-year anniversary of electric trains is approaching. A more substantive update will be provided the next time Staff returns to Rail Committee. Chair Burt asked if ridership is close to 70 percent since electrification. Ms. Dhaliwal confirmed that to be correct. B. VTA. Chantal Cotton-Gaines, Deputy City Manager shared that the VTA Mobility Hub Ad Hoc Committee is currently working with the Urban Land Institute, Stanford, and VTA in order to do a study of the Transit Center Area. Events were described happening the week of October 19. An explanation was provided about the Urban Land Institute. The ad hoc is focused on the short and long-term vision on making the Transit Center more lively and being a gateway. Chair Burt added the real purpose is to make it a place that will enhance use of transit. C. City Staff Ria Lo, Chief Transportation Official City of Palo Alto, reported Public Works is managing the Palo Alto Avenue Crossing project to create a quiet zone. It was awarded in early June and should be finished by the end of the year. After that is completed, the City will be able to provide a notice of implementation to the Federal Railway Administration to request a quiet zone in that area. Construction is complete on the improvements to the Churchill Avenue and Alma Street intersection. There is a similar project in the works for Charleston and Alma. It is in the 35 percent design stage. There is a South Palo Alto Connectivity project underway. The online survey is extended into early October and will be brought to Rail Committee in November and City Council in December for initial review. Nadia Naik, Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design, observed people still making right turns on red on El Camino and thought an education sign would be helpful warning that things have changed and potentially enforcement. Agenda Items 1. Initial Review of Refined Conceptual Designs for the selection and development of alternatives to proceed with 15% design for the Grade Separations at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 Ripon Bhatia, Senior Engineer, provided a slide presentation including the purpose of the meeting, an agenda, project site, current project phase, June 2024 Council direction for Churchill Avenue and Meadow Drive/Charleston Road alternatives, conceptual alternatives, and project goals and desired outcomes. Edgar Torres, Transit Consultant at Kimley-Horn and Associates, joined the presentation including recent technical activities, multimodal and circulation analysis, summary of concepts, Churchill Avenue and Seale, Churchill Avenue partial underpass landscape strip between curb and sidewalk, Churchill Avenue partial underpass Alma Street cross-section without landscape strip, Churchill Avenue partial underpass Alma Street cross-section with landscape strip, Churchill Avenue partial underpass looking south on Alma Street – no landscape strip between curb and sidewalk, Seale Avenue ramp and bike/ped crossing, Seale Avenue ramp cross-section, Seale Avenue: Alma Street ramp, Seale Avenue ramp aerial view, preliminary analysis results, initial considerations for Churchill Avenue partial underpass with and without landscape strip and Seale Avenue bike/ped ramp, draft crossing concept profiles of Meadow Drive and Charleston Road, Meadow Drive Hybrid concept refinement, Meadow Drive Underpass concept refinement, Meadow Drive Underpass draft, Charleston Road Hybrid concept refinement draft, Charleston Road Underpass roundabout concept refinement draft, Charleston Road Underpass direct access ramp concept refinement draft, Meadow Drive preliminary analysis results, Charleston Road preliminary analysis results, and initial considerations of Meadow Drive and Charleston Road. Mr. Bhatia resumed the presentation including a four-month look ahead, upcoming community meetings, and additional input opportunities. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims asked how delay is measured. Mr. Torres explained delay is effectively modeled with Synchro. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims pointed out the expected increase in population in this region. Mr. Torres agreed that would be included as part of the documentation. Chair Burt expressed concern that having a bike/ped crossing at Seale would increase the number of students crossing there. Chair Burt noted there will be delays and improvements on Churchill but drivers will say that Churchill is now faster than going to Embarcadero and there will be new equilibrium. Mr. Torres agreed that it will rebalance. Ms. Lo added for rendering 16, there is no pedestrian and bicycle access across Alma but there is pedestrian and bicycle access across Churchill near the tracks. Ms. Naik thought the issue was that the CPUC would not allow having something so close. If this was to be built, there would no longer be a crossing. The issue would be fixed by building the grade separation. Mr. Bhatia said in the future if there is a grade separation anything can be done at that intersection. Mayor Lauing queried what assumptions were made in terms of modeling on population growth. Mr. Torres replied VTA Staff was consulted with regard to the model the county currently utilizes. They were more conservative in the traffic demand. Mayor Lauing asked about the impact of where the landscaping was taken out. Mr. Torres responded it would be up to two feet of private property potentially needing to be acquired due to the landscape strip. The previously proposal had two lanes in upper Alma which did have four-foot private property impacts and further three-and-a-half feet encroachment on Caltrain right-of-way. Being SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 allowed to look at the traffic analysis and reduce to one lane on upper Alma gave the ability to identify a concept wholly within the City's right-of-way. The planning strip came from the ability to create some separation of the sidewalk with the road. Chair Burt noted that for northbound traffic, there would no longer be a signal at Churchill. There has been a discussion about the possibility of a signal in that area, perhaps at Cal Ave, that would both give a safe entrance and exit from that neighborhood and calm down some of the speeding that occurs on Alma. What is being seen is the work done so far toward the 15 percent engineering. It is possible to see other improvements at 15 and 30 percent. There was observation that a significant intrusion has not been assumed at the Caltrain right-of-way or Charleston/Meadow but it is not off the table. Mr. Torres confirmed that to be accurate. A concept will be shown that shows further encroachment in Charleston. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims questioned what is to prevent thousands of Paly students from becoming road cyclists that were hoped to be diverted through a tunnel further south. Mr. Torres explained that is an item that has been identified to be explored with the City and community to understand what design changes may be necessary whether road cyclists will or will not be allowed. The second would be working through an education campaign on Safe Routes To School. Ms. Naik added Embarcadero runs at an angle. Seale, Embarcadero, and Alma create a triangle. The number of students who might be tempted to go that way is the people who live in that triangle north of Seale. They have an option to go north and go under the Embarcadero grade separation. Chair Burt inquired when the 15 percent design completion is anticipated to be complete. Mr. Torres answered the end of second quarter next year, May-June timeframe to come back to the Rail Committee. Additional information in terms of constructability is anticipated at the November Rail Committee. As part of the construction schedule and updated cost estimate, that would be as part of the 15 percent drawings early next year. Potential negotiation with Caltrain on being able to use more of their right-of-way will be an ongoing process. Chair Burt was hopeful there would be fewer property impacts because of design refinements and being able to intrude on the right-of-way in some key locations. Mr. Torres stated those concepts are being explored and none are foreclosed. That is an important item as part of the collaborative nature between City and Caltrain. There is still more information to be gathered especially around utilities and constructability. As more information is gathered, it will be brought back to the Rail Committee and community about those implications. Item 1 Public Comment 1. Eric N. commented the retaining wall section along Alma might not be enough, it made sense to have the tunnel stop at the Caltrans right-of-way, the extension beyond Alma Street seems excessive, and the tunnel on Charleston seems excessively wide. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 2. Wendy A. inquired if there is any property acquisition to the west of Alma for Meadow and Charleston and requested a meeting scheduled in the evening for Charleston and Meadow. 3. Elizabeth A. wanted to put the bike network issues at the front of the conversation. A bike lane should extend to Carlson if an underpass is done. Education should be done about the bike networks. 4. David M. described concerns about safety with respect to the Seale Tunnel. 5. John M. requested a study be made of the impact of construction and that Caltrain and the City be considerate of the neighbors on construction projects. 6. Adrian B. suggested raising the train 4 to 6 feet and using a thin bridge to get the necessary elevation in order to not displace any properties or change street networks. 7. Stephen R. aligned with the suggestions made by Adrian B. Questions were posed about the amount of delay associated with closing one of the seven east-west crossings of the tracks and the complications associated with these movements. 8. Penny E. requested having the upcoming housing units included in the traffic analysis going forward, having a study if the new proposed changes might encourage neighborhood cut through the South Palo Alto neighborhoods, and consider widening the bike facility for the San Antonio area. Mr. Torres stated the units to the south near San Antonio was envisioned as part of the future traffic analysis. In terms of clearances, utilizing 7 percent would be tough to be able to make that clear. This ramp would have to approach 8 percent grade to be able to allow to be able to get underneath Alma and the railroad. Opportunities are being sought to reduce potential property impacts. If it is Rail Committee's and City Council's direction to explore gentler grades and have a larger footprint, that can be explored as part of the design team. Chair Burt wanted to see the two alternatives of grades and asked for clarification at what point in time refinements would be taken and to look at construction impacts. Mr. Torres agreed to bring the information back about the grades. The process has started of understanding what the potential work windows will be, recognizing the ability to be able to operate the railroad, that there are now homes adjacent to the railroad, the ability to provide space for the contractor to perform work day or night, and the type of work that may be limited day or night. There is more discussion to be had. Any time the profile of a railway is being changed, a shoe fly or temporary tracks are required. Chair Burt opined the ability to fund Churchill is not on the horizon and there would be a challenge funding Charleston and Meadow. There were questions about the hybrid. Mr. Torres stated in the short term, it would improve traffic flow. Mr. Bhatia commented the community meeting on September 30 would be recorded and available on YouTube and feedback can be provided electronically. Previous studies have been SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 done regarding travel times for the vehicles as well as the pedestrians for the partial underpass scenario and are available on the website. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed concern about adequate notice to the public on this issue for this meeting and timeliness of receipt of the Staff/Caltrain report. The images were difficult to see online. The meeting times are not equitable. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims wondered why there were no renderings of the hybrid option. There was a request to answer if the potential takings were only on the east side or on the west for Meadow and Charleston. Mr. Torres explained there is one potential full acquisition on the northwest side of the crossing that is anticipated. As the design is refined, it will be determined exactly how. As Charleston comes down, Park Boulevard also needs to come down so there would likely be some driveway modifications and access modifications to be able to make that connection. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims mentioned concern expressed about properties already being impacted by the South Palo Alto Bikeways and wanted the City's sense of the validity of that concern. City Manager Shikada stated it is early in the process of outreach. It is appropriate for members of the community to provide that feedback as a variety of alternatives is being worked on. Notices in that case went out to properties that are potentially impacted and also adjacent. Chair Burt said the need is for this to move as quickly through the narrowing of alternatives as possible so people that can be removed from consideration are done so. Ms. Naik thought it would be important for Rail Committee to have a study session of City Council and then a decision suggesting a special meeting for either bikes or this part. Chair Burt concurred. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims stressed the importance of good visuals for each option. 2. Quiet Zone Implementation Project at Existing At-Grade Crossings (Churchill Avenue, E. Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road); CEQA status – statutorily exempt per Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies). Mr. Bhatia provided a slide presentation including an agenda, purpose, background – study area, background – Rail Committee's direction, background – train horn overview, background – what is a quiet zone?, background – wayside horns, background – distribution of noise (traditional horn), background – distribution of noise (wayside horn), agency coordination, quiet zone study – background – the process, conceptual design – four quadrant gates, conceptual design – wayside horns, quiet zone study – summary of findings, quiet zone study – alternatives consideration, and the next steps. Mayor Lauing inquired about the meaning of "conducting reviews". Mr. Bhatia replied the reviews are conducted by Caltrain, FRA, and CPUC who have to review and approve the proposed concepts and designs before proceeding with any implementation. Mayor Lauing asked for an estimate of what percentage of the City's capital improvement program that might be. Mr. Bhatia stated the cost will be totally on the City. Most other funding sources do not allow for quiet zone implementation. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 Chair Burt asked about a comparison of the time to implement of the wayside versus the quiet zone. Mr. Bhatia responded the typical time it takes for any railroad project is in that timeline. The belief is that it will be on a lower end of that timeline for wayside horns because of less complexity and cost. It goes through the similar review processes and approvals from those agencies and agreements are required. The procurement of consultant and contractor is required. Mr. Torres added this timeline aligns with what has been spoken to with projects adjacent and across the country. Chair Burt mentioned that while Caltrain has reservations about the loss of safety of horn blasting, the horn noise is a constant announcement of lethal means to people considering self- harm. Mr. Bhatia explained these are FRA approved methodologies that are allowed under the code of federal regulations. Chair Burt noted the high-speed rail business plan and the funding does not include the cost of grade separations. Blake Silkwood, Project Manager at Kimley-Horn and Associates Item 2 Public Comment 1. Eric N. wondered if there is a market for used crossing gates given the large expense. 2. Elizabeth A. talked about the noise from the horns and urged to get the project done as soon as possible. 3. Melinda M. was shocked that horns were being considered and stressed moving forward with the quad gates as soon as possible. 4. John M. spoke in favor of quad gates and asked for better information in a timely way. 5. Herb B. observed that the train horns are being used excessively unnecessarily. 6. Adrian B. discouraged pursuing the use of wayside horns and spoke in favor of using quad gates. MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Lauing, to recommend the Quiet Zone Implementation Through Four Quadrant Gate Systems to City Council for the Churchill, Meadow and Charleston crossings. MOTION FAILED/PASSED: Motion passed 3-0 SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 8 Rail Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 9/16/2025 Future Meetings and Agendas Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 5:12 PM