HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 2603-6169CITY OF PALO ALTO
Rail Committee
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, May 12, 2026
2:30 PM
Agenda Item
2.Initial Review of the Technical Activities that Informed the 15% Design Development for
the Grade Separations at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road, Staff
Presentation
Rail Committee
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: Transportation
Meeting Date: May 12, 2026
Report #:2603-6169
TITLE
Initial Review of the Technical Activities that Informed the 15% Design Development for the
Grade Separations at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is seeking initial review on the technical studies that inform the 15% design development
for the grade separations at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In collaboration with City staff, Caltrain are working towards developing 15% designs and
technical reports for the partial underpass alternative for Churchill Avenue, hybrid alternative
for Meadow Drive, and underpass alternative for Charleston Road grade separation projects.
This staff report presents an update on the 15% design and technical activities for the Rail
Committee’s initial review and feedback before seeking community input and feedback.
Staff plan to conduct community meetings in August 2026, to gather community input
before returning to the Rail Committee and City Council to present 15% design and seek
direction on progressing alternatives into 35% design and environmental documentation.
BACKGROUND
The City of Palo Alto’s rail corridor planning efforts commenced in 2010 with the Palo Alto
Rail Corridor Study, which was adopted by Council on January 22, 20131. From November
4, 2013, the City developed preliminary grade separation alternatives as part of the
Connecting Palo Alto project, which explored multiple options for the four at-grade rail
crossing locations of Charleston Road, Meadow Drive, Churchill Avenue, and Palo Alto
Avenue. This work resulted in a Rail Corridor Circulation Study and initial screening of a
wide range of alternatives by Council on May 29, 20182. In April 2018, in-depth analysis of
1 City Council , January 22, 2013; Item 7, Action Item, SR# 3410
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=36707&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
2 City Council , May 29, 2018; Item 7, Action Item, SR# 9284
engineering options continued, with review by the Council Rail Committee and Rail
Crossing Community Advisory Committee (XCAP). The XCAP concluded deliberations and
presented recommendations to Council on March 23, 2021.5
Since 2022, staff have secured grants from the Federal Rail Administration (FRA) and
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), and have continued to develop,
evaluate and present grade separation alternatives for consideration. In consultation with
the community, Rail Committee and Council, the City has refined project alternatives for
rail crossings at Charleston Road, Meadow Drive, and Churchill Avenue, while the Palo
Alto Avenue crossing was put on hold.
To facilitate durable decision-making and expedited refinement of the alternatives, the
Project is divided into two steps:
Preliminary Engineering Conceptual Refinement (15% Design), which is anticipated to
progress through Summer 2026; and
Preliminary Engineering (35% Design) and Environmental Documentation under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA), which is anticipated to conclude in Fall 2027.
On December 1, 20256 and December 15, 2025,7 Council directed staff to advance the
following project alternatives into 15% design with a focus on enhancing safety and access,
establishing a project footprint for environmental clearance, and minimizing congestion,
environmental impacts and property impacts.
For Churchill Avenue, Council selected the Partial Underpass as the Locally Preferred
Alternative (LPA) with a partial crossing for motor vehicles at Churchill Avenue with no
landscaping strip along Alma Street; and a pedestrian/bicycle crossing at Seale
Avenue/Peers Park with a ramp along Alma Street.
Based on Council direction on November 29, 20218, the Pedestrian/Bicycle Undercrossing at
Churchill (aka Closure Alternative) remains as the backup alternative if needed in the future
for this location. (As directed by Council, the backup alternative will not advance to
preliminary engineering at this time.)
For Meadow Drive the Council identified the Hybrid Underpass as a preferred alternative to
advance into 15% design. Additionally, Council asked to look at earthen berm verses
5 City Council , March 23, 2021; Item 1, Study Session Item, SR# 9284
6 City Council , December 10, 2025; Item 1, Action Item, SR# 2506-4895
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=84042&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
7 City Council , December 15, 2025; Item 26, Action Item, SR# 2512-5637
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=84075&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
8 City Council , November 29, 2021; Item 11, Action Item, SR# 13787
podium option that was reviewed by the rail committee at its March 10, 202613
meeting.
For Charleston Road, Council selected the direct ramp underpass alternative to advance
into 15% design.
Caltrain is leading the Preliminary Engineering and Environmental Documentation phase and
the City collaborates with Caltrain for project design and acts as project sponsor.
ANALYSIS
During the 15% design development, the project team (City and Caltrain staff) explored and
refined the following preliminary design elements:
Basis of Design
Track Alignment
Structures
Drainage
Storm Water
Geotechnical
Utility Identification and Relocations
Vehicle, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Access and Circulation
Potential Property Impacts
Basis of Design
The Basis of Design establishes a general framework to guide project design. The detailed
project design will follow the applicable provisions of Caltrain, American Railway Engineering
and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA), Caltrans and City of Palo Alto standards. The
design criteria are governed by a combination of Caltrain, AREMA, and Caltrans standards,
reflecting the diverse design elements involved—including railroad bridges, pedestrian
overcrossings, retaining walls, and roadway interfaces. In general, all rail-related structures
must comply with the Caltrain Design Criteria Manual, which defines electrification
compatibility, seismic performance, and structural loading under increased train frequency.
The design will also adhere to the AREMA Manual for Railway Engineering, which provides
technical standards for rail load combinations, track-structure interaction, and substructure
performance under static and dynamic loads.
For roadway-related elements such as retaining walls, pedestrian bridges, and crash barriers,
the project follows relevant portions of the Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications and Seismic
Design Criteria (SDC 2.1), particularly for vehicular collision loads, pedestrian safety,
foundation design, and geotechnical considerations. The integration of these requirements
ensures that each structural component is resilient, serviceable, and compatible with both
rail operations and the surrounding urban and transportation context.
13 Rail Committee, March 10, 2026; Item 1, Study Session, SR# 2603-6052
In addition, the City requires that the project addresses multimodal access, community
aesthetics, and integration with the urban environment. Together, these criteria guide the
structural design toward a solution that is technically robust, operationally efficient, and
responsive to the community. The Basis of Design report will be provided as part of the
September Rail Committee packet after the technical review is completed by Caltrain and the
City.
Track Alignment
separation, a shoofly track alignment would be installed as part of that subsequent phase.
Structural Elements
For Churchill Avenue, structural geometry was established based on required civil alignment,
vertical and horizontal clearance constraints, and the relationship between existing and
proposed grades. The proposed design features a hybrid retaining system—using deep soil
mixing (DSM) walls and conventional cantilever retaining walls for the ramps—and a concrete
box structure for the underpass.
vertical and horizontal clearance requirements, and existing ground and the finish grade. In
general, a U shape conventional retaining wall is proposed for the ramps and concrete box is
proposed for the tunnel, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Alma Street Ramp – Pedestrian/Bicycle Tunnel and Ramp Sections
The retaining wall was shortened slightly at each end of the ramps
The tunnel was extended toward the west in Peers Park to reduce the maximum
retained soil depth for the retaining wall.
For Meadow Drive, the grade separation will include a proposed structure consisting of a
three-span precast girder bridge located within the existing right-of-way. Approach
embankments will be required to support the raised alignment. To accommodate the
depressed roadway profile, cast-in-place cantilever retaining walls will be constructed along
portions of Meadow Drive and Alma Street. The overall layout of the proposed improvements
is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Meadow Drive Hybrid Structural Elements
Figure 3: Meadow Drive Hybrid Rail Bridge Structure
For Charleston Road, to achieve the required vertical clearances, the proposed design
incorporates several key structural components: a new railroad bridge, a roadway bridge, a
pedestrian and bicycle overcrossing (of Charleston Road), and a series of retaining wall
systems supporting the lowered roadway approaches, as shown in Figure 4. The design
provides minimum clearances of 16.5 feet beneath the rail bridge, 13.5 feet beneath the
roadway bridge, and 8 feet for the pedestrian undercrossing of the railroad. Roadway
geometry, lane widths, cross slopes, and access connections have been developed to fit
within the constrained footprint while meeting applicable design standards and maintaining
connectivity to Alma Street and Park Boulevard.
Figure 4: Charleston Road Underpass Structural Elements
1. Vehicular roadway, providing east-west travel lanes in each direction
2. A separate pedestrian and bicycle (multi-use) path located adjacent to the
roadway at a higher elevation when undercrossing the railroad, shown in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Charleston Road Underpass – Alma Street Bridge
The railroad bridge carries the active Caltrain tracks over the lowered Charleston Road and
the pedestrian undercrossing. Therefore, the structure shall be designed to satisfy Caltrain’s
clearance, load, and operational requirements while fitting within the constrained right-of-
way. Construction feasibility is dependent on the railroad structural system due to
maintaining Caltrain operations. The work window assumes weekend closures. Two general
construction concepts influence the structural system:
• Open-Cut Method with temporary shoofly tracks as shown in Figure 6,
which allows the use of conventional superstructure types.
• Box-Jacking method that installs a reinforced concrete box beneath the
active tracks without a shoofly (Figure 7).
Figure 6: Open-Cut Railroad Bridge
Figure 7: Box Jacking Railroad Bridge
A pedestrian bridge is required to maintain connectivity across the lowered Charleston Road.
The structure spans approximately 60 feet over the lowered Charleston Road. Prestressed CIP
voided concrete slab is selected as the preferred superstructure system. The lowered
Charleston Road for vehicular traffic only as shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Charleston Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge
Stormwater
Guidance for compliance with the permanent stormwater requirements of the San Francisco
Bay Municipal Regional Permit (MRP) is summarized in the Santa Clara County stormwater
management program (SCVURPPP) C.3 Stormwater Handbook. This project needs to meet
treatment requirements as it is classified as: Construction of impervious trails that are greater
than or equal to 10 feet wide. SCVURPPP’s Local Hydro-Modification Management
Applicability Maps indicate that the Project is in an area exempt form hydromodification
management requirements.
Caltrain Stormwater - The selected alternatives include substantial new and reconstructed
impervious area within the Caltrain right-of-way associated with track and corridor
improvements. The Project evaluated permanent Low Impact Development (LID) treatment
within the Caltrain right of way, including bioretention, to address Caltrain new and replaced
impervious surfaces consistent with Caltrain design criteria and Caltrain stormwater permit
requirements. The Project cannot site permanent LID treatment Best Management Practices
(BMPs) within the Caltrain right-of-way because planned future track configuration and
operational requirements constrain available footprint. The Project will therefore plan to
address Caltrain post construction treatment requirements through alternative compliance.
Caltrain will address Caltrain track and corridor impervious area through on corridor
(alternative compliance) LID treatment within Caltrain right of way.
City of Palo Alto Stormwater - The City’s portion will address City MS4 and Santa Clara Clean
Water Program post construction requirements through alternative compliance due to right
of way and grade constraints. The City and Caltrain will coordinate ownership, access, and
long-term maintenance for any pump stations and any alternative compliance BMPs through
a long-term maintenance agreement.
Given the constrained rights of way, grade separations, and utility and grade conflicts, on
corridor low impact development (LID) within City of Palo Alto right-of-way is not practicable
at multiple locations. City standards recognize that non-LID or off-site approaches may be
necessary where soil, location, or project constraints preclude standard LID. The Project team
will coordinate early with the City staff to define the alternative compliance obligations for
City regulated impervious areas in accordance with C.3.e (Alternative Compliance) by
providing equivalent, hydraulically sized LID treatment off site or by participating in a
Regional or off-site project administered by the City within the same watershed with a
documented net environmental benefit.
Drainage
peak flow for the 50-year, to fully convey all runoff from the project up into the public storm
drain system. Once the water is pumped to a storm drain manhole, outlet pipes that gravity
flow stormwater into the City’s system are sized to adequately convey the 10-year peak flow.
Per the Santa Clara County Hydro Modification Susceptibility Map, all Project Areas are in
hydromodification exempt zones.
The preliminary configuration assumes independent pump stations at each depressed
undercrossing. The interaction between the Churchill Avenue and Seale Avenue pump facilities
may result in a series pumping condition within the City’ existing storm drain main system.
While hydraulically feasible, this configuration will be further evaluated during the 35% design
phase to assess potential gravity bypass option. The drainage report will be provided to Rail
Committee packet in Fall 2026 after technical review from Caltrain and the City staff.
Geotechnical
distance seems reasonable. Construction of the rail bridge or underpass may be
achieved through conventional bridge construction or box jacking. These options are
being evaluated by design engineers. During these operations, Alma Street will be
narrowed to one lane in each direction.
If conventional construction is adopted for the rail bridge, a deep pile foundation is
expected for foundation support. However, staff believes that the project may pose
noise and vibration concerns on neighbors if conventional driven piles are used.
Therefore, alternatives such as Caltrans standard Cast-In-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) piles are
being evaluated for feasibility. Either pile-footings or large diameter CIDH pile
columns may be considered and groundwater is expected in this area. Therefore,
shoring, will likely be required for the 4 to 7 f t excavation and will likely consist of
cantilever soldier pile and lagging system. For small retaining walls along Meadow
Drive and Alma Street, cantilever or L-shaped walls on shallow foundations would be
feasible. Again, noting that for the rail bridge, the design needs to account for
railroad loading.
Charleston Road
For Charleston Road, boring data indicates stiff clays and silty sand in the upper 20 ft
depth overlying sandy clays and clayey sands through about 35 ft. The planned
finished grade below the future underpass and vehicular structure at Charleston Road
and Alma Street seems to be at elevation 14 to 15 ft (approximately 26 ft below the
top of rail) and in stiff clay or clayey sand.
For the planned retaining walls supporting future depressed Charleston Road and
Alma Street, DSM walls for both shoring and permanent design will be feasible. The
underpass and vehicular structures at Charleston Road and Alma Street crossing can
be bridges on DSM foundations, box structures, or combination with alternate
construction methods. For the pedestrian/bike path from Wright Place to Park Blvd.,
cantilever or L-shaped walls on shallow foundations should be feasible. At this
crossing also, the box structure needs to be designed for railroad surcharge.
Based on boring and CPT data, groundwater is anticipated to be above the final grade
of depressed Charleston Road/Alma Street since groundwater was encountered at as
high as 10 ft below surface at Charleston Road and Alma Street. Groundwater control
and temporary construction dewatering will be required, and permanent roadway
design needs to account for groundwater level. For permanent design, this
groundwater level may necessitate a drainage blanket layer below the depressed
roadway pavement sections and a pump station. The geotechnical report will be
provided as part of the September Rail Committee packet after the technical review
from Caltrain and the City of Palo Alto.
Utility Identification and Relocation
The project team submitted a request to obtain utility contact information of all utility owners
within the crossings as well as utility record drawings. All utility companies and the City’s
Utilities department provided delineation maps, which were used to prepare a utility base map.
Utility conflicts were then evaluated at a conceptual level relative to proposed grading,
roadway modifications, and structural elements.
Vehicle, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Access and Circulation
speeds. No structural sight obstructions were identified at Churchill Avenue or Meadow
Drive, indicating that SSD limitations are primarily due to vertical alignment. At the
Charleston Road Direct Access Ramp, corner sight distance is constrained by bridge
abutments and retaining walls.
Across all evaluated intersections, passenger vehicles can generally be accommodated within
the proposed roadway geometry; however, larger design vehicles, including WB-40 trucks,
fire trucks, buses, and refuse vehicles, frequently require oversteering or operational
adjustments to complete turning movements. Accommodation for wide-body and emergency
vehicles is limited and may require targeted geometric modifications or access restrictions to
ensure safe and efficient operations. Therefore, it is recommended to:
Prohibit access to wide-body vehicles to and through the Charleston Road Direct
Access Ramp.
Restrict truck movements from the Alma Street northbound approach to eastbound
Charleston Road.
Reconfigure the sidewalk along eastbound Charleston Road to maintain appropriate
access for the trucks.
Potential Property Impacts
15. In addition to private
parcels the project also requires partial right-of-way from Caltrain for the proposed and
roadway and structure improvements. These areas will need to be further refined in the next
phase when the design is further advanced.
15 City Council, December 10, 2025; Item 1, Action Item, SR# 2506-4895
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=84042&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
APPROVED BY:
City of Palo Alto
Grade Separation Project
Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive,
and Charleston Road
Rail Committee
May 12, 2026
Current Project Phase1
2
Key Design Elements2
Agenda
Independent Cost Estimate Considerations3
Path to 35% Design and Environmental Documentation4
Summary of Alternatives
3
ALTERNATIVE
CROSSING Meadow Drive Charleston Road
HYBRID UNDERPASSPARTIAL UNDERPASS
Churchill Avenue
Direct Access
Ramp
Vehicle Crossing
(without Landscape Strip)
Bike/Ped Crossing
(Alma Street Ramp)
Earthen Berm
(Short Bridge)
Implementation study
if only Charleston Rd
Underpass is built
Current Project Phase
4
202720262025
Q4Q3Q2Q1Q4Q3Q2Q1Q4Q3Q2
Preliminary Engineering and Environmental
35% Design and Environmental15% DesignConcept Development
and Refinement
City Council Direction #2:
Concurrence with alternatives
to advance to 35% Design and
Environmental Documentation
City Council Direction #1:
Identify alternatives to
advance to 15% Design
Final 35% Design and
Environmental Documentation
#1 #2
We are here
15% Design Phase
Establish a feasible, buildable project concept with a
defined project footprint to inform environmental studies,
cost, and schedule.
What’s included:
Concept layouts and typical sections
Initial construction approach and sequencing
Key risks, constraints, and impacts
Preliminary project cost estimates
Deliverables:
Basis of Design
15% Design Plans / Technical Design Memos
Preliminary project cost estimate and schedule
5
35% Design & Environmental Phase
Confirm track and roadway geometry, structure types, risks,
and constructability to complete environmental
documentation and prepare for final design and project
delivery.
What’s included:
Confirm alignment and profiles
Confirm footprint (right-of-way, utilities, structures)
Construction sequencing and staging
Environmental studies (CEQA/NEPA)
Refined project cost estimate and schedule
Deliverables:
35% Design Plans
Environmental documentation
Refined project cost estimate and schedule
Preliminary Engineering Phases
Captures the potential limits
of design alternatives
Sets the area of study for
environmental resources and
informs potential permitting
Allows for design and
construction flexibility and
refinement
Establishing a Stable Project Footprint
6
Anticipated Limits of Improvement
Construction Easement
Project Footprint
Key Design Elements
7
Utilities Construction
Considerations
Right-of-Way StructuralRoadway
Track
15% design drawings are consistent
with concepts presented to City in Nov.
Churchill Avenue lowered 22 feet
Meadow Drive lowered 7 feet
Charleston Road lowered 20 feet,
if constructed with Meadow Drive
Charleston Road lowered 24 feet,
if constructed alone
Design Elements: Roadway + Drainage
8
Charleston Road Direct Access Ramp Rendering
Confirmed local vehicles can
turn through intersections
City Garbage Truck
City Fire Truck
Bus-40 (40’ passenger bus)
WB-40 (40’ wheel base, semi-
trailer)
Limitation: 3-axle semi-
trailer at Charleston Road
would likely be restricted on
the direct access ramp
Design Elements: Roadway Turning Movements
9
Source: AASHTO 2018.
Dimensions of an
intermediate semitrailer
truck design vehicle with a
single 33-ft trailer (WB-40).
Source: AASHTO 2018.
Dimensions for intercity bus
(BUS-40) design vehicle
For Churchill Avenue and
Meadow Drive, 15%
design confirmed previous
list of potential property
acquisitions.
For Charleston Road, two
parcels were removed from
the list of parcels/dwelling
units in 15% design.
List of potential property
acquisitions will continue
to be refined throughout
design.
Design Elements: Right-of-Way
10
Charleston Road Underpass
Concept (Previous)
Charleston Road Underpass
15% Design (Current)
Churchill Avenue –Partial Underpass
Roadway lowered within concrete box under
tracks with cantilever retaining walls and
elsewhere
Seale Avenue –Underpass
Tunnel was extended into Peers Park to
reduce excessive retained soil depths—
particularly at the west ramp, where depths
approached 18 feet
Ramp end retaining walls were shortened by
14 feet
Design Elements: Structural + Geotechnical
11
Pedestrian/Bicycle Tunnel
Design Elements: Utilities
12
Desktop research has identified
major utilities within the Project
limits
Further investigation is needed
Next Steps:
Subsurface Utility Exploration
Ground penetrating radar
Potholing
Develop a comprehensive utility
matrix
Project-specific discussions with
utility companies (City, PG&E)
Resolving Utility Conflicts
Design team is exploring approaches that
minimize construction impact and footprint
Preliminary Approaches to Utility Relocation
Combined utility trenches
No utility upgrades except increase fire hydrant
frequency for fire safety, if needed
Preliminary Approaches for Stormwater
Management
Alternative BMPs for post-construction stormwater
treatment
Drainage pump stations at low points of deep
underpasses
Churchill Ave –No modifications to track
Charleston Rd Only –No modifications to track
Meadow Dr + Charleston Rd –Raise tracks
Raise track 16 feet at Meadow Drive
Due to Meadow Drive track raise, track raises at
Charleston Road by 4.5 feet
Track set on bridges (over roadway crossings) and
embankment with retaining walls (everywhere else)
Design Elements: Track
13
Churchill Avenue Partial Underpass Rendering
Meadow Drive Hybrid Rendering
Design Elements: Track Curves
Future Main Track 1 (MT1)
Future Main Track 2 (MT2)
Future MT1 Profile
Charleston
Rd
Alma St
Ely
Pl
VERTICAL
HORIZONTAL
SLOPE
1.19%SLOPE
-0.65%
ROAD LOWERED 7’
TRACKS RAISED 16’
Legend
New track profile
Existing roadway and track profile
Meadow Dr and Charleston Rd profiles
Meadow Dr Centerline
Charleston Rd Centerline
CURVES
Construction sequencing will identify
community impacts during each major
construction phase
Construction sequencing will serve as
baseline information for environmental
documentation
City/Caltrain constructability workshop in
May
Sequencing plans to be shared with Rail
Committee in September
Construction Sequencing
15
Considerations
User experience (Bikes/Peds/Autos)
Bike and Pedestrian Safety
Bike and Pedestrian Access across
Tracks
Vehicular Access across Tracks and
along Alma Street
Nighttime Construction
A shoofly (temporary track) is
necessary to construct the Meadow
Hybrid grade separation
Shoofly sequencing will allow for
reliable and consistent Caltrain
operations (with work windows)
Opportunity to improve construction
production rates
Track Shoofly
16
Shoofly Extents
17
Alma Street Ely
Pl
Greenmeadow
Way
Alma StreetOne travel lane in each direction
Existing Tracks
Temporary Barrier and Fence
Shoofly Tracks
28 ft
22 ft
15 ft
OCS Poles and Construction Staging Area
38 ft
18
Shoofly Extents
Temporary Barrier and Fence
Shoofly Encroachment on Alma Street
19
Existing Caltrain TracksTemporary Shoofly TracksAlma Street
One travel lane in each direction
during construction
28 feet 23 to 37 feet
of Alma St
Applicable to Churchill Avenue
Partial Underpass and Charleston
Road Underpass
A construction method that installs a
reinforced concrete box/rectangle
under the existing railroad tracks
Structure constructed adjacent to the
site, then pushed into place
Minimizes or eliminates disruption
to rail operations, eliminating need
for shoofly
Box Jacking
20
Source: Caltrain Corridor Crossings Delivery Guide
Delivery Scenarios
21
ALTERNATIVE
CROSSING
ANTICIPATED
CONSTRUCTION
METHOD
Charleston Road
UNDERPASS
Direct Access
Ramp
Box Jacking
PARTIAL
UNDERPASS
Churchill Avenue
Vehicle Crossing
(without Landscape Strip)
Bike/Ped Crossing
(Seale -Alma Street
Ramp)
Box Jacking
Meadow Drive & Charleston Road
HYBRID
Earthen Berm
(Short Bridge)
Shoofly & Open Cut
UNDERPASS
Direct Access
Ramp
OR
Estimate Includes:
Total Delivery Cost = Construction + soft
costs (design, permitting, environmental,
construction management)
Key Considerations:
Property acquisitions are not included
Estimate Informed By:
Work windows and rail service constraints
Electrified corridor requirements
Current market costs
Independent Cost Estimate Considerations
22
September Rail Committee Meeting
Constructability Memo for
Meadow/Charleston
15% Construction Schedules & Cost
Estimates
Churchill Partial Underpass
Meadow Hybrid + Charleston Underpass
Charleston Underpass Only
Potential Preliminary Cost Risks
Path to 35% Design and Environmental
Documentation Phase
23
August
Activities
Independent cost estimate and schedule
Key risks, cost drivers, and constructability
considerations
Community Engagement
Hold 2 community meetings
Receive community input on:
15% design
Independent cost estimate & schedule
Key risks, cost drivers, and constructability
considerations
September
Project Advancement Concurrence
Informed by:
Community feedback
15% design
Independent cost estimate and schedule
Rail Committee Recommendation
Concurrence on advancing alternatives into
35% design and environmental documentation
City Council Direction
Concurrence on advancing alternatives into
35% design and environmental documentation