Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-18 Rail Agenda PacketCity Council Rail Committee 1 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Wednesday, April 18, 2018 Special Meeting Council Chambers 8:00 AM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday 12 days preceding the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items. If you wish to address the Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers/Community Meeting Room, and deliver it to the Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Committee, but it is very helpful. Call to Order Oral Communications Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Action Items 1.Introduction of new Railroad Grade Separation Consulting Team 2.Continued Discussion on the Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas for the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program (Continued From March 21, 2018) 3.Verbal Update on Interagency Activities Future Meetings and Agendas Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. City of Palo Alto (ID # 9160) City Council Rail Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/18/2018 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas Title: Continued Discussion on the Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas for the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program (Continued From March 21, 2018) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Committee receive a report on the Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas for the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program. Staff does not recommend any action until early April 2018. Background The Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program is a community-based process to address long-standing challenges associated with at-grade crossings on the Caltrain corridor that runs through Palo Alto. This process will inform decisions affecting both community aesthetics and mobility choices for many future generations, and has some urgency because of expected increases in rail service (and resulting delays at at-grade crossings) enabled by ongoing Caltrain electrification and the long development timeline for solutions. Community feedback and collaboration has been a vital part of the decision-making process. Engagement activities that inform, educate, gather input and connect citizens about potential rail design alternatives will help prepare the City for the transit landscape of the future. For more information on the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program, and the work completed to-date, please visit http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/connectingpaloalto. Throughout 2017 and early 2018, community comments were collected through a project website, stakeholder interviews, an on-line questionnaire with 800 responses, two community workshops with 228 attendees, and four community roundtables with 381 attendees. To-date, Staff has received an additional 63 public comments or inquiries related to the project. All of the input received has been entered into a public comment database. Figure 1. Alternatives Screening Diagram City of Palo Alto Page 2 Source: City of Palo Alto, February 2018 Staff has reviewed all of the input received to-date and drafted a Master List of Ideas. This list contains all of the various grade separation projects suggested by members of the public and as a result of previous planning efforts. A total of 34 discrete Ideas were identified by Staff (this was previously described as ~40 Ideas). This Master List of Ideas is included as Attachment A. As presented at the City Council retreat and Rail Committee meeting in February, the program goals for 2018 are to identify four (4) to eight (8) Alternatives for Study in June and select a Preferred Solution for Environmental Analysis and Preliminary Design by December. In order to move toward the goal of identification of the handful of Alternatives for Study, Staff recommends the early elimination of financially or technically infeasible Ideas through the use of Initial Screening Criteria, which are based on the Tier 1 and Tier 2 Evaluation Criteria adopted by City Council on September 6, 2017. A glossary of the terms used in this staff report is included below. Glossary Option: A standard type of railroad grade crossing improvement or grade separation treatment. Examples of Options include: safety upgrades, closure, road under rail, road over rail, hybrid, rail under road, and rail over road. Idea: An initial concept for a treatment at one or more specific grade crossings. An Idea has not been evaluated for financial feasibility or constructability. Master List of Ideas: A comprehensive list of all grade crossing treatment Ideas. All Ideas on The Master List of Ideas were identified in public comments or in previous planning efforts. Alternative for Study: An Idea that has been initially screened for financial and technical feasibility and selected for further analysis. The cost to further analyze each Alternative for Study is estimated at $200,000 to $300,000*. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Solution: A combination of one Alternative for Study for each of the four grade crossings (e.g., closing one crossing, putting a hybrid at two crossings, and putting a trench at one crossing would equal one Solution). The Alternatives for Study within a Solution must be compatible with one another. Preferred Solution: The Solution selected by City Council to move into the environmental analysis and preliminary design phase in 2019. * The further analysis of an Alternative for Study will likely include traffic circulation and multi- modal access evaluations, geotechnical investigations, structural type selections, hydraulic analysis, utility conflict evaluations, constraints analysis, preliminary cost analysis, economic and community impact analysis, construction phasing impacts, and multi-modal transportation impact analysis). Figure 2. Adopted Evaluation Criteria Source: City of Palo Alto, March 12, 2018 Discussion Using the methodology outlined below, Staff conducted an Initial Screening exercise based on the adopted Evaluation Criteria, as well as three new criteria: 1) Estimated Community Support, City of Palo Alto Page 4 2) Constructability, and 3) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Opinion. Much of this scoring is qualitative in nature and relies on the professional judgement of Staff. An internal working group comprised of staff from the Planning and Community Environment Department, Public Works Department, and Utilities Department coordinated on the evaluation under the technical screening criteria. It’s important to recognize, however, that cumulatively, a minor change to the score under one criterion is unlikely to change the results of the Initial Screening. Two exceptions to this are the so-called Fatal Flaw criteria of 1) Funding Feasibility and 2) Constructability. It will likely be the Staff recommendation that the Ideas that face substantial funding or construction challenges be removed from consideration. An additional criterion on TAC Opinion remains blank, as the Master List of Ideas was not presented to the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Technical Advisory Committee until March 13, 2018. The scoring under this criterion will be included in the Rail Committee agenda packet for the early April meeting. Tier 1 Evaluation Criteria Facilitate Movement – All Modes  At year of completion, the project will likely improve access and mobility compared to a scenario with no project.  At year of completion, the project will likely result in similar levels of access and mobility compared to a scenario with no project.  At year of completion, the project will likely worsen access and mobility compared to a scenario with no project. Reduce Delay and Congestion  At year of completion, the project will likely decrease motor vehicle delay at signalized intersections compared to a scenario with no project.  At year of completion, the project will likely result in similar levels of motor vehicle delay at signalized intersections compared to a scenario with no project.  At year of completion, the project will likely increase motor vehicle delay at signalized intersections compared to a scenario with no project. Ped-Bike Circulation  The project is likely to substantially improve bicyclist and pedestrian connectivity across the rail corridor and between key destinations.  The project is likely to moderately improve bicyclist and pedestrian connectivity across the rail corridor and between key destinations.  The project is likely to degrade bicyclist and pedestrian connectivity across the rail corridor and between key destinations. Support Rail Operations City of Palo Alto Page 5  The project will likely facilitate improved rail operations.  The project will likely have no impact on rail operations.  The project will likely constrain flexibility for future rail operations and expansion of service. Funding Feasibility (Fatal Flaw) ✔It’s possible that the entire project can be funded with established revenue sources. X It’s possible that the majority of the project can be funded with established revenue sources, although some portion of the project will likely require new funding mechanisms, and that portion is likely to be eligible for competitive grant funding. X The estimated cost of the project likely exceeds the capacity of existing revenue sources and potential new funding mechanisms, and the project would be unlikely to be eligible for competitive grant funding. Tier 2 Evaluation Criteria Reduce Noise  The project will likely reduce noise from trains—air horns and roadway crossing warning bells—while not increasing other noise.  The project will likely reduce some sources of noise—air horns and roadway crossing warning bells—while potentially increasing the degree or intensity of noise from other sources.  The project will likely not reduce noise. Minimize Visual Changes  The project will likely either improve or not substantially alter the appearance of the project area.  The project will moderately alter the appearance of the project area.  The project will likely substantially alter the appearance of the project area. Minimize Right-of-Way  The project will likely require very minimal or no permanent property acquisition. City of Palo Alto Page 6  The project will likely require moderate permanent property acquisition, possibly impacting only small portions of affected parcels.  The project will likely require substantial permanent property acquisition. Minimize Construction Impacts  The extent and duration of project construction will likely have minimal impact on the public and be mostly within the existing railroad right-of-way.  The extent and duration of project construction will likely have a moderate impact on the public and be partially outside the existing railroad right-of-way.  The extent and duration of project construction will likely have a significant impact on the public and be mostly outside the existing railroad right-of-way. Estimated Community Support  Based on recent community engagement activities, Staff believes that the project may have broad support within the community.  Based on recent community engagement activities, Staff believes that the project may have some support within the community.  Based on recent community engagement activities, Staff believes that the project may have little support in the community. Constructability (Fatal Flaw) ✔Project can be constructed under existing technical standards and within existing political framework. “Political framework” refers to the City’s ability to obtain necessary approvals from other agencies. X Project cannot be constructed under existing technical standards or within existing political framework. X Project cannot be constructed under existing technical standards and within existing political framework. TAC Opinion  As of April 1, 2018, the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Technical Advisory Committee members have not expressed any concerns with the project.  As of April 1, 2018, the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Technical Advisory Committee members have expressed minor concerns with the project. City of Palo Alto Page 7  As of April 1, 2018, the Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Technical Advisory Committee members have expressed major concerns with the project. The results of the Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas is included as Attachment B (the detailed scoring from the Initial Screening will be distributed at the meeting). A total of 18 Ideas have been identified by Staff for potential early elimination, which would leave 16 Ideas on the Master List of Ideas. These 16 Ideas are summarized below, and reflect the results of Initial Screening only. Some of these Ideas may prove unworkable and/or be viewed unfavorably by the community as the screening process moves forward. Ultimately, the City Council will be asked to identify four (4) to eight (8) Ideas worthy of in-depth analysis. Ideas that Include Grade Crossing Closure Option CAE Close Churchill Avenue crossing and widen existing Embarcadero Road roadway undercrossing CAS Close Churchill Avenue crossing and build a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing near the planned Seale Avenue bicycle boulevard to connect to the existing Peers Park and planned Stanford Avenue bicycle boulevard MDL Close Meadow Drive crossing and build a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing near Loma Verde Avenue to connect to the planned Matadero Avenue bicycle boulevard PCE Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and build planned Everett Avenue bicycle and pedestrian undercrossing PCU Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and widen existing University Avenue roadway undercrossing Ideas that Include Hybrid Option (Railroad Raise Slight and Roadway Depressed Slightly) CAH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Churchill Avenue crossing CRH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Charleston Road crossing (maintain connection between Charleston Road and Alma Street) MCH Roadway under rail hybrid at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings MCL Roadway under railroad hybrid at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings; new hybrid path under rail bicycle and pedestrian crossing near Loma Verde Avenue MDH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Meadow Drive crossing (maintain connection between Meadow Drive and Alma Street) City of Palo Alto Page 8 PAH Continue proposed Menlo Park hybrid alternative across San Francisquito Creek and Palo Alto Avenue on a viaduct structure Ideas that Include No Build Option (Safety Upgrades Only) CAN No grade separation at Churchill Avenue crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quad-gates and wayside horns) in addition to planned Section 130 project to be completed in 2018-2019. MDN No grade separation at Meadow Drive crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quad- gates and wayside horns) in addition to potential Section 130 project to be completed in 2020- 2022. PAN No grade separation at Palo Alto Avenue crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quad-gates and wayside horns) with the goal of making a quiet zone Ideas that Include Rail under Road Option MCT Railroad under roadway trench from Meadow Drive to Charleston Road; Alma Street not within trench (maintain connections between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) MCX Railroad under roadway trench at Charleston Road; Close Meadow Drive crossing; Alma Street not within trench (maintain connections between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) Timeline Throughout March and early April, Staff will be recieving Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Technical Advisory Committee feedback on the Master List of Ideas and also meeting with key stakeholders to review the results of the Initial Screening of the Master List of Ideas. It is recommended that the Rail Committee take up an action item to move forward with the early elimination of Ideas at its first meeting in April. Attachments:  Attachment A - Draft Master List of Ideas  Attachment B - Draft Initial Screening Results  Attachment C - Rail Committee Presentation 2018-03-21 Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Master List of Ideas 03/07/2018 Alternative  ID Description of Alternative MCA Railroad under roadway trench within existing railroad corridor from Meadow Drive to Charleston Road; Alma  Street within trench (no connections between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) MCH Roadway under rail hybrid at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings MCL Roadway under railroad hybrid at Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings; new hybrid path under rail bicycle  and pedestrian crossing near Loma Verde Avenue MCT Railroad under roadway trench from Meadow Drive to Charleston Road; Alma Street not within trench (maintain  connections between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) MCX Railroad under roadway trench at Charleston Road; Close Meadow Drive crossing; Alma Street not within trench  (maintain connections between Meadow Drive and Charleston Road) WBE Citywide deep bore railroad tunnel from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits under El Camino Real  with two new underground rail stations WBR Citywide deep bore railroad tunnel from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits under existing rail  corridor with two new underground rail stations WCE Citywide cut‐and‐cover railroad tunnel from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits under El Camino  Real with two new underground rail stations WCR Citywide cut‐and‐cover railroad tunnel from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits under existing  railroad corridor with two new underground rail stations WER Citywide railroad berm from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits within existing rail corridor with  two new elevated stations WTR Citywide railroad under roadway trench within existing railroad right‐of‐way from Menlo Park city limits to  Mountain View city limits with two new depressed rail stations WVR Citywide railroad viaduct from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits within existing rail corridor with  two new elevated stations Citywide or Multiple Crossing Alternatives DR A F T FO R DI S C U S S I O N ON L Y Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Master List of Ideas 03/07/2018 Alternative  ID Description of Alternative PAH Continue proposed Menlo Park hybrid alternative across San Francisquito Creek and Palo Alto Avenue on a viaduct  structure PAN No grade separation at Palo Alto Avenue crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quadgates and wayside  horns) with the goal of making a quiet zone PAT Connect Alma Street south of Palo Alto Avenue to Sand Hill Road with a roadway undercrossing beneath the  railroad corridor and El Camino Real; dead‐end Palo Alto Avenue east of Alma Street; connect the bicycle path from  Menlo Park to El Camino Park PCA Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and connect Alma Street to Alma Street in Menlo Park PCE Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and build planned Everett Avenue bicycle and pedestrian undercrossing PCQ Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and extend Quarry Road under rail corridor to Alma Street to tie into Lytton Avenue PCU Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and widen existing University Avenue roadway undercrossing CAE Close Churchill Avenue crossing and widen existing Embarcadero Road roadway undercrossing CAH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Churchill Avenue crossing CAK Close Churchill Avenue crossing and build a a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing near Kellogg Avenue to connect to the  existing Embarcadero Shared‐use Path CAN No grade separation at Churchill Avenue crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quadgates and wayside horns) in  addition to planned Section 130 project to be completed in 2018‐2019. CAS Close Churchill Avenue crossing and build a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing near the planned Seale Avenue bicycle  boulevard to connect to the existing Peers Park and planned Stanford Avenue bicycle boulevard CAT Railroad under roadway trench at Churchill Avenue crossing Palo Alto Avenue (AKA Alma Street) Alternatives Churchill Avenue Alternatives DR A F T FO R DI S C U S S I O N ON L Y Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Master List of Ideas 03/07/2018 Alternative  ID Description of Alternative MDA No grade separation at Meadow Drive crossing; depress Alma Street into trench within existing Alma Street right‐of‐way  under Meadow Drive (no connection between Meadow Drive and Alma Street) MDH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Meadow Drive crossing (maintain connection between Meadow Drive and Alma Street) MDL Close Meadow Drive crossing and build a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing near Loma Verde Avenue to connect to the  planned Matadero Avenue bicycle boulevard MDN No grade separation at Meadow Drive crossing; implement minor safety improvements (quadgates and wayside horns) in  addition to potential Section 130 project to be completed in 2020‐2022. MDU Roadway under railroad undercrossing at Meadow Drive crossing (maintain Alma Street connection) CRA Roadway under railroad undercrossing at Charleston Road crossing (no connection between Charleston Road and Alma  Street) CRH Roadway under railroad hybrid at Charleston Road crossing (maintain connection between Charleston Road and Alma Street) CRO Roadway over railroad overcrossing at Charleston Road crossing (no connection between Charleston Road and Alma Street) CRU Roadway under railroad undercrossing at Charleston Road crossing (maintain connection between Charleston Road and  Alma Street) Charleston Road (Only) Alternatives Meadow Drive (Only) Alternatives DR A F T FO R DI S C U S S I O N ON L Y Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Matrix of Ideas – Top Scoring Ideas from Initial Screening of 34 Ideas Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Matrix of Ideas – Top Scoring Ideas from Initial Screening of 34 Ideas Type of Separation (Alphabetical Order) Citywide Palo Alto Churchill Meadow Charleston Closure Palo Alto Ave Closed, Everett Bike/Ped (PCE) Palo Alto Ave Closed, Widen University (PCU) Churchill Ave Closed, Widen Embarcadero (CAE) Churchill Ave Closed, Seale Bike/Ped (CAS) Meadow Dr Closed, Loma Verde Bike/Ped (MDL) Hybrid (Road under Rail) Palo Alto Ave Hybrid (PAH) Churchill Ave Hybrid (CAH) Meadow + Charleston Hybrid, Loma Verde Bike/Ped (MCL) Meadow Dr Hybrid (MDH) Charleston Road Hybrid (CRH) No Build / Do Nothing Palo Alto Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades (PAN) Churchill Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades (CAN) Meadow Dr No Build, Safety Upgrades (MDN) Rail under Road (Trench) Meadow + Charleston Trench (MCT) Rail under Road (Tunnel) Road over Rail (Berm/Viaduct) Road under Rail Abbreviations CAE – Close Churchill Ave. crossing, widen existing Embarcadero Rd. undercrossing CAH – Churchill Ave. crossing with roadway under railroad Hybrid CAN – Churchill Ave. crossing with No grade separation. Implement minor safety improvements CAS − Close Churchill Ave. crossing, build bike/ped crossing near planned Seale Ave. bike boulevard to connect to Peers Park and Stanford Ave. bike boulevard CRH − Charleston Rd. crossing with Hybrid (maintain connection b/w Charleston Rd. and Alma St.) MCH − Meadow Dr. and Charleston Rd. crossings with roadway under rail Hybrid MCL − Meadow Dr. and Charleston Rd crossings with roadway under rail Hybrid; new hybrid bike/ped path under rail near Loma Verde Ave. MCT − Meadow Dr. to Charleston Rd Trench; Alma St. not within trench (maintain connections between Meadow Dr. and Charleston Rd.) MCX − Close Meadow Dr. crossing; Railroad under roadway trench at Charleston Rd.; Alma St not (X) in trench (maintain connection b/w Meadow Dr. and Charleston Rd.) MDH − Meadow Dr. crossing with roadway under railroad Hybrid (maintain connection b/w Meadow Dr. & Alma St.) MDL − Close Meadow Dr. crossing, build bike/ped crossing near Loma Verde Ave. to connect to planned Matadero Ave. bike boulevard MDN − Meadow Dr. crossing with No grade separation; implement safety improvements PAH − Continue proposed Menlo Park Hybrid across San Francisquito Creek and Palo Alto Ave. on a viaduct structure PAN − Palo Alto Ave. crossing with No grade separation; implement safety improvements (quad-gates and wayside horns) with the goal of making a quiet zone PCE − Palo Alto Ave. crossing Closed; build Everett Ave. bike/ped undercrossing PCU − Palo Alto Ave. crossing Closed; widen University Ave. roadway undercrossing Meadow + Charleston Hybrid (MCH) Meadow Dr Closed, Charleston Trench (MCX) 1 Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Master List of Ideas –Initial Screening City Council Rail Committee March 21, 2018 2 Potential Changes to Existing Crossings INTERSECTIONS Charleston Meadow Churchill Palo Alto Closed to Vehicles Only; Pedestrians & Bicycles OK Closed to All Traffic Independent of Alma Connects to Alma Road Under Rail Road Over Rail HybridClosureNo Build / Do Nothing Rail Under Road Rail Over Road Alma Below Grade Alma at Grade 3 Types of Crossing Modification Road Closure at Tracks •Close City Road that crosses RR Property •Fence RR Property •Modify Alma intersection •Reroute traffic to other crossings Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn •Traffic reduced on/near closed road •Alma traffic improved •Low cost •Low property impacts Cons: •Increased traffic on/near other crossings •Longer routes for bikes/peds •More vehicle trips Sample location: North California Avenue, Palo Alto 4 Types of Crossing Modification Lower Road/Ped/Bikes under Tracks •Change local road profile to go under tracks •Bike/Ped under RR –higher than road •Retaining Walls parallel to road •Train crosses over road on bridge –same elevation. •Lower Alma to local road elevation Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn •Improved traffic flow on grade separated street Cons: •Increased traffic on local road(s) •Increased noise from vehicles •Property impacts •Potential impact to street system •Utility Impacts Sample Location: Jefferson Ave, Redwood City 5 Types of Crossing Modification Raise Road/Ped/Bikes over Tracks •Change local road profile to go over tracks •Bike/Ped follow road profile •Retaining Walls parallel to road •Train crosses under road on existing ground •Alma crosses under local road Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn •Improved traffic flow Cons: •Increased traffic on local road(s) •Increased noise from vehicles •Property impacts •Local street connections lost •Utility Impacts Sample Location: Scott Boulevard, Santa Clara 6 Types of Crossing Modification Hybrid –Lower Road/Ped/Bikes and Raise Tracks •Change local road profile to go under tracks •Bike/Ped higher than road profile •Retaining Walls parallel to road & parallel to tracks •Train crosses over road at higher elevation •Alma lowered to elevation of local road Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn •Improved traffic flow •Reduced property impacts from other alternatives Cons: •Increased traffic on local road(s) •Increased noise from vehicles and train travel •Property impacts •Utility Impacts Sample Location: Holly Street, San Carlos 7 Types of Crossing Modification Lower Railroad Tracks under Local Road •Change RR profile to go under local road •Bike/Ped stay at road elevation •Retaining Walls parallel to tracks •Road crosses over RR tracks on bridge •No impact to Alma (after construction) Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn and reduce travel noise •Improved traffic flow •Few property impacts (after construction) Cons: •Increased traffic on local road(s) •Increased noise from vehicles •Utility Impacts •Major construction Impacts Sample Location: E Compton Boulevard, Compton (Alameda Trench Corridor) 8 Types of Crossing Modification Elevate Railroad Tracks over Local Road •Change RR profile to go over local road •Bike/Ped stay at road elevation •Retaining Walls parallel to road •Train crosses over road on elevated tracks •No impact to Alma (after construction) Pros: •Increased safety •Eliminate train horn and reduce travel noise •Improved traffic flow •Few property impacts (after construction) Cons: •Increased traffic on local road(s) •Increased noise from vehicles •Substantial visual impacts •Utility Impacts •Major construction Impacts Sample Location: BART Central Contra Costa Viaduct, Contra Costa 9 Mission for 2018 34 Ideas Initial Screening of 34 Ideas (Begins today) 4 -8 Alternatives for Study (June) 1 Preferred Solution (December) 10 Community Engagement •Connecting Palo Alto website www.cityofpaloalto.org/connectingpaloalto •On-line questionnaire with 800 responses •Held 2 Community Workshops, with 228 attendees •Held 4 Community Roundtables, with 381 attendees •Held 13 Rail Committee meetings •Collected 63 public comments / inquiries •Built a database of interested stakeholders •Produced Connecting Palo Alto e-newsletter •Posted extensively on social media 11 Master List of Ideas •Community Engagement produced 40 grade separation ideas •Examples: •Close Palo Alto Avenue crossing and connect Alma Street to Alma Street in Menlo Park •Citywide railroad under roadway trench within existing railroad right-of-way from Menlo Park city limits to Mountain View city limits with two new depressed rail stations 12 Refining Process for Decisions Tier 1 Criteria: Most Important •East-West connectivity: facilitate movement across the corridor for all modes of transportation •Traffic congestion: reduce delay and congestion for automobile traffic at rail crossings •Ped/Bike circulation: provide clear and safe routes for pedestrians and bicyclists seeking to cross the rail corridor, separate from automobile traffic •Rail operations: support continued rail operations and Caltrain service improvements •Cost: finance with feasible funding sources Tier 2 Criteria: Also Important •Environmental impacts: reduce rail noise and vibration along the corridor •Environmental impacts: minimize visual changes along the rail corridor •Local access: maintain or improve access to neighborhoods, parks, schools and other destinations along the corridor while reducing regional traffic on neighborhood streets •Cost: minimize right-of-way acquisition by eminent domain •Construction: minimize disruption and the duration of construction Technical Financial Property Construc- tion 13 Refining Process for Decisions Tier 1: Finance with feasible funding sources Tier 2: Minimize right-of-way acquisition Tier 2: Minimize disruption and duration Technical Financial Property Construction Tier 1: Facilitate movement Reduce delay and congestion Provide safe ped / bike routes Support rail operations Tier 2: Reduce rail noise Minimize visual changes Maintain or improve local access 14 Evaluation Criteria with Sample Ideas Standard Scoring: ID Description of Alternative Initial Screening Criteria Advance into Study Tier 1 Tier 2 New Fa c i l i t a t e M o v e m e n t - Al l M o d e s Re d u c e D e l a y a n d Co n g e s t i o n Pe d -Bi k e C i r c u l a t i o n Su p p o r t R a i l Op e r a t i o n s Fu n d i n g F e a s i b i l i t y Re d u c e N o i s e Mi n i m i z e V i s u a l Ch a n g e s Mi n i m i z e R i g h t -of - wa y Mi n i m i z e Co n s t r u c t i o n I m p a c t s Es t i m a t e d Co m m u n i t y S u p p o r t Co n s t r u c t a b i l i t y TA C O p i n i o n Alternatives A Grade Separation Idea A X X ?N B Grade Separation Idea B ✔✔?Y C Grade Separation Idea C ✔X ?N D Grade Separation Idea D X X ?Y E Grade Separation Idea E ✔X ?Y = Highest weight = Middle weight = Lowest weight Fatal Flaw Scoring: ✔= Feasible X = Possibly Feasible X = Not Feasible 15 Results of Initial Screening Type of Separation (Alphabetical Order) Citywide Palo Alto Churchill Meadow Charleston Closure Palo Alto Ave Closed, Everett Bike/Ped (PCE) Palo Alto Ave Closed, Widen University (PCU) Churchill Ave Closed, Widen Embarcadero (CAE) Churchill Ave Closed, Seale Bike/Ped (CAS) Meadow Dr Closed, Loma Verde Bike/Ped (MDL) Hybrid (Road under Rail) Palo Alto Ave Hybrid (PAH) Churchill Ave Hybrid (CAH) Meadow +Charleston Meadow + Hybrid,Loma Verde Charleston Bike/Ped (MCL) Hybrid (MCH) Meadow Dr Hybrid (MDH) Charleston Road Hybrid (CRH) No Build / Do Nothing Palo Alto Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades (PAN) Churchill Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades (CAN) Meadow Dr No Build, Safety Upgrades (MDN) Rail under Road (Trench) Meadow + Charleston Meadow Dr Closed, Trench (MCT) Charleston Trench (MCX) Rail under Road (Tunnel) Road over Rail (Berm/Viaduct) Road under Rail 16 Results of Initial Screening –Closure Ideas PCE:Palo Alto Ave Closed, Everett Bike/Ped PCU: Palo Alto Ave Closed, Widen University CAE:Churchill Ave Closed, widen Embarcadero CAS: Churchill Ave closed, Seale Ave Bike/Ped MDL:Meadow Dr Closed, Loma Verde Bike/Ped Road Closure at Tracks: North California Avenue, Palo Alto 17 Results of Initial Screening –Hybrid Ideas PAH: Palo Alto Ave Hybrid CAH: Churchill Ave Hybrid MCL:Meadow + Charleston Hybrid, Loma Verde Bike/Ped MCH: Meadow + Charleston Hybrid MDH: Meadow Dr Hybrid CRH: Charleston Rd Hybrid Hybrid (Road Under Rail): Holly Street, San Carlos 18 Results of Initial Screening –No Build Ideas PAN:Palo Alto Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades CAN:Churchill Ave No Build, Safety Upgrades MDN: Meadow Drive No Build, Safety Upgrades No Build: Safety Improvements, e.g. Quad Gates, Redwood City 19 Results of Initial Screening –Rail Under Road Ideas MCT: Meadow + Charleston Trench MCX: Meadow Closed, Charleston Trench Rail Under Road (Trench): Alameda Trench Corridor, Compton 20 Connecting Palo Alto: Rail Program Master List of Ideas –Initial Screening City Council Rail Committee March 21, 2018