preliminary alternatives analysis - caltrain.comrail+program/preli… · · 2010-06-28context...
TRANSCRIPT
Preliminary Alternatives AnalysisCaltrain Modernization & High Speed Train Projects
City of Palo Alto
Dominic Spaethling
Regional Program Manager
Bruce Fukuji
Context Sensitive Solutions Program Manager, Peninsula Rail Program
April 27, 2010
Agenda
Meeting Objective : Understand characteristics of
preliminary alternatives
• Open House
• Presentation
• Question and Answer
• Breakout Groups
• Report Out
Results Achieved by Improvements2000 to 2008
• 98 trains per day / 5 peak hour
• Three types of service
• Express “Baby Bullet” SF-SJ in under 60 minutes
• Limited
• Local (Off Peak Only)
• Diesel push-pull service
• 46,000 riders per weekday
• 2,600 bicycles per weekday
The Challenge: Planning for the Future
• Infrastructure, signal system, and diesel
vehicle technology limit capacity
• Tripled demand from regional growth,
Transbay Transit Center and HSR
• Majority of fleet due for replacement by
2015
• Uncertain funding commitment or
sources
Maximum Speed
Limited Speed
Med. Speed
Improved Headway
Safety Improved
By Speed
EnforcementImproved Operating Speed
and Journey TimeManual Control of
Train Speed
Caltrain 2025
Main energy absorber
European-Style Rolling Stock Safer Train Design
Positive Train Control Grade Crossing Improvements
Maximum Speed
Limited Speed
Med. Speed
Improved Headway
Safety Improved
By Speed
EnforcementImproved Operating Speed
and Journey TimeManual Control of
Train Speed
NO FUNDING
Main energy absorber
European-Style Rolling Stock Safer Train Design
Positive Train Control Grade Crossing Improvements
Largest Public Transportation Project in U.S.
History
• 800 miles of new track + stations and related structures
• $40+ billion in planning and construction costs
• State, federal, local, and private partnership
• 10 years for Phase 1 build-out (includes SF –SJ)
• Safely grade-separated
• 100% clean electric power
Why does CA need the
High-Speed Train Project?
• California’s population expected to jump by 30% –12 million people – by 2030
• Rising gas prices
• Reduced greenhouse gases
• Maintain a robust economy
How does California benefit?
• Jobs:
• 450,000 new jobs by 2035
• 600,000 construction jobs (1 year jobs)
• Reduce the $20B lost each year to congestion in fuel and
time costs.
• HST uses 1/3 the energy of air travel
• HST uses 1/5 the energy of passenger cars
• Reduce dependence on foreign oil by 12.7 million barrels
per year
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 12 billion pounds
per year
Different Systems; Common Needs
Electrified System
Vehicles – High performing with crash energy management
Positive Train Control
Grade Crossing Improvement
Grade Separated System
X X
X X
X X
X
X
A New Partnership:
The Peninsula Rail Program• Caltrain (JPB) - CHSRA MOU in March/April 2009
• Peninsula Rail Corridor - joint development of ONE
Program
1. Prelim. Alternatives Analysis -- Spring 2010
2. Stations -- Spring/Summer 2010
3. 15% Engineering & Costs Summer 2010
4. Draft EIR/S -- Dec. 2010
5. Public Comment Dec. 2010 – Feb. 2011
6. Final EIR/S – Summer 2011
7. NOD/ROD – September 2011
8. 30% Engineering
2010 2011
Alternatives Dev.
Draft EIR/S
Final
EIR/S
Project Schedule
Role of Alternatives Analysis
• Define a range of reasonable, practicable, and
feasible project study alternatives
• Present these alternatives to the CHSRA Board,
the FRA and the public for feedback
Planning Assumptions
• Stay within existing Caltrain Right of Way
• Four track, grade separated system
• HST up to 125 MPH and Caltrain up to 110 MPH
• Opportunity for joint operations
Planning Assumptions
• Improve Caltrain Service
• Shared High Speed & Caltrain Stations
• San Francisco, Millbrae (SFO), San Jose
• Potential high-speed train stop:
–Redwood City
–Palo Alto
–Mountain View
Additional Considerations Based on
Feedback
• Evaluate the use of berms – especially in
commercial or residential areas
• Additional tunnel options
• Evaluate San Francisco terminal options
Feedback from Palo Alto• Consider multiple alternatives
• Below ground (preferred by City)
• Above ground
• Study and mitigate impacts to community• Visual
• Noise & Vibration
• East/West Connections (Don’t Divide the Community)
• Property Impacts
• Protect historic and natural resources (El Palo Alto, Palo Alto Caltrain Station, etc.)
• Traffic and Circulation impacts from Construction and Project
• Coordinated, transparent process with city staff, elected officials and public
Findings
• Caltrain corridor is preferred alignment
• San Francisco joint terminal solution: Transbay
Transit Center and 4th and King
• Limit use of high berms
• Tunnel options added
• Ending High Speed Train service in San Jose
would negatively impact Caltrain and its riders, and
does not meet Prop. 1A requirements.
COLOR CODE:
WIDTH: approx. 80 – 105 feet
PROS: Improved or New East/West Connections,
Narrow Width, Benefits to Riders, Constructability
CONS: Visual Impact, Noise Impact
Aerial Viaduct
COLOR CODE:
WIDTH: approx. 95 – 105 feet
PROS: Benefits to Riders, Constructability
CONS: Larger Impacts to Properties on East/West
Roads at Grade Crossings
Existing Caltrain Grade
COLOR CODE:
WIDTH: approx. 100 feet
PROS: Limited Visual Impact, Limited Ventilation
Needs
CONS: Doesn’t Improve Connectivity, Potential
Impacts to Waterways and Utilities, Cost, Right of
Way Needs
Trench
COLOR CODE:
WIDTH: approx. 100 – 140 feet
PROS: Limited Visual Impact, Improved Connectivity
CONS: Requires Ventilation System, Potential
Impacts to Waterways and Utilities, Cost, Right of
Way Needs
Cut & Cover
COLOR CODE:
WIDTH: approx. 70 – 115 feet
PROS: Limited Visual Impact of HST, Limited Noise
Impact of HST
CONS: Cost, Fire & Life Safety Issues, Centralized
Noise Impacts at Vent Shafts, No Upgrades to
Caltrain
Deep Bored Tunnel – HST ONLY
San Francisco to San Jose Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Train Project
RESULTSINITIAL
AERIAL AT GRADE TRENCH/ C&C
San Francisco to San Jose Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Train Project
RESULTS
AERIAL HST AERIAL AT GRADE TRENCH/ C&C HST TUNNEL
San Francisco to San Jose Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Train Project
RESULTS
All Options Remain
INITIAL
AERIAL AT GRADE TRENCH/ C&C
San Francisco to San Jose Project EIR/EIS California High-Speed Train Project
RESULTS
All Options Remain
AERIAL AT GRADE TRENCH/ C&C HST TUNNEL
Design
TeamA
B
C
D
E
F
G
Outreach
Cities
Stakeholders
Communities
Prepare Draft
Deliverable
Present
Review
Input
Opportunity
Revise
Report Back
Inform
Community Engagement Process
Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS)
• Collaborative engagement of communities
• Balance Desirability, Feasibility, and Achievability
• Design transit facilities that fit setting
• Preserve and enhance scenic, aesthetic, historic and
environmental resources
• Enhance safety and mobility
• Promote transit-oriented development and sustainable,
livable communities
What is in the Toolkit?
• Reference Documents
• Context and technical information
• Exercises
• Provide input to project team and TWG/PWG members
at each step of the process
– Exercise #1: Mapping the Context
– Exercise #2: Grade Separation / Vertical Options
• http://www.caltrain.com/peninsularailprogram_csstoolkit.html
Break-out Groups
• What are we doing?
• Review Alternatives Analysis Maps
• Questions and Feedback
• Where to go?
• A HR conference room
• B Lobby
• C, E & F – council chambers
• Reporting back
Next Steps
• Continue to gather feedback
• “Stitch” Corridor together
• 15% Design & Cost Estimates
• Stations Planning
• Environmental Studies
• Draft EIR/EIS, December 2010
For More Information
Email [email protected] and ask to be added to our email list.
Peninsula Rail Program
www.caltrain.com/peninsularailprogram.html
California High-Speed Rail Authority
www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov