The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPW Andersen Dr. SMART PPTSan Rafael City Council Meeting February 1,, 2016 ANDERSEN DRIVE/SMART AT GRADE CROSSING Introductions City of San Rafael Community Development Public Works Consultant Team Environmental Process AECO M Crossing Design Kimley Horn Associates Quiet Zone Assistance HDR Purpose Review and Consider Action to 1. Adopt the Andersen Drive /SMART At -Grade Crossing Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration 2. Approve the At -Grade Crossing design (Alternative 6) 3. Direct staff to proceed with filing an application with CPUC A Short History Andersen Drive IF If'� T '' ! -.t'•. All k i;F� . SdR ii • ...'rf ��.�� 14 po Jp 1i ANDERSEN DRIVE y � E►� J0, ,,. LZ yr Jo I Or- "I �..� :� `'� - sew• . �/'. �- J. + - -- 1,lL 1997 CPUC Decision 97-07-055 (July 16, 1997) Condition 2 2. This authorization to blockade the tracks shall expire upon the scheduling of regular train service over the tracks which intersect Andersen Drive. Upon such expiration of authority, the City shall take all actions necessary to ensure the unimpeded use of the intersection by the rail service, absent further order of the Commission." 2006 SMART Measure Q Authorizes funding for rail service from Cloverdale to Larkspur. SMART has notified City of San Rafael of their intention to proceed with the Larkspur Extension -WIOMINP� City of San Ralael - Andersen Drive - Report on Analysis of Alternatives tc Accommodate Rail Service Andersen drive Report on Analysis of Alternatives to Accommodate Rail Service Final Report January 2015 Department of Public Works Engineering Division F.H DR pawep-s . Alternative 1— Grade Separation Advantages Eliminates Train/Vehicle/Bicycle/pedestrian conflicts Disadvantages Conflicts with Other Facilities Lengthy Permit Process Costly 10 years to design, permit and construct Main Transmission Lines 11w Secondary Line' , OR 4 VER F-fiEw Alternative 2 — At -Grade with Chicane Advantages Reduction in crossing length Improves sight distance for drivers to oncoming train. Disadvantages Cost R/W Acquisition Required Relocation of Sanitary Facilities Difficult Environmental Permitting Advantages Low Cost Eliminates Conflicts Quick Construction Alternative 3 - Closure Disadvantages Major Traffic Impact Reduction in Access Business impact Increase Ped/Bike route length Increase Traffic Volumes on other street/HWYs ,. .._ se"OK WOODLAND AVE h "DF t4 OR Alternative 4 — One -Way Southbound Bypass via Woodland Ave. Advantages Eliminates Train/Vehicle/Bicycle/pedestrian conflicts Disadvantages High Cost Major impacts to roadway & Residential Neighborhoods Reconstruction of Rail and Hwy Facilities (This may not even be possible) Significant impacts during construction ti WOODLAND AVEC IDR Alternative 5 — Two -Way Bypass via Woodland Ave. Advantages Eliminates Train/Vehicle/Bicycle/pedestrian conflicts Disadvantages High Cost Major impacts to roadway Reconstruction of Rail and Hwy Facilities (This may not even be possible) Significant impacts during construction V�W/ �... - }; 0 A Highway Columns (Green) \ /\ \� i Rail Supports (White) Pedestrian Bridge (Biuc: j ot lY r WOODLAND AVE ('Aa �•�-� �---mss,. - 74 Queue Detqc#1 1 �0 v I dF 210 71 WOODLAND 4[)ES1E—Modo Alternative 7 — Two -Way Bypass via Woodland Ave. with Andersen Advantages Maintains access for users Separation for bicycle/ped users Connector Disadvantages High Cost Traffic Impacts - Queueing R/W acquisition required Time to Design and Construct Improvements Traffic Modeling ie k -. � �i4h Vic:, _ _�• � _ 7_w 7 41, CAl r .y; # Alternative 1 Grade Separation ............................................................................ 2 At Grade Crossing with Chicane ............................................................................ 3 Closure of Andersen Drive 4 One -Way Southbound Bypass onto Woodland .........................................._............................... ............... 5 Two -Way bypass via Woodland ............................_................................................ _.......... 6 At Grade Crossing with Additional Storage 7 Two Way bypass via Woodland Ave. Model ............................... Syncro Vissum Comments None No local effect .............................................................. X #6 Model Run XTrain - unimpeded X Train - unimpeded ........... X _Train - unimpeded X Alternativem 1. Grade-Sep aration �[ 2. At-Grade•Crossing-with Chicanett 3.•Closure�[ 4. •One-Way•South bound Bypass -via -Wood land - Avenue�[ 5.•Two-Way•Bypass•via- Woodland Avenue 6. At-Grade•Crossing-with Existing•Geometrytt 7A. -Two-Way -Bypass -via Woodland Avenue•with- Andersen -Con necter•(1 Lane)�t 7B. -Two-Way-Bypass-via Woodland Avenue -with Andersen -Con necter•(2• Lane)rt Permanent- Traffic- Impactsm or[ of 5r[ 4rI Costo Feasibilitym Safetym Schedulem Totalm 4S( U or( 4r[ 12r[ 3�t 3�1 1�t 2�1 9�1 2S( 1Sl or( Irl Sri 5S( 5S[ or( 5r[ 19�1 Sri 51t 5r[ ort 5r[ 18�1 1�1 1S( 1Sl 2r( 1�1 6�1 5�1 2S( 1Sl Irl 2�1 11�1 1�1 3S( 2S[ 1r( 2�1 9�1 :nvironmental Review- Background • SMART Final Environmental Impact Report — — Certified in 2005 providing CEQA clearance for rail project from Cloverdale to Larkspur — Acknowledged Andersen Dr. crossing as not permitted by CPUC, thus FEIR did not analyze at -grade crossing • NEPA Environment Assessment- - Prepared by SMART to pursue federal funding to extend service from Downtown SR to Larkspur — Included analysis of seven crossing alternatives — FONSI issued by FTA in 2015 =nvironmental Review - Required • Alternative 6 at -grade crossing subject to environmental review by City and CPUC • Initial Study completed utilizing studies prepared for 2015 NEPA Environmental Assessment • Initial Study concludes that project will result in significant impacts but mitigation measures identified to reduce impacts • Mitigated Negative Declaration - Initial Study- Topic Areas of Study • Biological Resources • Cultural Resources — Completed Tribal Consultation per AB 52 • Geology/ oils • Hazards/Hazardous Materials • Noise — Construction related (short-term) — Operational — recommendation for "wayside" horns • Transportation/Traffic Required CEQA Review Period • Notice of Intent published in December 2015 • 40_dav public review period observed • Comments received on Initial Study/MND • Response to comments on Initial Study/MND prepared including responses to comments on "Quiet Zone" Alternative 6 Consistent with General Plan 2020 • Circulation Element Policy C-17 • Circulation Element Program C -14a • Sustainability Element Policy SU -2 • Sustainability Element Program SU -2d • Noise Element Program N -8a Recommended Action • Adopt resolution adopting Initial Study/MND and approving MMRP (Attachment 1) • Adopt resolution approving Alternative 6 at - grade crossing and directing staff to proceed with CPUC application (Attachment 2) Comments & Questions City Staff Community Development & Public Works Consultants AECOM Kimley Horn Associates HDR Tab I e-1 ---A Iternative-3 -Intersection -De I ay -a nd -Leve Is -of -ServiceT Existingm Alternative -3m 0 Delay- Level -of- Delay¶ Level -of- 0 Intersectiono (sec)tt Servicett (sec)m Servicett Andersen•Dr,&-Rice•Dri# 0.232 Am 2.0m Am o Andersen-Dr,&-WoodlandAvert -3Z -fit -3Z -M 0 AuburnRdSt,&•WoodlandAvem 12.6m Bm 119.03#ao 0 Francisco-BlvdW-&-Rice-Drtt 1.932 Am 9.33 DuBois•St•&•Rice•Drg 2.832 Am 5.7m 0 Francisco -Blvd W-&-101-SB-Ramps>r[ 30.8m Ctt 73.81.E Ett 0 Andersen'Dr,&'Francisco-Blvd'Wg 29.63 Cg -9 0 Andersen-Dr,&-OId-101-SB-Rampstt 0.932 Am 0.9m 0 Bella m -Blvd •&•Andersen•Drm 53.5m Dg 94.4tt Ftt 0 Andersen-Dr,&-DuBois -Stm 31.6N Ctt 10.im Bm 0 Seco nd•St•&•Hetherton•Sttt 30.6m Cm 58.9tt0 Seco nd-St-&-Ta rnaIpaisAvem 35. 1m Dtt 68.49 0 Second •St•&•LincolnAvett 51.4m Dg 124.Ott 0 Lts y WOODLAND AVE 41 Tab I e-2 ---A lternative-4-1 ntersection -De I ay -and -Leve Is -of -ServiceT Existingtt Alternative -41 0 Delay- Level -of- Delay. Level -of- 0 •Intersectionrt (sec)tt Servicer[ (sec)tt Servicer# Andersen•Dr-&•Rice•Drr# 0.24 Ar# 6.0)4 Ar# IP Andersen•Dr,&-Wood IandAver( -r( -rl 20.2rt Cry �r Auburn -St •& -Wood IandAveg 12.6rt Brz 101.0rz p Francisco-BIvdW-&-Rice-Drr# 1.9rf Ar# 51.59 r DuBois•St•&•Rice•Drrt 2.8)4 Ar# 198.0gP� 0 Francisco -Blvd W-&-101•SB-RarnpsrI 30.8x( Crz 152.09 � Andersen•Dr-&•Francisco•BlvdWri 29.6rt Crz -)4 - p Andersen•Dr,&-OId-101-SB-Rampsrl 0.9rf Ar# 0.9rf Ar# �r Bel lam -Blvd •&•Andersen•Dm 53.514 Dri 167.0g Ftt Ip Andersen•Dr,&-DuBois-Strt 31.6x( Crz 19.0rt Br# �r Second •St•&•Hetherton•Stri 30.6rt Crz 30.814 Cm IP Second-St-&-TamaIpaisAverl 35.1r( Dri 35. 1r( Dri �r Seco nd•St•&•LincolnAvem 51.411 Dri 63.114 (E9 ) IP �VIL roil izve lit 0 r a4 a Tab I e-4 ---A Iternatve-5 -I ntersecton -De I ay -and -Leve Is -of -ServiceT Existingg Alternative -5M Delay- Level -of- Delay¶ Level -of- 0 •Intersectiontt (sec)tt Servicett (sec)N Servicett •Andersen-Dr-&•Rice•Drg 0.29 AM 16.79 C9 0 •Andersen-Dr-&-WoodlandAvett -9 -M 32.39 D9 0 •Auburn •St•&•Waadland Avett 12.6m Bg 830.ON 0 •Francisco•Blvd•W&Rice•Drtt 1.99 AN 25.1 # 0 DuBois•St-&•Rlce•Drm 2.89 AM 44.79 0 Fra ncisco -Blvd •W•&•101•SB•Ramps9 30.8m Ctt 52.3m 'D'm 0 Andersen -Dr -& -Fra ncisco -Blvd •WN 29.69 C9 -fit -9 0 Andersen-Dr&•OA -101•SB•Ramps9 0.99 AN 0.99 AM 0 Bel lam -Blvd •&•Andersen•Drtt 53.5m DN 137.ON Ftt 0 Andersen -Dr -& -Du Bois•Sttt 31.69 C9 20.39 CM 0 Second St•&-HethertonStM 30.6M C9 30.89 C9 0 Seco nd•St•&-Ta maIpa!sAvem 35.1m DN 35. IN ng 10 Second St•&-LincolnAvem 51.4M DM 63.19 Etz 0 ' y� r � -. • • wA Tab I e-5 ---Alternative -6 -Intersection -D e I ay -and -Leve Is -of -ServiceT Existing)t Alternative -6)4 0 Delay- Level -of- DelayT Level -of- 0 •Intersectiontt (sec))t Servicem (sec)g Servicett I•Fra ncisca -Blvd •W•&•101•SB•Rampsrt 30.8tt Cit 34.2tt Cit 0 I•Andersen•Dr &•Francisco•BIA-W9 29.6zi Chi 29.9tt 04 0 I•Andersen•Dr$e•O1d•101•SB•Ramps9 0.9rt Ar# 0.9tt Art 0 Bella rn-Blvd •&•Andersen•Dr14 53.5zi Dg 55.0tt Q� 0 Andersen•Dr&-DuBois•Sttt 31.6r[Crt 40. Irl 0 34 WOODLAND AVE 7 s .. Queue Ds#ectic .. _.-NP ." . y �tiL� i i'it� - a+n 11 Mrr :ii:l ■ Tahl a-6--Alternative-7.1 ntersection- Del ay -and -Levels -of -Service¶ • Intersectiona Existingo Alternative -7M Alternative -7B31 o 1-Lane-5B&EBo 2-Lane-5B&EB31 14 Delay- Level -of- Delay- Level -of- Delay- Level -of- 31 (sec)o 5erviceo (sec)o 5erviceo (sec)o 5erviceo Woodland-&-Andersen-Bypass*31 I[ "31 641E Fil 7.9331 Ao 14 Woodland-&-Bellam*31 "r[ "31 3.6431 Ao 32.5931 Do 31 Woodland-&-DuBois* 31 "31 "31 105.073: F3# 10.331 31 Francisca-W-&-101.SB-Rampo 30-731 C[i 73.849 Fil 77.631131 Andersen-&-Francisco•W-(&- 28-331 C32 41.3732 Dat 42.9331 11 Woodland)3t Bell am -&-Andersen o 53.30 Do 57.79 Ell 61.1311 rE'A p Andersen-&.DuBois3f 27-631 co 85.021E Fil 28.8131 "*Cr 31 5ignatize with Andersen & FBW f. y.-, -' # � 1 � � fat l • t� 111 ■ � � � � ' 5.;:7 y 6. ■ i