March 13, 2018 To: Menlo Park City Council From: Dana Hendrickson Subject: Menlo Park Residents Deserve A Much Better Grade Separation Option The Menlo Park City Council believes it must soon decide where and how to separate city streets from Caltrain tracks and appear ready to approve hybrid grade separations for Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood. While this solution does address the need for grade separations, three major drawbacks have received little or no attention. First, the 10-foot solid berm proposed for the train station area between Ravenswood and Oak Grove would permanently divide and irrevocably harm a business district now benefiting from multiple new private investments. One only needs to drive north on Old County Road starting in San Carlos to fully experience the depressing effects rail berms have on adjacent neighborhoods. Second, this structure would sacrifice future opportunities to transform this area with public improvements like a central plaza for community events, entertainment and informal social activities. The popular Redwood City Courthouse Square is a sterling example of a potential vibrant hub Menlo Park might create on a smaller scale. Third, the lowering of Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood at the tracks plus parts of Alma, Merrill and Garwood during 4 to 5 years of heavy construction would severely disrupt the travel of residents and visitors and harm local businesses. Given these concerns, I respectfully request the Council study a much less disruptive alternative that includes fully elevated grade separations AND an attractive fully elevated and open rail structure - with accessible areas underneath - in the train station area between Oak Grove and Ravenswood. There is plenty of time for the Council to make the best possible decision for our community, one Menlo Park residents widely support. All of us must live with whatever you decide - long after you have left the City Council - so I hope you support this recommendation. 1. It is clear from council comments that none enthusiastically supports the hybrid grade separation design due to its extensive use of solid berms and elevated tracks. 2. The construction of hybrid grade separations will produce unacceptable disruptions. 3. A fully elevated alternative was ruled out years ago as technically infeasible and politically unacceptable to Atherton. However, Caltrain has approved exceptions to its grade standards, and minor ones would allow a fully elevated design in Menlo Park. Elevated tracks were also once opposed by Peninsula cities like Menlo Park as a strategy to block a proposed 4 track high-speed rail system, a project that no longer exists. 4. Elevated and open rail structures can be (a) attractive, (b) environmentally compatible with adjacent neighborhoods and (c) provide valuable space underneath. (Note: The proposed Broadway grade separation in Burlingame is an excellent example of a beautiful design. An illustration is on the next page.) Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 1
5. Current residents and businesses might prefer the fully elevated approach if they understood its possibilities and advantages and were given the opportunity to compare it to the hybrid alternative. 6. The City has sufficient time to evaluate the fully elevated alternative, as future funding would not be put at risk, and a study would likely be short, as the City and consultant have already learned a great deal about the challenges of designing grade separations in Menlo Park. 7. A Civic Plaza between the east end of Santa Cruz and the train station is a major recommendation of the Public Space Section of the Specific Plan (2012). See Appendix 5 for more information. The fully elevated grade separation alternative is entirely consistent with this idea; the hybrid solution would severely limit its potential. Selecting the best grade separation solution for a particular Peninsula city is difficult and course corrections are often necessary. Palo Alto recently completed a comprehensive study of tunnels and open trenches only to find its preferred alternatives are neither practical nor affordable. And now a fully elevated design has been shown to be feasible in Menlo Park. This means the Council is obligated to carefully consider fully elevated grade separations and offer residents an excellent opportunity to compare it to the hybrid grade separation alternative. During the November 2017 City Council meeting others and I encouraged you to reconsider fully elevated grade separations. Our team - an architect, two knowledgeable transportation planners, and former mayors of our city - have spent well over a hundred hours analyzing Peninsula grade separations; Menlo Park grade separation planning documents and staff reports; and Caltrain rail design standards, exceptions and preferences. (Note: Caltrain appears to prefer elevated separations as lowering tracks creates drainage and flooding problems.) Our offer to discuss our findings with Council Members while largely ignored continues to remain open. Appendices: 1. A Fully Elevated Grade Separation Proposal for Menlo Park 2. Fully Elevated & Open Rail Structures Can Fit Well In Menlo Park 3. Advantages & Objections To Fully Elevated Grade Separations In Menlo Park 4. Downtown/Train Area Central Plaza Concept 5. Civic Plaza Recommendation Specific Plan - Chapter D Public Spaces 6. Early Opposition To High Speed Rail And Elevated Rail Systems Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 2
Attachment 1 A Fully Elevated Grade Separation Proposal for Menlo Park Grade separation structures fully elevated train bridges at Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood; streets remain at existing grades. Approach rail structures a combination of (a) solid berms and (b) elevated and open structures north of Oak Grove and south of Ravenswood. Connecting structure - fully elevated and open over the train station area between the grade separations at Oak Grove and Ravenswood, and possibly Glenwood. Central Civic Plaza the connecting open rail structure in the train station area enables the creation of a multi-purpose public space that extends under the elevated span from the end of Santa Cruz at Merrill to Alma. How It Differs From Hybrid Solution 1. At grade separations train tracks are elevated a maximum of 20-feet instead of 10 feet. 2. In the train station area a fully elevated rail structure would have continuous openings about 15-feet high instead of a 10-foot solid berm. 3. Outside the train station area north of Oak Grove and south of Ravenswood the rail grades could be elevated with any preferred combination of berms and elevated open structures instead of berms only. 4. Ravenswood, Oak Grove and Glenwood would not be lowered as with hybrid separations. 5. Encinal would be closed to vehicle traffic but have a bike and pedestrian undercrossing. There would be no impact on adjacent private property unlike with a hybrid separation. Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 3
Attachment 2 Fully Elevated & Open Rail Structures Can Fit Well In Menlo Park Viaducts are elevated and open structures commonly used in the construction of commuter rail systems built in urban and suburban environments around the world and should not be confused with the heavy-duty viaducts commonly used in freight rail systems to span water and severely uneven terrain and urban commuter systems built in the (late) 19th and 20th centuries, e.g., Chicago El opened in 1892. Nor must viaducts have the stark and industrial designs often found in commuter rail locations where appearance is less important and structure designs are more functional, e.g., BART. Where appearance is important as in residential areas and business districts viaducts use technology, structural designs, and materials that reduce negative impacts and can be architecturally attractive The above illustration shows an elevated grade separation with large openings, thin spans and columns, attractive surfaces and a graceful overall design. While this grade separation is not fully elevated - the street dips slightly, the structure height is close to those Menlo Park could use for its fully elevated grade separations and the overhead spans in the train station area. Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 4
Attachment 3 Advantages & Objections To Fully Elevated Grade Separations Undervalued Advantages Of Fully Elevated Grade Separations 1. A fully elevated grade separation solution would be far more consistent with the Vision Goals of the Menlo Park Specific Plan and provide opportunities to improve the Downtown/Train Area rather than irreversibly damage it. 2. A fully elevated grade separation solution would be far more consistent with the existing Menlo Park Rail Policy. The negative physical and social impacts of rail are minimized and the positive impacts are enhanced by using context sensitive design solutions" 3. Construction of a hybrid grade separation would severely disrupt traffic, businesses and neighborhoods for 4 to 5 years. The impact of fully elevated grade separations would be much less as no streets would be lowered. Common Objections Raised About Fully Elevated Grade Separations 1. Technically Infeasible. This claim is not true. An AECOM profile shows the southern rail grade could reach within a foot of the required fully elevated height at Ravenswood using a gentle one and one-half grade and a standard concrete bridge span. However, a thinner steel span would reduce the needed height by at least two feet and eliminate the need to lower Ravenswood. Also, the northern grade is assumed to extend into Atherton because the AECOM design conforms to the Caltrain maximum grade standard of one percent. A grade slightly more than this would not extend into Atherton. Note: Caltrain has approved small exceptions, e.g., it approved one and a quarter percent rail grades in San Bruno. 2. Too Expensive relative to hybrid alternative. This perception is unsubstantiated. While the cost of a fully elevated rail structure for sections of track would be higher than a 10-foot berm, the lowering of three streets and relocation of existing underground utilities is expensive and totally eliminated. The City has neither estimated the net cost differential between these two alternatives nor compared it to the total cost of any grade separation project. 3. Less Desirable (re: aesthetics & noise) This perception is unproven and likely untrue. An elevated open rail structure with a beautiful architectural design and attractive landscaping could become a unique Menlo Park landmark that visually anchors the train station area. The structure would be a maximum of 20 feet high with large continuous openings about 16-feet high and 40-feet wide. Its overall appearance and the environment could be designed to be much more appealing than what is possible with a 10-foot high solid berm. The Broadway Burlingame open rail structure design is a great example. Outside the downtown train area, Menlo Park can screen elevated track, trains and electrification equipment with trees and other plantings. And contemporary noise screening and suppression technology plus electric trains would greatly reduce noise in residential neighborhoods like Felton Gables. 4. Closing Encinal is undesirable. This perception is unproven. This outcome is just one of many tradeoffs our entire community must consider when comparing grade separation alternatives. For example, bicyclist and pedestrian crossings could continue, and reduced thru traffic on Encinal would increase safety, especially for students. Closing the street would also Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 5
eliminate noise from train horns and crossing gate signals. Note: the new grade separations at nearby Oak Grove and Glenwood would improve the convenience of the Oak Grove, Oak Grove-Laurel-Encinal and Glenwood routes between El Camino and Middlefield. 5. No Time To Study this option. This perception is unproven and likely untrue. There is no real basis to believe that state and county funding would be jeopardized by a six to 12-month delay in the submission of a Menlo Park application. (Note: the Council last reviewed grade separations in early October 2017 - almost six months ago and a study of fully elevated grade separations could have been largely completed by now if there is truly a cause for urgency.) Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 6
Attachment 3 - Downtown/Train Station Area Central Plaza Concept A fully elevated grade separation solution is far more consistent with the Vision Goals of the Menlo Park Specific Plan than the hybrid grade separation alternative. Goal #6: Train Station Area. Activate the train station area. Goal #10: Open Space: Provide plaza and park spaces Goal # 11: Pedestrian & Bicycle Circulation: Provide an integrated, safe and well-designed pedestrian and bicycle networks. Menlo Park - like most Peninsula cities other than Redwood City - lacks a central plaza that supports community activities, and more generally appeals to residents, visitors and workers; and the Downtown/Train Area is the most logical large central location for building one. Potential Plaza Area = Red Train Tracks = Green New Developments (2015-2019) = Yellow Dotted Fully Elevated Open Rail Structure = Orange Purchase property for parking? 4 Private investors are already rapidly revitalizing this core central district, and Menlo Park needs to consider how grade separations decisions would affect its future vibrancy and vitality. Grade separations that physically divide the Downtown/Train Area would be severely detrimental. Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 7
The BBC restaurant at 555 Santa Cruz Avenue was renovated in 2015. A three-story office building will be completed at 1020-1026 Alma in 2018, and Station 1300 intends to open in 2019. Also, a builder has proposed a multi-use development that replaces existing old buildings at 1125 Merrill Street, and 506 and 556 Santa Cruz Avenue. All must include ground floor retail. Plaza Description The central plaza could extend from Alma to Merrill and from Ravenswood to Oak Grove. Train tracks would be elevated by an open rail structure that extends for up to 1000 feet from Oak Grove and Ravenswood. Openings 40- foot wide and 15-foot high would create an expansive feeling, and some space under the tracks might be used for either temporary or permanent shops, booths, and cafes. An elevated passenger-loading platform would extend the entire 1000- foot distance and have access points and loading facilities located for convenience and best visual impact. A beautiful architectural design would integrate the plaza, rail structure, existing train station, landscaping and public amenities Merrill and Alma could be resurfaced with complementary materials Ticket purchasing and seating located on elevated train platform and plaza Plaza amenities: seating, fountain(s), trees, convenient access to train platform, rest rooms and features that support the staging of community events (see list on next page) Example of Community Activities Redwood City Courthouse Square https://www.facebook.com/pg/redwoodcityevents/events/?ref=page_internal Annual ethnic festivals, e.g., Latino, Irish, Lebanese, Oktoberfest Music in the Square summer series (bands) Classical Series - Redwood Symphony, Bay Shore Lyric Opera Movies in the Square Art in the Square Food & beverages festivals, e.g., salsa, BBQ, wine & cheese, chocolate, micro brews, desserts, ethnic, local chefs Other Possible Plaza Enhancements Caltrain expands and relocates its parking area underground The City purchases the two adjacent properties at 525 Oak Grove and 1170 Alma and repurposes land for public plaza parking (75-100 spaces) Build a new separate bike path between Middlefield and El Camino that runs across SRI and City land, connects to the central plaza and bypasses the Ravenswood-Middlefield intersection. (Note: SRI already proposed this bike path as part of a campus modernization plan.) Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 8
Attachment 4 - Civic Plaza Recommendation Specific Plan - Chapter D Public Spaces The Specific Plan establishes a central Civic Plaza at the intersection of the east end of Santa Cruz Avenue and the Caltrain Station as a unifying public space that organizes surrounding spaces and pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Other major public improvements in this area include Menlo Center Plaza, Alma Street Civic Walk and Ravenswood Gateway, all of which support the centrality of the Civic Plaza and create stronger connections to the plaza and downtown. (Page D28) It serves multiple purposes -- as a landmark space and gateway to downtown and Menlo Park, a pick-up and drop- off locale for motorists and transit users and a civic public space integrating the historic train station and enhanced pedestrian linkages and plazas to downtown, Menlo Center and Civic Center. (Page D30) Create an improved arrival/departure transit plaza for the station and iconic civic plaza for downtown. Improvements Implement streetscape improvements that celebrate the station area and sense of arrival. Provide enhanced connections to the eastern neighborhoods and Civic Center across the railroad tracks, via a grade-separated connection, and to Menlo Center plaza. Install iconic trees, such as native oak trees, maples, sycamores, or redwoods, that are differentiated from the surrounding landscape, including El Camino Real and Santa Cruz Avenue, and create a unique sense of civic space. Improve Santa Cruz Avenue northern sidewalk for greater connection to El Camino Real and downtown. Improve Merrill Street sidewalk for greater connection to Oak Grove Avenue. Provide enhanced connections and integrate with Menlo Center. Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 9
Attachment 5 Early Opposition To High Speed Rail And Elevated Rail Systems These old news stories (2001-2010) help put today's situation into a historical context. They show how early HSR plans helped catalyze an anti-elevated rail mindset on the Peninsula. The California legislature eventually blocked efforts to build an elevated four-track system and Caltrain is now modernizing its existing two-track system that will remain primarily at grade. Published Wednesday, October 17, 2001, in the Menlo Park Almanac Menlo gets $200,000 to study four rail grade separations https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/messages/3318 Published Saturday, December 14, 2002, in the Palo Alto Daily News Menlo Park releases Caltrain grade-separation report https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/topics/9769 Published Wednesday, January 15, 2003, in the Menlo Park Almanac Menlo Park re-examines Caltrain grade separations https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/messages/10142 Published Wednesday, August 11, 2010, by the Menlo Park Almanac HSR wakeup call -- Menlo Park mayor Cline to seek open trench https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/messages/46096 Published Thursday, September 16, 2010, by the San Mateo Daily Journal Belmont OK's resolution 3-0-1 calling for cut-and-cover HSR trench https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/topics/46572 Published Friday, September 24, 2010, by the Palo Alto Weekly Menlo Park, Peninsula cities turn to courts in "tunnel or nothing" (anti-elevated) HSR fight https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/batn/conversations/messages/46683 Dana Hendrickson March 12, 2018 10