?！--· - 1. O GD •~!-· {\}- ·- º á -•@ - · ©· →* -·Luº)©· |- →·· · @R∞& |- | №- ， ！z , ！ ©a º， ,. . .· Gae). O A st |E A | * *ſ*.**.*.*; ·º, ， ）; （ ）, （**）, §. · ·,≤ x ≤ ≥ ± − × × ^&]*... *，:.，…??·&\>… : ~ ¡ ¿ · ·:·º·:·¿? § §§ ... ！?！?! “¿ |- ſ- t） \） (） (） (） - l- → (） (） != '=' => '=' '）' =) =} Wransportation - | *, *z, *.x, (,, , , re." R E P O R T O N G R A D E S E P A R A T | O N P R O J E C T F O R T H E S O U T H P A L O A. L T O A R E A P A L O A L T O, C A L | F O R N A P r e p a r e d f o r T H E M A Y O R A N D C | T Y C O U N C I L September | 9 5 6 D E L E U W, c. A T H E R & C o M P A N Y : E N G | N E E R S s A N F R A N c 1 sco Transportation library w Hº. 3, #: º º :- 35 T DE LE UW, CATH E R & CO MPANY E N G | N E E R S WESTERN OFFICE 7S McALL | ST E R S T REET SAN FRANCIS CO 2, CAL FORN IA UN DER HILL |-|3 O2 September 5, 1956 City of Palo Alto California Attention: Mr. Noe E. Porter, Mayor Mr. Jerome Keith ley, City Manager Gent lemen : Pursuant to our agreement of May 23, 1955, we are p leased to submit a report on our findings and recommendations concerning a grade separation project at South Palo Alto. At your request we have contacted the consult ing engineers of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission and we have discussed the general physical plans of rapid trans it facil it ics which they propose for the South Palo Alto Area. The improvements that we recommend are compatible with those proposals. Further, the grade separation facilities proposed by us would be useful and use able at such time as rapid trans it facilities are developed. We wish to acknowledge the cooperation and assistance extended by the City, by the Southern Pacific Company, and by staff members of the Pub I ic Util it i es Commission, and District IV, State Division of Highways. It has been a pleasure and a privilege to serve the City in this important matter. Very truly yours, DE LEUW, CATHER & COMPANY 2->=-a- Charles E. De Leuw President §---* 2 T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S | . Purpose of the Study : The Pa |O A | TO Area 3. The South Pa |O A | TO Area 4. Grade Separation History 5. Sources of Data Studied 6. Discussion of Findings (a) Vehicular Volumes (b) Vehicular De lays (c) ViO at ions (d) Crossing Accident History 7. Recomended Plan (a) Governing Criteria (b) Alternate Plans Considered (I) Separation by railroad grade elevation (2) Separation by elevated or depressed structures (3) A lignment studies (c) Recommended Plan (1) Variations of recommended plan 8. COST Estimates 9. Benefits Page No. Table No. 2 L | S T OF T A B L E S Estimate of Cost - E levation of Southern Pacific Company Tracks - - Estimate of Cost - Recommended P an ! P |ate No. L | S T 0 F P L A T E S Map of Palo Alto and Vicinity Vehicular Volumes and De lays at Railroad Cross ings Vehicular Volumes and De lays at California Avenue Cross ing Vehicular Volumes and De lays at Page Mi || Road Crossing Vehicular Volumes and De lays at Church i | | Avenue Cross ing Proposed California Avenue Underpass - 1945 Plan Oregon Avenue Underpass - Tentative Plan, 1945 Pre liminary Location Proposal by City of Palo Alto Recommended Grade Separation Plan Arrangement and Traffic Signal Phasing Diagram — West Approach to Grade Separation General Plan of Grade Separation Project Profiles - Page Mi || Road to Emerson Street and Connect ion to Park Boulevard Profiles of Alma Street Ramps Profile of Re located Alma Street and Typical Roadway Sections - Plan, Elevation, and Section of Alma Street Bridge Plan, Elevation, and Sections of Railroad Bridge P an and Sections of Pedestrian Underpass at California Avenue Utility Modifications – East of Railroad Utility Modifications – West of Raj | road *** ！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！&&-&?（ºſ №！， →---- - - =æ√≠√≠√∞=sae，!!!！！！！！！--~~~~ || – ---. PURPOSE OF TH | S STUDY The purpose of this study is to investigate the feasibility of providing grade separation in the South Palo Alto area near the Southern Pacific railroad station, to prepare pre liminary plans and a cost estimate of a recommended improvement, and to estimate the benefits to be derived from grade separation. THE PALO ALTO AREA Located 52 miles south of San Francisco on the San Francisco Peninsula, Palo Alto is primari Iy a city of homes and gardens. Founded in 1887 by Senator Le and Stanford and incorporated as a city of sixth class in 1894, Palo Alto organized as a charter city in 1909 and adopted a council-manager form of government by a new charter approved in 1950. A special census in 1955 indicated a population of 4 |,002, a four fold increase over the 10,602 population count of 1925. Although Palo Alto's economy has been influenced to a large extent by its proximity to Stanford University, the City has long been a major regional shopping center for the Mid-Pen insula area as we | | . Many of its stores are branches of downtown San Francisco department stores. In recent years there has been a striking development of electronic plants, scientific laboratories, and other enterprises taking advantage of the proximity to Stanford University and its pool of high |y trained professional and technical personne | . THE SOUTH PALO ALTO AREA Plate indicates the location of the study area and its relation- ship to nearby communities. The first development in what is now known as the South Palo Alto area was the construction of a depot at Mayfield on the San Francisco and San Jose Railroad at the time of the Civil War. 3. -*— l - º ~ | | In 1866 the first subdivision was laid out in the vicinity of the Mayfield depot, the plot reaching westward from the tracks to the San Francisco–San Jose Stage Road (now E | Camino Rea ) for a b lock or SO On either side of California Avenue. For many years Mayfield re- . mained an agricultural trading center of a few hundred families, serving The surrounding ranch area. Subdivision of the Co lege Terrace fract West of El Camino Real in 189 increased Mayfield's size somewhat. In 1925, when annexation to Palo A to was voted, the Town of Mayfield had a population of only 1, 308, whereas the conso I idated City numbered |O, 602 persons. - Since the end of World War | | , the South Palo A to area has had spectacular growth. About 10,000 persons have moved into the approxi- mate ly 2, 300 new houses built east of Alma Street and south of California Avenue since 1950. w Between 1946 and 1950 the number of commercial estab I ishments in the California Avenue Business District (including frontage on E | Camino Real and adjacent streets) increased from 32 to |05. The linea | feet of street frontage used for commercial enterprises increased from 1,200 feet to 4,522 feet. Since 1950 there has been considerable industrial expansion in the Page Mi || Road area on both sides of E | Camino Real. It is anticipated that this industrial activity, now employing about 1,200 persons, Will employ from 3,000 to 10,000 persons when the Stanford lands are developed. The growths in residential, shopping, and industrial development, and the location of such growths, have created increased vehicular traffic volumes at the California Avenue and Page Mi | | Road crossings of the railroad. GRADE SEPARATION HISTORY Hazards to high school students crossing the tracks at Embarcadero Road, and several fatal accidents, fina | |y resulted in the elimination of the grade crossing in 1938 by construction of an underpass under the tracks and Alma Street. At University Avenue the proximity of the railroad station to El Camino Real, the relative ly high volume of vehicular traffic, and the attempt of commuters' autos to enter already fi I led and b locked traffic streams, created an untenable situation. In 1940 the Palo A to station was rebu i ! t , the tracks re located, and University Avenue depressed. At the same time an overpass was built to carry University Avenue traffic over El Camino Real. s : Ramps carry Alma Street traffic over University Avenue and to and from University Avenue. Other ramps connect E I Camino Real with University Avenue and Palm Drive. | n | 937 a committee of the Mayfield Service Club recommended to the City Council that an underpass be constructed at California Avenue. In November of 1945 the City Council expressed its intent to construct an underpass in the vicinity of California Avenue at an early date in a "sense motion" passed by the Council. Planning reports by consultants in 1949 and 1955 recommended a grade separation. In October 1953, Committee Number One of the City Council recommended that the City Manager be authorized to in if i ate negotiations leading to the construction of the underpass. The situation confronting the City at California Avenue at present is similar to that existing earlier at University Avenue. On a typical weekday a total of approximately 18,000 vehicles cross the railroad at California Avenue and at Page Mi || Road. More than 2,000 vehicles cross during the evening peak period. Commuters using the California Avenue station have increased from approximate |y 700 to a most double in the last five years. A check made just prior to 5:30 P.M. on a November 1955 evening indicated that approximate |y 250 automobiles were parked in the depot parking lot, 120 on adjacent streets east of the tracks, and 60 West of the tracks. Although a ! I of these vehicles do not cross the rail- road during the commuter rush period, they do contribute to the congest ion and de lays in the vicinity of California Avenue. SOURCES OF DATA STUD | ED The City made available to us maps showing traffic flows, street Cross sections, grades, and elevations, and the location of util it ics, Storm sewers, and sanitary sewers; a report on soil investigations in Palo Alto; sketches and drawings of several grade separation plans that have been proposed; and cost estimates of property. The April 15, 1955, Report on the Inter im General Plan for Palo Alto out lines a system of trafficways, presents information on existing traffic flows, and projects future traffic flows. Information on grade crossing accidents was furnished by the City and by the California Util it i es Commission. The Southern Pacific Company furnished timetab Ies, information on passenger Volumes, station plan, profiles, and construction standards. p-—--------------------•• • •=ærpæº-~~~~， : \. | . N During the period starting at 6:00 A.M., Saturday, October 8, 1955, - and ending 6:00 A.M., Sunday, October 16, 1955, counters at California Avenue, Page Mill Road, and Church i | | Avenue, recorded the number of vehicles crossing the railroad. Between the hours of 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M. each day, observers employed by the City recorded the meter readings at quarter-hour intervals from 6:30 A.M. to 8:30 A.M. and from 4:30 P.M. to 7:00 P.M.; and at half-hour intervals for the remainder of the 16-hour period. For each closing of the respective crossings the time that the gates lowered and the time that the gates raised were recorded. The number of vehicles de layed and the number of violations during each closing Were a so recorded. D | SCUSS ON OF F | ND | NGS Vehicular Volumes During the calendar week start ing 6:00 A.M. Saturday, October 8, 1955, the recorders indicated that 87, 60 l vehicles crossed the railroad at Cal i- fornia Avenue, 36,936 crossed at Page Mi | | Road, and 34, 37 crossed at Church i | | Avenue, resulting in average daily vehicular volumes of approxi- mately 12,500, 5,300, and 4,900, respective ly. Approximately 95 per cent of the crossings occurred during the period of 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. Plate 2 compares the 16-hour weekday, Sunday, and Saturday vehicular volumes at each crossing. October 8, 1955, represents a typical Saturday and October 15, 1955, reflects the effect of a football game, with high attendance, at Stanford Stadium. - Vehicular volumes for each half-hour throughout the 16-hour study period on a typical weekday, Saturday, and Sunday, are presented on Plates 5, 4, and 5. - The California Avenue crossing indicated a relative ly uniform pattern of vehicular movements throughout the daytime hours on a typical weekday. A total of 12,272 vehicles crossed the railroad between 6:00 A.M. and 10:00 P.M. On Saturday, October 8, 1955, which may be considered a "normal" Saturday, the 16-hour vehicular volume was 13, 125. The Saturday and Sunday patterns clear ly demonstrate the absence of to-and-from work vehicular trips on those days. At Page Mi | | Road and at Church i | | Avenue the weekday vehicular volumes exceeded the weekend volumes. Both crossings indicated proport ionate ly greater vehicular movements during the peak periods than occurred at Cali- fornia Avenue, particularly so at Page Mi || Road. The absence of worker travel on Saturdays and Sunday is apparent also at Page Mi l l Road and at Church i | | Avenue. A weekday peak-hour flow of 1,527 vehic ies occurred at California Avenue on Friday, between 4:30 P.M. and 5:30 P.M. At Page Mill Road the peak-hour flow of 774 occurred on Friday, between 7: 15 A.M. and 8: 15 A.M. At Church i ! : ------------------–––––––––-—=|-_| –f→ rg-- *: —-seº./ -*—*-wºº,*-- | J Avenue a peak-hour flow of 588 occurred on Monday, between 4:30 P.M. and 5:30 P.M. (the Friday volume was on ly 20 vehicles less). On Saturday, October 15, 1955, however, 1,654 vehicles crossed the railroad at Cal i- fornia Avenue between | | : 30 A.M. and 12:30 P.M. Between 4:45 P.M. and 5:45 P.M., 864 vehicles crossed at Page Mi | | Road and |, |26 vehicles crossed at Church i | | Avenue. - Vehicular De lays On a typical weekday 76 scheduled trains pass California Avenue, of which 39 are "through" trains and 37 make scheduled stops. During the period of 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. there are 36 through trains and 3 make scheduled stops. In add if ion, there may be as many as ten unscheduled freight trains each day. From 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. on the seven days, October 8 to October 14, inclusive, 432 c losings of the crossing were observed at California Avenue, resulting in a total closed time of 9. hours. At Page Mi | | Road 520 closings tota led 15. hours, and at Church i | | Avenue 37 closings totaled 6. hours. The following table presents, for the period 6:00 A.M. to |0:00 P.M., the number of minutes and the percentage of time each crossing is closed on a typical weekday, a norma | Saturday, and Sunday: Weekday Saturday Sunday Minutes Minutes Minutes Cross ing Cross ing Cross ing Closed % C losed % C losed % California Avenue 92 9.6 53 5.5 3 | 3.2 Page Mi || Road | 53 | 5.9 8 | 8.4 63 6.6 Church i | | Avenue 63 6.6 35 25.6 | 8 | , 9 Virtual ly a l l of the closings at Church i | | Avenue were caused by through tra in movements, as contrasted with switching operations, and hence the total time during which the crossing was closed to vehicular traffic was a minimum. At California Avenue and at Page Mi || Road additional gate closings were caused by freight switching operations. The average length of time per C losing was greater at California Avenue and at Page Mi | | Road than at Church i | | Avenue because of the switching movements and because the gates at One or both crossings remained closed whenever a passenger tra in stopped at the station. Plate 2 compares the 16-hour weekday, Saturday, and Sunday gate C losings at each crossing, and Plates 3, 4, and 5 indicate the number of C losings each half hour throughout the day. The number of vehicles de layed and the percentages they represent of the total vehicles using the respective crossings during the 16-hour period, 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., are indicated in the following table: — ） ） ） ） ） ） → → → → → → → → → → → → ; .. Weekday Saturday Sunday ‘. No. of No. Of No. Of Vehicles Vehicles Vehicles I De layed % De layed # De layed % ~. Ca ifornia Avenue |, 537 | 2.5 |, | 79 9. O 3O6 3. 8 | Page Mi || Road |, O37 | 9.4 397 9.8 | O7 25.2 Church i | | Avenue 436 8.4 | 92 4. 5 5. 2. 3 || From 6:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. on the seven days, October 8 to Octo- ber 14, inclusive, 7, 120 vehicle-minutes of de lay occurred at California Avenue, 7,650 at Page Mi || Road, and 1,500 at Church i | | Avenue. The average de lay per vehicle, in seconds at each cross ing, is presented in the fo low ing table: *] - Average De lay per Vehicle (Seconds) Weekday Saturday Sunday | celifornia Avenue 4.7 48 4 | Page Mi | | Road - 8 78 79 Tº | Church i | | Avenue - 37 4 | 23 - “º - P late 2 indicates the total number of vehicles de layed and the vehicle- | minutes of de lay on a weekday and on Saturday and Sunday. Plates 3, 4, and 5 indicate the number of vehicles de layed and the vehicle-minutes of de lay -- *- each half hour throughout the day. The de lay times represent the de lays | caused by the actual closing of the cross ing gates and do not include addi- £ tional de lays that may have been caused by traffic signals or street con- gest ion after the gates were raised and the cross ings were opened to traffic. T On Saturday, October 15, 1955, just prior to the footba | | game at Stanford | Stadium, traffic in the vic in ity of Alma Street and Church i | | Avenue was so heavy that the observer was unable to distinguish, with any degree of cer- Tº - fainty, between the number of vehicles de layed by tra in operation and those | de layed by traffic conditions. After the game, train operations at Stadium Station caused the Church i | | Avenue gates to remain closed for two continu- --An ous periods of approximate |y ten minutes and of nineteen minutes each, | during which time a police officer directed traffic around the gates. _ _ ! } According ly, on Plate 2 the total number of vehicles de layed and the tofa vehicle-minutes of de lay on October 15, 1955, are not shown for Church i || | Avenue. ||| V iO | at ions The number of vehicles bypassing the gates or "running" the warning be lºl was observed. During the eight-day study period three cars violated the protective devices at California Avenue. One violation occurred during switching operations. At Page Mi || Road there were 78 violations, of which 53 occurred during switching operations. At Church i | | Avenue there were nine violations, one of which occurred during switching opera- tions. Crossing Accident History Although most of the accidents at the cross ings have involved trains and motor vehicles, there were a few accidents involving bicycles and pedestrians. - Crossing gates were instal led at California Avenue in January 1948. From 1937 unt iſ instal lation of the gates there were |4 accidents, which resulted in seven fatal it iss, three injuries, and five property damage incidents on ſy. One of the fatal accidents involved a train-bicycle conflict, and two involved pedestrians on ſy. After instal lation of the gates there were two gate accidents in 1948 and one train-motor vehicle accident, in- volving property damage on ly, in 1953. Gates were instal led at Page Mi || Road in February 1948. From 1937 to The date of insta | | at ion there were nine accidents which resulted in one fatality, three injuries, and five property damage incidents on ly. There have been no accidents since instal lation of the gates. The Church i | | Avenue gates were instal led in June 1950. In 1930 an accident involved two fatal ifies at the crossing, and in 1947 a train- bicycle accident caused one fatality. RECOMMENDED PLAN The field data indicate that although the total number of vehicles de layed and the vehicle-minutes of de lay at Church i | | Avenue are much lower than at either California Avenue or Page Mi | | Road, during the peak periods of vehicular movements the Church i | | Avenue cross ing operates approximate ly at capacity. Therefore, even for trips of equal distance, there is little like i hood that Church i | | Avenue would serve as a sat is— factory a ſternate route as increasing vehicular volumes create more con– gestion and de lays in the vicinity of California Avenue. It appears that grade separation is indicated as the means of reducing vehicular congestion and de lays associated with railroad operations. -“” Governing Criteria We consider that an adequate solution to the South Palo Alto grade separation problem requires that the following criteria be satisfied: Any grade separation structure or facility should be located so as to fit into the pattern of development of trafficways and serve anticipated fraffic flows. The facility must be capable of accommodating peak traffic flows of from 2,000 to 3,000 vehicles per hour. The Alma Street cross ing must be grade-separated and the present width of Alma Street must be maintained. California Avenue and Page Mi || Road must be closed to vehicular and pedestrian cross ings at grade. The design of the facility must take into consideration future changes in railroad faci it i es that may reasonably be expected. Vehicles using the facility should be able to enter and leave the facility with a minimum of interference to other traffic and to pedestrians. Grade-separated crossings of the railroad must be provided for pedestrians. Grades of vehicular ramps should be he d to a maximum of six per cent up and eight per cent down. Non-shopper and non-business traffic should be directed away from California Avenue in order to afford maximum freedom of movement to shoppers and business people. Access to the California Avenue shopping area should be convenient. Property acquisition should be he d to a minimum. The design of the facility should harmonize esthetical ly with the surrounding area. A | ternate Plans Considered Before location studies were made it was necessary to determine Whether grade separation should be accomplished by a litering the grade of • ſ） → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → º- -. -->--... → *-----, : the railroad, by crossing over the railroad, by crossing under the rail- road, or by some combination of the above-mentioned methods. Separation by railroad grade elevation From Church i | | Avenue to California Avenue, a distance of approx 1 - mately 3,500 feet, the elevation of the railroad track drops approxi- mately 13 feet. From California Avenue to Diss Road, a distance of 6,557 feet, the elevation rises approximate |y 4 feet. The lowest point in the vicinity is approximately one eighth of a mile south of Page Mi | | Road. At this point the track elevation is approximately 2-1/2 feet be low that at California Avenue. - The suggest ion has been made that f i ! I be placed and the tracks raised to permit vehicular traffic to pass under the railroad at Cal i- fornia Avenue and at Page Mi || Road. Assuming the grade of Alma Street to remain unchanged, approximately 20 feet of f i ! I would be required to provide the height sufficient for vertical clearance of vehicles and for the track-supporting structure. Reasonable track grades could be obtained if the existing track elevations were met at Church i | | Avenue on the north, Diss Road on the south, and El Camino Real on the west. In our opinion there are serious disadvantages to such a plan. From a functional point of view, the plan does not separate Alma Street traf- fic from east-west traffic. Such separation could be obtained if the grade of Alma Street were a ſtered. Possibly the most economical way to accomplish this would be to raise the grade of Alma Street. However, the cost of providing retaining walls, placing f i ! I for the track raise (whether or not Alma Street is raised), and the cost of temporary re- routing of the railroad tracks, make such a plan inadvisable. Further, raising the main line tracks would virtual ly isolate the industrial area from railroad service un less very cost ly track rearrangement were accom- p lished. It is pointed out, as we | | , that switching operations would continue to de lay traffic at California Avenue and at . Page Mi | | Road. We estimate that the over—a || cost of the project, Alma Street remaining at its exist- ing grade, would be approximate ly $ 1,880,000. Separation by elevated or depressed structures Functional ly, either an elevated structure or a depressed structure would satisfy most of the criteria ment ioned above, one equal ly as we l l as the other. However, it is our opinion that a plan based upon a depressed roadway is preferab le. An elevated structure would require a roadway elevation approximate ly 28 feet above the top of rail in order to provide the required vertica clearance above the track and space for structural members. On the other hand, a depressed structure would require on ly approximate ly 22 feet between top of rail and roadway. To achieve the same grade, ramps leading to and from the elevated structure would necessarily be longer and require more right-of-way than those leading to and from the depressed roadway. This requirement creates somewhat of a problem east of Alma Streef, as the terrain slopes downward to the east. A pedestrian Overpass of the railroad would require a sidewalk elevation of approximate |y 26 feet above the top of rail, whereas an underpass would require a drop of on ly approximate ly 15 feet. At the South Palo Al to location an elevated structure and ramps would cost considerably more than a depressed roadway and ramps. Although the matter of esthetics is one of local determination, it is our opinion that a depressed facility in the South Palo Alto area would receive greater public acceptance. A ignment studies The City furnished several sketches and study plans, a | | of which were concerned with a depressed crossing of the railroad. A plan dated August 25, 1937, proposed an underpass of the railroad and Alma Street at California Avenue, with ramps reaching the surface approximately 55 feet west of Park Boulevard and at the center of High Street. Grades of eight per cent were developed by raising Alma Street slight | y, reducing its roadway to 36 feet, and slight ly depressing the intersection of Park Boulevard and California Avenue. Alma Street traffic presumably would gain access to and from the facility by the use of High Street, Washington Street, and Nevada Avenue extended. Sidewalks were provided a long the depressed way, and on the south side of California Avenue a pedestrian ramp provided access to the station platform. A 1945 modification of the plan (see P late 6) provided a separate roadway between Park Boulevard and the south side of California Avenue, elevated Alma Street approximately 7 feet above existing grade, raised the tracks about | – | /2 feet, and made minor modifications to pedestrian facilities at the station. This p an eliminates the need for left turns at the intersection of Park Boulevard and California Avenue and provides a grade- separated crossing of California Avenue for pedestrians trave ling between Park Boulevard and the railroad Station. A facility aligned directly on California Avenue fails to satisfy the governing criter i a primari |y for the following reasons: |. Although traffic originating east of the railroad and dest ined for California Avenue would be we | | served, the Inter im General Plan indicates a major movement trend a long an Oregon Avenue-Page Mi || Road axis. N : 2. Assuming that it would be possible to induce traffic to move from Page Mi | | Road to California Avenue, California Avenue would not have adequate capacity to accommodate the volume of traffic anticipated. Further, through traffic should be routed around rather than through a business area. 3. Short horizontal ramp lengths cause excessive grades. Two similar study plans were prepared by the City in which horizonta distance was increased to obtain better grades. Additional and more direct connections to Park Boulevard enab led traffic to approach the under- pass conven i ent ly from other streets as we | | as from California Avenue. Plate 7 is representative of these plans. Forgoing discussion of other features of these plans, it is pointed out that the ir a lignments would re- quire the major flow of traffic to backtrack. A study plan utilizing a direct line between Oregon Avenue and Park Boulevard was considered. In order to maintain reasonable grade, the east ramp reached the surface at Emerson Street. It was necessary to real ign Park Boulevard to the west to obtain a reasonable grade. This plan, like most of the others, provided no direct connections with Alma Street, but required Alma Street-bound traffic to uti ize Emerson Street, California Avenue, and Colorado Avenue. A study plan providing easier access to Alma Street is shown on Plate 8. By applying certain modifications to this plan to meet the adopted governing criteria, the plan i lustrated in P late 9 was evolved. Recommended P an As indicated on Plate 9, the east terminus of the facility has been located so as to be in a lignment with a possible future parkway development of Oregon Avenue. The West terminus is located so as to require minimum property acquisition to complete a direct connection to Page Mi | | Road. From grade at Park Boulevard and Sheridan Avenue, a four-lane de- pressed roadway runs in a norther ly direction, underpassing the railroad and Alma Street, and reaching grade on Oregon Avenue, approximately mid- b lock between Emerson Street and High Street. Traffic destined for the California Avenue business district would use the two-lane ramp leading to Park Boulevard. Traffic from the district would enter the underpass at the signalized intersection of Park Boulevard and Sheridan Avenue. See P late |0. Ramps are provided on both sides of Alma Street – which is realigned – to: permit traffic to enter and leave the underpass at Alma Street without crossing the main flow of Alma Street traffic and without frave ling over resi- dent i a streets. Ramp grades are he d to a maximum of six per cent. Traffic between Oregon Avenue and Alma Street would be carried by separate surface connections located outside of and adjacent to the ramps from the underpass on the east side of Alma Street. Pedestrians cross A ſma Street at California Avenue by means of an underpass on the south side of California Avenue. This underpass continues under the railroad tracks to accommodate pedestrians bound to and from the business district. A stairway connects +he station platform with the underpass. Stairways and walkways from the east end of the station platform carry pedestrians to Alma Street and Colorado Avenue and to Park Boulevard and Grant Avenue. Traffic signals at these intersections protect pedestrians cross ing vehicular traffic flows. Traffic signals, in addition to the existing instal lation at Alma Street and California Avenue, would be rou ired at the following locations: Emerson Street and Oregon Avenue; Park Boulevard and Sheridan, Grant, and Sherman Avenues; Alma Street and Colorado Avenue; and at the intersection of the Oregon Avenue connections with Alma Street. The railroad underpass structure is planned to accommodate four main | ine railroad tracks and the lead to the house and team tracks. In it i a | | y, on ly two of the four main line tracks, plus a center platform, will be provided. | n the block bounded by Colorado Avenue, Emerson Street, Oregon Avenue, and High Street, three parcels of property would be required. Two of these parcels would be required in any event, if the Oregon Avenue Parkway were to be constructed. In the block bounded by Colorado Avenue, High Street, Oregon Avenue, and Alma Street, six parcels of property would be required in addition to a portion of the rear of a seventh parce l. Corners of three parce |s of property would be required at the north- east corner of Park Boulevard and Sheridan Avenue, and seven parcels of property would be required in the block bounded by Sheridan Avenue, Park Boulevard, Page Mi | | Road, and Birch Street. In cross ing a corner of the railroad yard the facility requires on ly a minimum of railroad property, and causes little disturbance to freight operations. Plates | | to 16, inclusive, present plans, profiles, and sections of the underpass structures, ramps, and roadways. Plate | 7 presents the plan and sections of the pedestrian underpass at California Avenue. Plate 18 indicates the required modifications to util it ics east of the railroad and Plate 19 indicates the required modifications to utilities west of the railroad. º*** -- . - War i at ions of recommended plan After a discussion of the recommended plan with the City Council, the Council requested that a cost estimate be made based on shift ing the facility so as to place its western terminus at Grant Avenue and Park Boulevard and its eastern terminus on Emerson Street between Nevada Avenue and Oregon Avenue. It was desired that the estimate include the cost of completing connections to Page Mi l l Road and Oregon Avenue. - This variation of the recommended plan has the following disad- vantages: |. Although the West end of the facility is one block closer to California Avenue, the alignment of the facility re- quires a major segment of vehicles using the underpass to backtrack. 2. If the east terminus of the project remained at Emerson Street, without direct connection to Oregon Avenue, the short distance to adjacent intersections and the number of turning movements to be sat is fied would create con- gest ion in the area during periods of peak activity and, in any event, would cause de lays at other times. 3. If the project were terminated at Park Boulevard on the west, "through" traffic would filter through streets that should be used on ly for local traffic. 4. This location of the underpass through the railroad property impairs the usefulness of the property and in- creases the cost of switching operations. 5. More parcels of property are required, including those necessary for adequate connections to Oregon Avenue and Page Mi | | Road, than under the recommended plan. We were requested to investigate the feasibility of providing a grade-separated approach to the underpass on the west side of the rail- road to serve traffic from the business district. A grade-separated access ramp for eastbound traffic from the Park Boulevard area would require grades in excess of six per cent and turning radii of approximately 100 feet, resulting in restricted sight distance and Operating speeds. Such a facility would cost a minimum of $300,000 additional. Approximately one half of this cost would be for additional property acquisition. This facility would permit existing streets, ex- Cept Park Boulevard, to remain open to traffic. A facility that would provide greater turning radii, less severe grades, and increased sight distances would require additional property acquisition, increased construction costs, and the C losing of existing streets or lower ing of existing street grades. | n any case the capacity of the grade-separated access ramp Would be limited to that of the approach streets. it is our opinion that a proper |y signa i zed intersection, as rec- ommended, adequate | y meets the needs of the area. Park Boulevard or Sheridan Avenue provides the most direct route to the underpass from the business district. Any p an of grade separation would require addi - tional vehicular travel in order to achieve reasonable grades and radii. COST EST |MATES The possibility of providing grade separation by elevating the rail- road tracks was discussed. Table presents the various elements of cost involved for such development. The total cost would be $ 1,880,000, assum- ing grade crossings of Alma Street at California Avenue and at Page Mi || Road. The Cost of the recommended p an is presented in Tab Ie 2. The esti- mafied cost of this plan is $1,963,000. We estimate that the cost of the Variation of the recommended plan, in which the facility is shifted to the north; Would be $2,033,000. The foregoing costs do not include the Cost of an easement through the Southern Pacific Company property. However, it is reasonable to assume that the easement cost for the recom- mended plan would be less than that for the variation of the plan. BENEF | TS | f is not the purpose of this report to discuss the theories on which the Costs of grade separation projects may be distributed among the inter- ested parties. That is a matter of policy within the jurisdiction of appropriate public regulatory bodies. It is in order, however, to ap- praise the benefits that could be gained by construction of this grade Separation project. Benefits that may be evaluated to some extent in monetary terms in- clude prospective accident reduction, saving in time to motorists, reduc- fion of vehicle operating costs, and reduction in railroad operating costs. \） (） → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → → The proximity of Alma Street to the tracks, with the attendant possibility of a vehicle stopping or being forced to stop on the tracks, creates more than usual hazardous cond it ions at California Avenue and at Page Mi | | Road. Nonethe less, there have been no acci- dents at Page Mi || Road since instal lation of crossing gates and on ly one train-motor vehicle accident at California Avenue. There Were two gate accidents at California Avenue during the first year of Operation of the gates. With increasing vehicular volumes there would be a tendancy for a greater frequency of accidents. However, based upon recent experience (one train-vehicle accident from 1949 to 1953, in- clusive), assign ing an economic cost of $2,000 per accident and cap if a l- izing this cost at three per cent for 50 years, the savings brought about by the elimination of accidents would warrant a capital expend- iture of s light Iy more than $ 10,000. Studies indicate that increased vehicle operating costs result from stopping, start ing, and waiting. There is an additional element of cost involved for time lost in connection with the operation of commercial vehicles. To a less extent, and more controversial in nature, there is an element of cost for time lost in the operation of private vehicles. These matters have been argued before public regu- latory bodies and it is not our purpose to discuss them here in. However, for purposes of iſ lustration we have adopted 3-1/2 cents per minute of vehicle de lay as a reasonable composite unit cost with which to evaluate vehicular de lays at California Avenue and at Page Mi l l Road. During the study-week de lays at the California Avenue and Page Mi | | Road cross ings totaled approximately 15,000 vehicle-minutes. The cost of de lays, expanded to one year, would be $27,300. This amount, capital- ized over a 50-year period at three per cent, warrants an expenditure of approximately $700,000. - The proposed improvement separates traffic crossing Alma Street and e liminates conflicts between Alma Street traffic and vehicles enter ing and leaving Alma Street from and to the west. Therefore, the grade separation project, as recommended, would reduce ordinary traffic de lays as well as those attributable to railroad operations on ly. Taking into consideration ordinary traffic de lays and additional de lays in the future caused by the normal growth in traffic, it is reasonable to estimate that over-all benefits to motor ists could warrant an expenditure of approxi- mate ly $ 1,000,000. - . - | f the crossings at California Avenue and Page Mi | | Road were closed, the Southern Pacific Company would save the cost of operating and maintaining the protective devices at those crossings, at an esti- mated saving of $3,000 per year. Switching costs under the recommended plan should remain the same as at present, assuming comparable operations. I - $º- TABLE | EST IMATE OF COST E LEVAT |ON OF SOUTHERN PAC | F | C COMPANY TRACKS Embankment Retain ing Wa | Is Bridge at Page Mi || Road Bridge at Cal i fornia Avenue Regrading of Park Boulevard Pavement - Remove and Reconstruct Drainage - Temporary and Permanent Utility Modifications Track work - Temporary and Permanent Re location of Railroad Signal and Communications Lines - Temporary and Permanent Re locate Freight House Facilities New Station Platform Pedestrian Underpass – Station TO P at form Railroad Right-of-Way Fence – Remove and Reconstruct Estimated Construction Cost Engineering and Administration – 10% Contingencies – |5% EST IMATED PROJECT COST $ 442,300 243,000 |42,500 | |6, 700 37, OOO | | , 100 60,600 9,000 357, 700 |2,500 32,400 8,400 25, 200 5,500 |, 503,900 |50, 400 225, 700 $ 1,880,000 : : . TABLE 2 EST |MATE OF COST RECOMMENDED PLAN Grading Pavement Curb and Gutter Sidewalk Roadway Light ing Traffic Signals Retaining Walls Barricades and Guard Rai | Alma Street Bridge Railroad Bridge Pedestrian Underpass at California Avenue Pedestrian Overpass Rai ling for Bridges and Retaining Wa ||s Roadway Drainage, Including Pump House and Equipment Concrete Box Culvert A long Alma Street Modifications to Sanitary Sewers Modifications to Water Lines Modifications to Gas Distribution Lines Modifications to Electrica | Distribution Lines 9|, 200 23, 100 45, 200 5,800 32,000 40,000 88,400 6,600 | 39,000 306,000 44,400 4,000 | 5,000 4 |, 800 68,000 2,500 14,000 8, 100 7,500 • • ） → → → → → → → - - - - -) – –] =] =) : I TABLE 2 – CONTINUED Track work - Temporary and Permanent Re locate Freight House Facilities Passenger Platform and She liter Railroad Right-of-Way Fence - Remove and Reconstruct Landscaping Estimated Construction Cost Engineering and Administration – 10% Contingencies – 15% Right-of-Way – Estimated Cost of Property and Improvements EST IMATED PROJECT COST $ | 3 |,000 14, 100 | 7,400 3,600 5,000 |, |53, 700 | | 5,400 | 72,900 52 |,000 $ , 963,000 PLATE º ae º . ： ： ： ： ： ： ： ： ： ſo º s 1 ： n ： ， ！ w w. s. 13 Bae - o ！！ ！！ ！！ ！！ 5 ſ=ſ~=№r=0 & w aº n n p g oooº！ oooºº oooºº ſood'ı s ≠ ≠ ≠ ≠ ≠ ≠ ≠ ≠， ！ ！！ 1 ！！ ！！" ， n × n.- ： Å L | N | O | A 0 N \7 O L T \7 O T \， d -10 dº W s.0 & 3 & 1 „ ， ?º n a Kuopunoº ---- ！ … … ---- · … · … q n ≤ i ≤ ≥ ± 0 0 1 w u N v. E. R. S. 1 T. PLATE 2 VEHICULAR VOLUMES AND DELAYS AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS 6: OO A. M. TO O. O.O. P. M. TYP cal- we Ek DAY SATURDAY. octo BER 8, 1955 s.ATURDAY. oc Toº ER 15, 1955 TYP C A L s UN DAY california Avenue TYP I c. AL w E Ek DAY sat U R DAY. octo B E R 8, 1955 SATURDAY. oc To BER 15, 1955 TYP c. A L su N DAY PAGE M | LL ROAD TYP ca L W. E. E. K. D. A. Y. SATURDAY. oc TO BER 8, 1955 SATURDAY. Octo BER 15, 1955 TYP cal_ SUNDAY C H U R C H | LL A V E N UE --------- ---------- † -------- ºr -------s - - - 4. s s º º - -- - -- -- -- |-- -- 1- -- -- Nu Ma ER OF v Eric LEs de L.A.Y.E. D. º o - -- -- -- * -- -- --- º -- - N Nu MBER OF GATE c Los NG's --- --- --- --- ---> ---- 1,4-oo ----- lºo º ----- v EHICLE-M1 NUTE!'s of DELAY. * NUM BER of vehic LES DELAYED could not ee DETERMINED DE L Eu wº c AT H E R & co. MPANY - E N G | N E E Rs - S.A. N. F. R A N C is co - SEP-T E M B E R is 5 s b） = ） ） ） --★ → → → → - -) –J – — J — J — J — —) -l- al |- PERIOD END ING |O:OO P. M. PLATE VEHICULAR VOLUMES AND DELAYS AT CAL FORN IA AVENUE CROSSING 6:OO A.M. TO 800 8 -40 C. TYP C A L WEEK DAY 7 Oo 7 600 6 - 2 oc is 2. 500 - u wº - u - - º 400 - * 20-0 -> - -n. - - u 300 * - > - - $ 2 200 - - º: * ... too u - in º > 100 - I - -> - ~ -- 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 1000 |0-30 ||:00 ||:30 2:00 [2:30 Izoo lºo 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 A. M. Noon P. M. P. M. 800 8 -400 SATURDAY, octo BER 8, 1955 700 -7. 600 º --oo. un - 500 3-5 s - - ºn - u 3. - - 400 – 4 u l-zoo 9 *I c ~ º -- § soo g| 3 º' u- * = o u- - - 200 ol-2 *| roo ºu - º an º: ~ s 100 = -1 = -> z - g ENDING 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 IO-30 ||:00 11:30 §§ 12:30 I-00 1-30 2:00 2:30 3:00 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 stoo 6:30 7:00 7:30 Broo 8:30 900 sºo loºoo A. M. N. P. M. P. -- 900 |-9 SATURDAY, Octobe R 15, 1955 800 8 --~~ 700 -7 500 |-e --~~ al - 500 * | * = - – º u º - º 400 3 ka 200 - o 9 * ºn I- º- - 3 do * -3 – g * | - - u- u- - - o 200 2 * | too º: u Lu - - ºn loo - - == > - I -> - - - g ENDING 4-co 4:30 G-3d 7-oo. 7:30 a. - - - - A. M. NOON. P. M. 30 8too 8:30 9-loo 9:30 º 800 -8 1-400 TYP I CAL SUN DAY 700 -7 500 s --- - -- - ºn =|s 5 Lil º u t c. --> – = 400 9|* 5 coo Lu > * : u 300 * - 3 - º º - ºr u- = º: 299 *| g º too - u- s § 5 º * I oo > | r - u- - > END ING 91.30 10:00 10:30 liroo Iliso 2:30 3:30 4100 4:30 sºo 700 8:00 8:30 3 PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD 12:30 too I-30 P. M. 1 E G B N D NU ME E R or v E H | c. LEs cross I No. Nu ME E R of v E. H. Ic LEs DELAYEd D E L E U W, c. A T H E R & Co M P ANY SS NUM BER of GATE clos NG's - vehicle-Minutes of DELAY E N G | N E E R s S. A. N. F. R A N C is C. c. 9:30 losoo P. M. SEP T E Mae R a 5-5 * | PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD PERI on ENDING VEHICULAR VOLUMES AND DELAYS AT PAGE MILL ROAD CROSSING 6:OO A. M. TO IO:OO P. M. PLATE 4 800 - -8 --~~ TYPICAL WEEKDAY foo - 7 600 -- --~~ º -- º -- 5.oo º - + 3 + º % º - L- 2 2 3| 8 - - - 5 * % 3 * * * -- º u u- º - ºn > 300 -L. rø - 2 - * * º -- - u- - - o - - - 200 - … º o 2 ºf loo - º - - uſ u- - º - º > loo - - - -> - - - - - ENDING 6:30 7-oo 7:30 8soo 8:30 9:00 9:30 to-do IO-30 || 1:00 11:30 §§ º Eoo Tºo zºo 2:30 3-go ºso gº º sºoo 5:30 sºoo e-Bo 7-oo 7-3o 8-do sºo gºod 9.30 no-oo A.M. n P. M. P. M. a do - a -º-o-o- SATURDAY, octo BER 8, 1955 7 oo - | | 7 600 - E. --~~ - -- -- 500 º || 5 - = - wn. 3. - * 400 - º 3| * : *zoo -1 º -- sº º - -- % º * u 3 oo º - 2 || 3 E > - 2 * | - 2 º 2 - u- º - - - ° 200 –r º º % ° 2 " .. loo º º º - º º u º: º º º º º º - - Lu 2 º 2 º º 2 º - - º 2 -4 º ºn ſº ſº º - * = º º - -: 100 º º º - - - º º º º º F. - - - - ~ º º º º º º 3% º º º º - - - % 2 H2 º 2 ** 2 #2 º 2 || 2 || > - º º - =2 º Hº * H_ 4 Fº 3 tº 4 : Fº ENDING 6:30 7-oo 7:30 8:00 8:30 9too 9:30 loroo torso II:00 11:30 12:00 º liou (180 2:00 2:30 2100 3:30 4:00 4:30 5:00 5:30 Gºod 5-3o 7-oo 7-3o 8-do 3-3o 3-do 3-3o no-oo A.M. Noon P.M. P. M. 8. ---- SATURDAY. OCTOBER 15, 1955 7. s ---- u- - - = |* * ºn º - ul - - – e 3|4 s 299 -- u º º > - - - - - u- - - - - 5|| 2 * | too º: - u º - º - -- #| = ~ - - - - - ENDING º 7soo 7:30 8:oo 8:30 9soo 9:30 lood losso lºoo tºo 12too 12:30 too -30 2:00 2:30 3-oo 3:30 4too 4-3o stoo 5:30 stoo siso 7soo 7:30 a.o.o. 8:30 9-oo 9:30 losoo ----- Noon P. M. P. M. 800 -8 --O-O. TYPICAL SUN DAY 700 -7. 600 -s ---- -- 500 3| s = -- u- un º - º 400 s - * u, -zoo -> - - + u - | u 300 g| 3 || - - - u- u- = o 200 * | * * too -- - - u u - º loo ºn - | -- > ºr = = | * 6:30 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 losoo losso 11:00 11-30 2100 12:30 lºod isso 2soo 2:30 stoo 3:30 *oo 4:30 5:00 5:30 6:00 5-30 -oo 7:30 8too 8:30 sºoo sº so losoo A.M. Noon P. M. - M. 1 E G E N D NUMBER OF VEHICLES C Ross NG N NUMBER OF -ATE c Los | Nºs. NUMBER of ve HI clies of LAYED we Hºc LE-M NUTEs of DELAY D E L Euw, c. A T H E R & co. MPANY E N G | N E E R S - SAN FRA N. c. sco sEPTE -e-R is 5-8 — — ） ） ） - - - - -| '-—\ — — —) — J — | — | — | ——] | | | | : | VEHICULAR VOLUMES AND DELAYS AT CHURCHILL AVENUE CROSSING 4. o o 3. o o 2 o o lo o PERIOD ENDING PE R100. En 4. o o s o o 2 O o o o DING PER i od End. No 700 500 PLATE 5 6:OO A. M. TO |O: OO P. M. TYPICAL WEEKDAY -º-o-o- loo loo 4-0-0 -o-o -2 vo * -o too ºn. - --- - - - - - -n. - - -- - I' ~ - u - -1. u - - - - - º - - - - - -- * | * * | 3 -- i. -- - - - - sº 700Tºgº, Taſoo gº gloo 330 Toroo Toso Iloo Tºso Izoo Izºo Too Tºo zoo 2:30 3-oo 330 ±oo 4-so sºoo 330 sºoo sº so 7-oo 7:30 a.o.o. a. so sºoo 2:30 loco A. M. noon P. M. P. M. SATURDAY. OCTOBER 8, 1955 - - > - - - - wn & º – -- -- - u - º -1. - º - - u- - - -- - - - - - e -E L r - u - - -QQ 4:00 4-30 5:00 5:30 6:00 5-3o 7-oo 7-3o 8:oo 8:30 9-oo 9:30 losoo A. M. Noon P. M. P. M. SATURDAY. OCTOBER 15, 1955 * L = x- - - - - 3| 3 — " u- - - u - - - -- - -> - - § -- -- u- #| 3 > - r - - - > º 7:00 7:30 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 10:30 lioo ll:30 12:00 (2:30 isoo lºso 2soo 2:30 3:00 3:30 4-oo 4-3o 5:00 5:30 stoo stao 7-oo 7-3o 8:00 8:30 9too 9:30 losoo ----- Noon P. M. P. M. TYP ICAL SUN DAY wº e = | > → ºn - - - ºl. 4 - || - - u - . -- - -- - - - - - o || > = º º - - º 2 #| 3 º - º - > | ºr º 2. º 2 - - 4- 3 & º - I - º º 2 º' - º . - id- k3- - º - 8:00 8:30 9:00 9:30 looo ſo. 3o inoo "... º *oo so 2-oo 2:30 3-oo 5:30 *oo 4-3o sºoo 5:30 stoo siso 7-oo 7-3o stoo asso sºoo siso to-oo ----- M. 1 E G E N D NUMBER of vehicles c Ross NG N. Numee R of GATE closi Ncs * Nu M BER of v E H lic LES DE LAYED DURING THIS PER too - Numa ER of vehicles De LAYED - vehicle Minutes of pelax cou LD NOT BE DETERM N.E.D. DE LE U w; c. AT H E R & co. MPANY - E. N. G. N E E R s - s A. N. F. R A N - I sco - sE P T E M BER 1956 != != '=' += '=' = ！= ） ） = - - - - - ） – – – T Q'. * - RAMona 5 TREET ſ T | Ju U. -> º - u º E. M. E. R. _ _ 3. son st REET º | -- º | o 2. Tº ſº | 5 ! : ſ 2. - | - > r - | º 3. º ; : 2. | * / U. - 3 2. - | T - J U- º: - y2=\"º- o \\ 2T (~ | T Polº p = W P A R k ſº A LMA st-REET PARK Bou LEwARD PARK soul Eva RP _- ::: A AVENUE UNDER PASS PROPOSED CAL FORN 1945 PLAN o loo 200 300 scale of FEET souTH PALO ALTO GRADE se PARAT toº STUDY -o-o - = Not N E E R 5 - s.A. N. raa Nc is tº see tº we tº a 5 tº _ be LE U W. eat he 5 & co MPANY ！= '=' = - - - - ） – J –J – J –J –J – J J | __| |_| |_| | | PLATE 7 RAM on a strº-EET º U- º | 2. E MERson st-REET --- º'ſ +. ~ O - º - - un +. > |- L ALMA 5 TREET Future Track- TTT – H-------------|- ZZ, Zºº r l, - !-------------. Future Troc * – Fº | || º PARK Eou LEVA R D. n -- º#: : NUE UNDER PASS OREGON AVE TENTATIVE PLAN, 1945 on stu DY H PALO ALT O GRADE sEPARAT souT - - E. = Nou N E E R 5 s a N Fas scus ºº sep t e Me R a -º N. Y. be utu W c.A.T. H. E. R. * cow PA - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - — — —-} RA - O - a st REET | _ E - E -s on REET | - Tº n T-T *_ ' peasanºian Hamel J. º PARK Bou LEwARD N u- a - - ~ o u - - - > - -- - º – > - - -- - - u - º - º tº- º - o - - - - ºn - - : u vo --- o AL PRELIMINARY Localſ (ON PROPOS s BY CITY OF PALO ALT O ( O GRADE sepa RAt loº STUDY SouTH PALO ALTO loo 200 300 400 scale of FEET H. E. R. * o M. P. º E. E. N F - - see tie Me tº a 5 tº R tº cus co DE Eu w c. * * A N. Y. nºt N R. S. s.A C. RA won a STREET - º E MERson st-REET | - _ T º H. G. H. s. TREET F- 2. Relocate Gos Distribºº n B 0 W. D. E. N. * k stotion stairwoy Pedestrion =- - crosswolklº- Jºr Pedestrion crosswo" Al-MA 5 T- º, - - #/ - -- Fedestrian Overdosº f º -º-º-º-º: *----- _ - - - + - - . T _ - - _ º - _ - - - __ - - TCCº- == — ** *———— _2~ - — _ - - - --- — — — station—" T stoi - T *- - --- --- - ºf rºyº Nº wº. Yº F- — T ------- - 3-4- º Hº-Hº- LIHF: --- N º - Freight House --- — - º º º Park Bou LEVARD soul-Eva RP º * REcoMMENDED GRADE sEPARATION PLAN TU DY souTH PALO ALTO GRADE see ARAT toº s o loo 200 300 -o-o scal-F of FEET e was a sº as co 5 e º T he R & co M P ANY = n & N E E R S saw FRA Nº'º pe Leuw, º' _ ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → | PLATE LO P A R K B O U L E WARD P HAS E A PHASE B PHASE C ARRANGEMENT AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL PHASING D AGRAM WEST APPROACH TO GRADE SE PARATION 5 OUTH PALO ALT O GRADE SEPARAT I on stu DY - P LAT E RAM on A STREET - Lil - - -*-* Is) ul a; g 2 > z lil 2. 2 > ill Lil lil - <ſ > > > —a A *s § * EMERSON - STREET § - - - * -Y (T- \ { ------ - - , - ------- - — ; – " A L MA - ustreet •-º- - -º - *#AM5 *D"Tºº Nºxºiſ Tºffle=T_ --- ; :- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - – -- ------- - - - - - -- - - - - - - --- * r * tº "r --- ** Z-ºl-` W.P. - 1 A -** - - -—t----- - - - - • - - - A* 1 1-1 —-E º - - -- -- - - - -- ===REHF=========H = =========--TH === - • *- º *-- - - - --- *— it NsinisTATEnºs Joss TNTNEW 6'X6'TCONCRETE I f_EXISTING Top ENTDTTCH w SOUTHERNTERCIFICTCOT R7 WTL” EXISTING CONCRETE BOX CULVERT UNDER sidewalk | ū RELOCATED N.B. MAIN-Ty PEDESTRIAN Overpass-Z sº- SUMP 8. PUMP HOUSE BOX CULVERT - 136 O NF|| V º HººpNF fº IELNEEN*NT f : \ k - T-1– 4 rº T--— | | | PLAT FORM - - - - - - - - --- RETAINING WAL *-4+ ñN. N TNT 25 & S -º- - | -—A-Existing CONCRETE l - Yu –RELocated s.e. main \station stairway – Sº-º-º: | BOX CULVERT i * J—l SPUR' TRACK Hº- –I *Nºe-N * . Yºu Lim- Yº SRELocate D TRAcks [T] RELO CAT ED SOUTHERN PACIFIC FREIGHT HOUSE | | – TE = i PARK BOULEVARD | • STANDARD | Ol L CQ. southERN Pacific co. . BAR R1CADF t saERMAN PARK pulayground . i l i SOUTH PALO ALTO GRADE SEPARATION G E N E R A L P L A N SE P T E M BER 1956 * SCALE =====#” " D E L E U W, C A T H E R & C O M P A N Y CONSU LT l N G E N G | N E E R S - SAN FRANC 1 SCO ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → PLAT E | 2 (t. 2-1 \ A. Existing TRAcks i - U. EL. Tyr 29.67% Q.57% ters I | > - 7- 3C ---------— * - ; \ * - - - - ~ |Ply.g. E1.29.68 -----existing around-uºz--------4-------------|ſib|rºf. # IJ: -- } \ v 1 º' !---Existing 2x4 concrete box - e fºlſ : *# a" aſ a "a #- º | L---|-Eks. H=HJ ! I t tº: Cº. r 1 Lil * =>~i=- T T ~ - - - - - * EXISTING GAS MAIN-sſ-, O - fi : *m. | Cº-Existing storm sewer ~~}~ EXISTING Éexistinº # & : || | | ā; wº | RELOCATED WATER MAIN ! EXISTING STORM SEWER GAS LINE ; WATER-LIF * . g | ! g Fºr – RELOCATED GAS M A. N. !-l Existing waſ ER MAIN–-T) \. - - sºm. g---- o 5 J. -1 - º |ii . ; EXISTING } } i 1 - "J * 2 CD % } *— | X_i, 3 ° GAS MAIN H. P- T-Existing SANITARY SEwe EXISTING SANTARY SEWER ——-º-\ || 1 Existing 6"J-H4–– F . H- #| 5: 24 Lil 'J. SEWER sº- Ei II) # 3 # l |# —H # 3|_| lil # - SEWER tu I [1] |# | * ſº | - • 6 e § £ £ —i Oſ) -º-nanoº ExISTING 8" v. C.P. SANITARY SEwe R clzo r É à ā- | |- 2O <ſ £ º: -—199 * # # # | ||# ; || ||: O H. —l ū I : 3 z c z: <ſ —l —l C O O ||w # =! im), [1] * * : Cº) *- > 3 2 ; 5 ; Vilá O * -1 <ſ g G 3 #||3: 2: 5 § É # # § G C ? r { C Cl- <ſ sº bill= 260' V.C. tº [º H. Cl.] (ſ) - | 2- <ſ 9||º, ; © > ! #|: + * Q. | O | 2. | § | º H. | => ſ 3. | | \ —T i ii I | ! { | - - - - - - - - - !- |\ |\ |\ }\} . || || | \ | | | | | | || | 'i | \\ | | \\ ji i ! . P. J. V. C. || | | E.L. 1.5 O' i O O ; §3 ; : º 3 + O #5 o, on S * P R O F | LE PAGE MILL ROAD TO HIGH STREET 30 3. O 3O | t _ _ _|_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- Existing GRound–LINET – — — — — — — — — — — | i. --- Toojº, A. P. l.V.C. E.L. 28.10' I º Lil ; -— –FXISING G Roun R I. V. C. E.L. 26.22 ſº T-I - - - - - *_º *T*--------- *====Q- - O.35 %, 5. I i N --—- - - ------------ —T- -T- * hi EXISTING 1. * | : GAS MAIN- -- # Cr- ; Or - U- § SS fl- O|| 0: ^ J § # SJ uſ? Lil ū|3 |10– | 19— 3: º, |O O O o “ C O O O § 3 s O try § O O f + + s # +- + + # t Uſ) N- N- - - o o so P R O F | LE PROFILE OF CONNECTION TO PARK BOULEVARD SOUTH PALO ALTO GRADE SEPARATION H! GH STREET TO EMERSON STREET | P R O F | L E S PAGE MILL ROAD TO E MER SON STREET & AND CONNECTION TO PARK BOULEV ARD - SE P T E M BER 1956 SCALES VERTICAL ====== FEET D E L E U W., C A T H E R § C O M P A N Y O IO 20 30 40 80 |2O FEET - HORIZONTAL CON SU LTI N G E N G | N E E R S – SAN FRA N C S CO ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → PLATE | 3 39–––... . --- 30 –––cº-t-9-3.3% PMC, E-, 28:75'_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _EXISTING GROUND LINE 2 - “sº ------------------------- tſ) {f} <ſ 0- or ill ;|2 O > s (ſ) as tº CD 2O tº 3 sºr. 20 -> th- # # (ſ) §: g: I - mº | OO" V.C. * . Aº IOO'V.C. *. OO' V.C. Orº § <ſ H- —! #: 3 à i E { lil # ! >1 —l * to t | la t ill s t |-- cit : Ç - C. * —l : * U.) } | gº u- - O i gº Lil - º amº m ºn 3 P. l. V.C. E.L. 5.21 u) it. }- -> O tº O O O O 3 § 3 g lſº O + + + + PROFILE OF + + tº) tº) iº) Lºſ sc -- ~~ £ 3. e 2 < e Š => 2 * ălă uſ E H19 (f) ºr iſ lº 3: - -> | (O G) O O g 3 O O $º O § § PROFILE OF : f f * wº * ON RAMP "B" $º * – SCALES; VERTICAL HORIZONTAL 3O : - - - -|--— ---. — — — — — — — — — — — EXISTING G Round : I.V.C. E.L. 27.05' – H % mº *** –––––––––––––––––– we are 3–94%—l—o———— 5. } É | C) ull 2 t o P | tºll or : #: Hè (ſ) to ºr f 20 % j; ; 2 0. - ſº lil O 2 so [º -g IOO'V.C. s .* I OO. V. C. -XI El S. # sº % lil > < > : | I º: (X C –) u} L 2" gº T.48% P. J.V. C. EL: 4.5O' § à f # =) 3 O O - { g 3 3 g e 3 + + + + 5 Š PROFILE OF |-– — — — — — I T T Ti - - --— — — — — — — — — z \ | –. — * * * ~ + -- - - - - - T T T - - - – – — — — — . . Tº - - - - = === *-* * *mºm t E x IS TING GAS LINE | TS-ºr WATER LINE - — — — — — — — . TIC 5 *-* = *=s* - -s. –F#-y **=== | - - * *mº | T | NG WATER LINE * ! SLT Tö t E x IS T | N G SAN | TARY *— | Exis T | NG WATER t 4- existing water Line -----→==== T T - - - – - – - - e T - - - - –– — — — —T T TIL- - -g existing sanitary sewer s 2, - | NEW 8" SAN ITARY S E W ER A 2 ! O -- * -------------- - - - - - - - - ** a sº- ºr < * * * * * *-* * * * * * * * * * \ 2 O + O. O. - - 5 + O.O 6 -H 26 \ | | | iO + OO | 2 + OO - ! i PROF |LE OF RE LOCAT E D ALMA STREET o 1 2 3 4 8 FEET S C A L E S : VERT ICAL -- O IO 20 30 40 80 FEET - HoRIZONTAL ====- \ ! ~ $1 gu L– : 24" - O VARIES 24' - O -*. - L. Fo" |N. Xt S T ln G ; _-property Line T p ROPERTY L | NE MED 1 A S. B. R O A DW mºmºmº t i !! ºn º Bº I as 14 N. B. R O ADWAY *— & º ºr à DWAY 1 6 o'-o" (EXISTING OREGON AVENUE R TO R.) -- 4 l' - O" VARIES VARIES sº-sa I6'- O' -º-gº. 5:9" | 1=0 —l t *. wº- —T- 2'-O"Ml sidewalk t = (-\º * - rº" . . s." - rh" "... ro" * - ºn tº *— rºll ! - ºn!" ! - ºn tº - ! - (-) 11 ; ; 2- ot #: 2:9-1– 28'- O -L-7:9"—£8-- - - -24. 9 #. 24" - O —- h, Barricade at End of # T T OREGON AVENUE - n - H! G H S T R EET ON LY - guarosau’t ; OREGON AVENUE, ! -- sº--— — — STATION O + 6 O TO 3 + 5 O EXTENSION *_l TOP OF PAVE MENT | AT HIGH S T REET * ADWAY N. B. R OADWAY RETA 1 N ING WALL - 3'- 0. | 6'-O" —3'-0"— VARIES — STATION | 3 + 2 O TO || 4 + 3 O | - ON t RE LOCATED ALMA STREET So UT H E R N PAct F 1 c R / W 4 RELoc At E D N.B. MAIN t RELoc ATED S.B. MAIN R E LOCATE D \| | EXTENSI - HOUSE TRACK j 24'-O" 3'-0" – VARIES 22'-O" à- ---sº VA R ES m 24'-O" 29'-6" -ms VARIES - * | T i ſ guardrail- | !"- Q" 18'-O" 2'-d" it t 5’ PLAT FORM g : –º- l—1– | a ll ll gº iſ T--—ſ 2T | RAMPs "A" AND "B – +e−CONCRETE BOX C U LV E RT 4'-9" 20'-O" - 4'-9" ——ºg - RELOCATED ALMA STREET i _souTHERN PAcific R/w 24' – O" __l 6'-O" 2O"- O” VA R |ES —T- SID E WALK | t | #:9". | 8'-O" 3'-O" RET Ai N ING WA LU: +—RETAining w ALL - | - CONC RET E RAMP Z- | B O X CU LV E R T | | R ETA |N||NG WALL R A M P ON RAMP "D" - ! OFF RAM P "C" 3'-Q" 6'-0" . 24'-O" —VARIES –1 24'-O" _l VARIES_L 36'-O" 2-0. VARIES_2'-0". 3O'- O" St D EWALK NL TRAFFIC & M. E. D. 1A N - -l PARK BOULEVARD Hºkéº- S. B. R O ADWAY _I-L N. B. R O ADWAY OFF RAM P 6 UAR D R All- AND BA RR T CADE A C C E SS ROADWAY P– SOUTH PALO ALTO GRADE SEPARATION PR OF | LE OF RELO CATED ALMA STREET STATION 4 + 7 O TO 6 + OO - & TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTIONS SEPT E M BER 1956 D E L E U W, c. A T H E R & C o M P A N Y O | 2 3 4 5 |O 15 FEET - - SC ALE Fºº-º-Fi - CONSU LTI N G E N G | N E E R S - SAN FRA N C | S CO ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → P LAT E R All L | N G 5'-0" - i 48'-O" º CURB TO CURB DEWAL g gº L5'- O | ! } º w C) B - - . «» s • * * gr wº * * • * * * '4' &. & * * * > 3 > & S. Sº S * . * * * * * o * ~ * $ a • * : * - sº rºº. "...a - S → ~ : « » 2 * * * * * f t I PE DES T R AN OV E R PASS R Al L | N G —” PLAN SOUTH E L EVATION O 1 2 3 4 5 |O 15 2O FEET S C A LE Hº-E= SECTION A - A SOUTH PALO ALTO GRADE SEPARATION PLAN, SECTION AND ELEVATION A L M A S T R E E T B R | D G E SEPTEMBER 1956 D E L E U W, C A T H E R & C o M P A N Y consul-TING E N G | N E E R S – SAN FRANC S CO o e º i - --" — Top of cuRB Ya, |= * TTop of PAv E M ENT AT surren f ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → PLAT E 16 2N ,” \ 2^ 2 < N \ .* \ , ” 2° 2' N × 2 2^ \ 2 * > & 22° 22' RS SS 2^ - N-PEDESTRIAN overpass sº - 2^ t 2" : \ \ 2. ſ \\ 2 | \\ 2’ | NN > * 2" | ...” : ——T-–––––. t | * * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * * - - - - 6' x 6' CONCRETE BOX CULVERT `--- PACIFIC COMPANY RIGHT OF WAY N º —t N. B. MAIN_ wº N * :- \ G)== C rº º' i - *- ſ-Bar H.E. T. º ------- ſ Châ’ - * wº - t A 2” - - - N - 2% N{ |||||Ilºiº ... ', '' ; : . ! . . . . . . . . i t . . C & . wº. R E L O C A T E D Tºº!—s fº | l: |#. iſ illiºſ ! , R A M P "c" - -º-º: | RON SOUT H B O UND MAl N T R A C K ration PLAT FORM SUMP AND PUMP HOUSE ill lºſilhºſſºm.TTTTT * | W 6 NoFFET iſ TFIELD *HE.T.T. S- -- | ſ relocated TRAcks—3. *-i-Hº Nº. N T – b * - t T T | mºre “ RELocated House IRAgº-º- - south PALO Al-'9 saape sepañAT19" was ºne--- - Tºs =T - | --— u Tu. It Y MoD fº CAT IONS EAST OF R Al L R O A.D sEPTEMBER 1956 D E U E U W c A T H E R §. c o M P A NY s — S AN FRANC SC 0 : CoN SULT i ！= ！= - - - - - - - - - - ~ - ） → → → → PLATE [9 MATCH U- | NE : i | > rTö | R E LOCAT E D F R El GHT station i - | ! - JNLET Tº J-E-1 rººſ i GRAVEL PLANT f TT T- ! | RE LOCATED | STAN DAR.D. Ol L | CO. T RACK —-> ‘. | | i | # t # : |é * #. | | # . 3 Z. ! | * == - Z ** - T-I-SouthERN eacts - STANDAR D 0 || L CO. %22% | i _^ *-*—so ºw—a * TH- * * | | - | g 3 - O | | & --- - \ ---SE=Z - || || > ==-T - | | ||= * * * * * *m, ºms º ºmºmºm º ºn - - * * |-. __ _ PARK * * * * * * * * * -º – _|_ _ _ _ _BOULEVARD * * *= as –––. ––––––––––––––-T-I--— — — — — — — — H–H––––––––––– –H -— ----- /~ TN Z ill (E —t- *º-º-º-º-º-º-º-mº *— - - - - - - - - - “ſ § ---------------- -------- *. | SHERMAN | i • i | | || || Park º | i || || ! | PLAYéRoundf ſ ſ | | | | i * × | ! | | | || t | || 1: ! |-| llll-l-l---|||— * - | i. * | || || | — — — — ——— t | | t | Lil | lu, .. I y ºs-ºs- -- Ž : | 2 tal g g . : H | <ſ <ſ wºm. —H. - i -> | i | | } - * * > - - 3 || |: || - H. i *sº ; 2 : º: sº