Railyard Alternatives & I-280 Boulevard (RAB) Feasibility ... · (RAB) Feasibility Study Led by the San Francisco Planning Department, the RAB Study is a multi-agency analysis of

Railyard Alternatives & I-280 Boulevard Feasibility Study 1

Photo: Manu Cornet

Railyard Alternatives & I-280 Boulevard

(RAB) Feasibility Study

Led by the San Francisco Planning

Department, the RAB Study is a multi-agency

analysis of transportation and land use

alternatives in the most rapidly growing areas

of the City, including: South of Market,

Mission Bay, and Showplace Square/Lower

Potrero Hill.

SPRING 2017


Transbay Transit Center (Slated to open levels 3-5 December 2017)

Caltrain Electrification

High-Speed Rail (HSR)Downtown Rail Extension (DTX)

Why is this Study happening now?

San Francisco has committed to significant transit

and infrastructure investments in the coming

decades. The Downtown Rail Extension (DTX), the

electrification of Caltrain, and High-Speed Rail (HSR)

service are planned around existing infrastructure.

Rather than simply considering how to build each

project independently in the existing circumstances,

the City would like to coordinate these projects into

a unified vision for the area. With the intersection of

these projects, San Francisco is at the crux of a

100-year decision that will impact our entire

region.


21st

Century Solutions

We have the unique opportunity to reshape the future of our region by

investing in understanding all possible options for our rail alignment to

improve access and quality of life for the entire east side of the City and

beyond.

Seeking Solutions

The existing infrastructure was built in a time when the area was primarily

industrial, and 20th century decisions divided these now densifying

neighborhoods. As we move forward, we’re now seeking 21st century

solutions that will increase connectivity and reduce congestion for public

transit, cars, pedestrians and cyclists.

Answering the Tough Questions

Despite years of multiple studies, a number of unresolved issues remain.

The RAB analysis seeks to address the following unanswered questions:

▪ Should we trench neighborhood streets?

▪ Can we avoid the most disruptive type of construction as we connect rail

to the Transbay Transit Center (TTC)?

▪ Can Caltrain better align with BART, High Speed Rail, Muni and other

modes of transit?

▪ Does the Caltrain railyard match modern land use demands?


Do we accommodate rail with trenched streets?

Fillmore Street Prior

to Grade-Separation

The electrification of Caltrain and the

delivery of High Speed Rail (HSR) will

impact our existing at-grade railway

crossings, most notably with longer

wait times. One solution is trenching

streets (grade-separation) to move

existing intersections under railway

crossings.

Existing Grade-Separation of

Geary at Fillmore Street

Potential Grade-Separation

of 16th Street


4: Boulevard I-280

Replacing the end of I-280 north of Mariposa with an

urban surface boulevard, similar to the Embarcadero

or Octavia Blvd, could create new open space, improve

circulation and allow connectivity throughout the area

that is currently separated by 1.2 miles of I-280.

1: Rail Alignment to Transbay

Transit Center (TTC)

This component explores how we get both Caltrain and

High-Speed Rail from the county line into the Transbay

Transit Center.

2: Transbay Transit Center (TTC)

Loop

The Transbay Transit Center Loop entails creating a

loop track/extension to enhance operational capacity at

the Transbay Transit Center and potentially adding a

crossing to the East Bay.

3: Railyard Reconfiguration/

Relocation

Modifying or relocating some or all of the activities at

the 4th/King Railyard would allow Caltrain to operate on

a smaller footprint, while potentially freeing up land for

open space and future development opportunities.

5: Opportunities for the Public’s

Benefit

Relocating the Caltrain Railyard and/or creating a

surface-level boulevard instead of the elevated freeway

makes new land available for housing, commercial

development, and open space.

RAB Study Components

The Planning Department is studying the five following

components, which can stand independently or can

potentially be combined into one design alternative for

the area. Each component includes a thorough analysis

of existing conditions and prepares conceptual design

alternatives within three study areas: the 16th Street

grade separation, the 4th and King Railyard, and I-280.


Component 1: Rail Alignment to

Transbay Transit Center (TTC)

The three options for connecting High Speed Rails

(HSR) and Caltrain to the Transbay Transit Center

(TTC) are outlined on this map. The RAB Study

analysis will review construction methods and rail

alignment configurations, as well as seek opportunities

to fund and build a cost effective project.


Component 2: Transbay Transit Center (TTC)

Loop

3. Steuart Street Caltrain & HSR

4. In the Bay Caltrain & HSR

Currently, the Transbay Transit Center (TTC) is a stub-end

station, meaning trains use the same track to go in and

out. A loop track or extension to the East Bay will increase

the station’s overall capacity by up to 40 percent. The

RAB analysis is looking at the financial and physical

feasibility of a loop track to solve for future connectivity

and capacity issues.


Thinking Through Relocation

In 2013, Caltrain and the City and County of San

Francisco studied necessary land for each activity

(operations, maintenance, and storage) at the 4th/King

Railyard. The study determined that Caltrain could

operate, maintain, and store the anticipated fleet on a

smaller footprint and if maintenance and storage were

provided elsewhere, an even smaller footprint for only

operations activities might be possible.

Component 3: Railyard

Reconfiguration/Relocation

If tracks are tunneled, can land at the

4th

/King Railyard be repurposed?

Component 3 provides some context to

help answer this question.

A Look Ahead

Currently, the railyard is used only for the operations,

maintenance, and storage of Caltrain and includes 6

platforms and 12 tracks. Starting in 2025, the railyard

will begin to serve as the interim station for High Speed

Rail (HSR) until the DTX is built. HSR is anticipating the

use of two platforms and four tracks. HSR operations at

4th/King Railyard could modify Caltrain’s existing and

anticipated use of the station to 2.5 platforms and 5

tracks. Platform heights will also need to be adjusted to

accommodate HSR operations.


Component 4: Boulevard I-280

Removing the surface tracks north of Potrero Hill

opens up the possibility of replacing parts of I-280

with a surface boulevard in the long term.

Originally planned to connect to other highways, I-80,

I-280 currently serves as a large off-ramp serving

44,000 drivers daily.

This component looks at replacing the end of I-280

north of Mariposa with an urban surface boulevard,

similar to the Embarcadero or Octavia Boulevard.

Those boulevards effectively handled similar loads

following freeway demolitions.

Such a boulevard could prioritize different modes on

different streets, provide better connectivity for

emergency vehicles, transit, pedestrians, bicyclists,

and cars, and could help create a more attractive

urban environment with more open space.

Southbound requires 3 lanes and Northbound

requires 3 to 5 lanes and could include High-

Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes for carpooling and

public transit.


Railyard (20+ Acres)

I-280 Corridor (4+ Acres)

Activate Adjacent Parcels

New Funding Opportunities

Component 5: Opportunities for the

Urban Environment

The combined impacts of repurposing the railyard and turning I-280

into a surface boulevard could open new parcels of land. This land

could be available for new housing, employment, and open space.

Land Use Options

In total, approximately 24 acres of land could become available for

development and open space. This ranges from between 1.05 and 2.43

million sq. ft. of commercial and 1.46 million sq. ft. of additional

residential space.

The study is asking the following questions: What’s possible? What’s

desirable? What does it look like to add 1.05 to 2.43 million square feet

of commercial and office space? Where could we add open space?

Pushing the Envelope

The development of land use scenarios for the space made available can

push the envelope of what’s possible for the area and has the potential to

pave the way for future projects.

Decisions regarding the balance of development types, building heights

and public amenities will be made through an extensive community

planning process. This Study is looking at what could be possible but

does not determine how the land should be developed.


Public Meeting

Preliminary Options

Analysis

Public Input

February 2016

PHASE I –

Preliminary Options Analysis

June 2014 – Feb 2016

PHASE II –

Alternatives Development Feb 2016 – March 2017

Public Meeting

Draft Alternatives

Public Input

March 2017

Ongoing Community Engagement

Community Working Group Participation

SF Board of

Supervisors Make

Recommendations

on Alignment

Options

June/July 2017

SF Board of

Supervisors Update

Draft Alternatives

March 2017

SF Board of

Supervisors Update

Revised Alternatives

April/May 2017

JU

NE 2

014

JU

LY

2017

Note: Dates and timeframes indicated are subject to change

RAB

STUDY

TIMELINE

Documents

Railyard Alternatives & I-280 Boulevard (RAB) Feasibility ... · (RAB) Feasibility Study Led by the San Francisco Planning Department, the RAB Study is a multi-agency analysis of