HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - December 18, 1985 (77)CITY COUNCIL MEETING
DECEMBER 18, 1,985
PUC INVESTIGATION
RE C )SSINGS AT
GRADE City Clerk Reimche presented information which had
been received from the Public Utilities Commission of e
the State of California regarding an investigation
J being conducted for the purpose of establishing a list
for the fiscal year 1986-87 of existing and proposed
crossings at grade of city streets, county roads, or �
state highways most urgently in need of separation, or
projects affecting the elimination of grade crossings
bv remval or relocation of streets or railroad tracks,
or existing separations in need of alteration or
reconstruction as contemplated by Section 2452 of the
Streets and Highways Code.
BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMM18(S1b&,'OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Investigation for the purpose of )�'
T
establishing a list for the )
Vlr'l!, (if,;f�$ C,Lt( itrc Sl N
fiscal year 1986-87 of existing )
and proposed crossings at grade )
OCT �,�J
of city streets, county roads, or)
state highways most urgently in )"
need of separation, or projects )
"" F'ZA;�4QSCQFFICE
�3
effecting the elimination of �c0.
I. :10 033
grade crossings by removal or )
relocation of streets or rail- )
road tracks, or existing )
separations in need of alteration)
or reconstruction as contemplated)
by Section 2452 of the Streets )
and Highways Code. )
ORDER INSTITUTING INVESTIGATION
By July 1 of each year, the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) is required to establish and furnish to the
California Transportation Commission (CTC) a priority list of those
railroad grade separation projects, including the elimination of
existing or proposed grade crossings; the elimination of grade
crossings by removal or relocation of streets or railroad tracks;
and the alteration or reconstruction of existing grade separations
most urgently in need of separation or alteration. The list, based
on criteria established by CPUC, includes projects on city streets,
county roads, and State highways which are not freeways as defined
in Section 257 of the Streets and Highways (S&H) Code.
N
I. 85-10-003 T/ASC/bcy
Funding for projects included on each annual priority
list is provided through Section 190 of the S&H Code, and the basis
for allocation and State requirements is contained in Sections
2450-2461 of the S&H Code. On projects which eliminate an existing
crossing or alter or reconstruct an existing grade separation, an
allocation of 80% of the estimated cost of the project is made,
with the local agency and railroad each contributing 10%. An
allocation of 50% of the estimated cost of the project is made for
a proposed crossing project, with the remaining 50% contributed by
i the local agency.
E Subsequent to CPUC's issuance of the Annual Grade
Separation Priority List, applications to CTC for an allocation of
i funds ale accepted no later than April 1 of each fiscal year.
f
Requirements for filing an application for an allocation of funds
are more specifically set forth in the California Administrative
Code, Title 21, Chapter 2, Subchapter 13, Grade Separation
i
Projects -Applications for Allocations or Supplemental Allocations.
j A copy of Subchapter 13 is included herein as Appendix 1.
By Decision (D.) 85-06-170 dated June 21, 1985, CPUC
established the 29th annual priority list of 71 projects for the
1985-86 fiscal year. The list will expire on June 30, 1986,
necessitating the establishment of a new priority list for the
1986-87 fiscal year.
CPUC will consider projects nominated by cities,
counties, cities and counties, the California Department of
Transportation (CALTRANS), and the various railroad companies
operating within the State for inclusion on the 1986-87 Grade
Separation Priority List. The criteria which CPUC staff proposes
to use in evaluating each nominated project are similar to those
found in D.85-06-170 with the exception of S2, Separation Height
Clearance for existing underpasses.
-2-
I. 85-10-003 T/ASC/hcy
At the hearings in Order Instituting Investigation
84-10-11 for development of the fiscal year 1985-86 priority list,
the city of San Mateo (City) expressed concern that the points
awarded in Category S2, Separation Height Clearance for existing
underpasses, did not give adequate recognition to clearance heights
of less than 13 feet. As a result of city's testimony, the
Commission found, in Finding 8 of D.85-06-170, that City's
recommendation to reallocate points to include additional clearance
heights was worthy of consideration. Further, Ordering Paragraph 3
of D.85-06-170 stated as follows:
"3. The Railroad Operations and Safety Branch of the
Commission is directed, in preparing the draft of
the Order Instituting Investigation pertaining to
the establishment of the 1986-87 Grade Separation
Priority List, to request the parties consideration
and comments at the hearing on the proposal to
refine category S2 -Separation Height Clearance for
underpasses as set forth in Finding 8."
The staff_ concurs with the position of City that
recognition should be given to separation height clearances of less
than 13 feet and, accordingly, proposes the following revised basis
for award of points in Category S-2, Separation Height Clearance
for existing underpasses. For purposes of comparison, the existing
basis for award of points in Category S-2 is shown immediately
below the proposed basis:
EXISTING SEPARATIONS
S-2 Separation Height Clearance -
I. Proposed Basis
-`
Height
(Feet)
15'
and
above
14'
but
less than
15'
-r
13'
but
less than
14'
11'
but
less than
13'
9'
but
less than
11'
Less than 9'
Underpass
--3-
Points
0
2
4
6
8
10
1.85-10-003 T/ASC/bcy
II. Existing Basis
Height (Feet) Points
15' and above - 0
14' but less than 15' 4
13' but less than 14' 8
Less than 13' 10
The proposed basis shown above will be used by the
staff in its initial exhibit evaluating nominations for the
1986-87 Grade Separation Priority List. Parties to the
proceeding are requested to give consideration to the staff
proposal to reallocate points in Category S-2, Separation Height
Clearance, and to comment on the staff proposal at the hearings
to be held to establish the 1986-87 list. The parties are also
invited to submit alternatives to the Commission for
consideration which, in their opinion, would better serve the
intended purpose of Category S-2.
Recent legislation has added Section 2460.7 to the S&H
Code relating to grade separation projects (chapter 1354,
Statutes of 1984). Section 2460.7 authorizes a local agency to
construct a project on the priority list prior to the time that
it reaches a high enough position for funding. The following
conditions will be applied to prioritization of grade separation
projects on which construction has commenced:
1. The project must have been nominated for the
fiscal year during which construction commenced.
2. The project must be renominated for the fiscal
year during which funding consideration is desired.
3. The nomination must include the same data as included
in the nomination for the fiscal year during which
construction commenced with the exception of cons-
truction cost data.
-4-
I. 85_10_Q03 T/ASC/bcy
4. Cost data included in the nomination shall he:
a. Final costs for completed projects.
b. Currently anticipated final costs
for projects still under construction.
5. All projects nominated under the provisions of
Section 2460.7 shall also comply with the filing
requirements set forth in this order.
IT IS ORDERED that an investigation on the California
Public Utilities Commission's own motion instituted for the
purpose of establishing a new priority list for fiscal year
1986-87, of existing or proposed railroad grade crossings of
public streets, roads, or highways most urgently in need of
separation; projects effecting the elimination of grade crossings
by removal or relocation of streets or railroad tracks; and
existing separation structures most urgently in need of
alteration or reconstruction as contemplated by Section 2452 of.
the S&H Code.
Public hearings in the investigation shall be held
before Commissioner Bagley and/or Administrative Law Judge
Orville I. Wright, commencing at 10:00 a.m. on April 8 and may
continue on April 9, 1986, in the courtroom of the California
Public Utilities Commission, State Building, 350 McAllister St.,
San Francisco, and commencing at 10:00 a.m. on April 15 and may
continue on April 16, 1986, in the courtroom of, the California
Public Utilities Commission, State Building, 107 South Broadway,
Los Angeles.
-5-
I. 85-I0-003 T/ASC/bcy
S
The Executive Director of the California Public Utilities
Commission shall have a copy of this order mailed to the following:
Every city, county, or city and county in which there is
a railroad
Every railroad corporation
California Department of Transportation
California Transportation Commission
League of California Cities
County Supervisors Association
Public agencies or railroad corporations desiring to have
a particular crossing or crossings, separation or separations
considered for inclusion in the 30th annual list (1986-87), to be
established under Section 2452 of the S&H Code, shall file the
original and three copies of their nomination(s) with the
California Public Utilities Commission, Transportation Division,
Railroad Operations and Safety Branch, State Building, 350
McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. All nominations shall
be received by the California Public Utilities Commission no later
than 4:00 p.m. on December 2, 1985. Each nominating body is also
required to provide two copies of its nomination to CALTRANS, one
copy to the appropriate railroad (see addresses contained in -
Appendix 2), one copy to each of the additional parties listed in
Appendix 2, and any other affected party.
Each nomination shall include the following data:
1. A statement indicating the need for the project.
2. A statement indicating that the nominating agency can or
cannot complete the pre -allocation requirements, as set forth in
Section 2456 of the S&H Code, prior to April 1,1987.
ZZ
I.85-10-003 T/ASC/bcy
3. A location map of the project, on paper 8-1/2 inches by
11 inches in size (scale 1" = 500' +), showing existing streets,
highways, and railroads. The proposed alignment of the grade
separation shall also be shown.
4. Two photographs (minimum size, 3-1/2 inches by 5 inches)
of the crossing, one from each direction of approach.
5. A statement indicating the type of project.
5.1. For existing or proposed crossings nominated for
separation or elimination, a completed Nomination Form GSN-1
(Revised 9-85) as shown in Appendix 3.
5.2. For proposed crossing projects, a discussion of the
physical practicability of constructing an at -grade crossing in the
general area of the proposed separation. The discussion shall be
supported by a plan and centerline profile of an at -grade crossing
drawn on paper 8-1/2 inches by 11 inches in size. No discussion of
economic feasibility is required, only a description of the
physical features in the surrounding terrain which would allow the
c(nstruction of an at -grade crossing. If sufficient evidence is
not presented that construction of an at -grade crossing is
practicable, the project will be excluded from the list.
5.3. For existing grade separations nominated for alteration
or reconstruction, a completed Nomination Form GSN-2 (Revised 9-85)
as shown in Appendix 4. A description of the existing and proposed
separation structures, including acute structural deficiencies,
shall be included with the nomination.
Instructions for collecting the required data and
completing the Grade Separation Nomination Forms GSN-1 and GSN-2
are included in Appendix 5. Data submitted in the nomination must
be based on verifiable facts occurring on or before the nomination
filing date, Speculative data involving events anticipated to
occur at some time in the future will not be considered.
-7-
I• 85-I0-003 T/ASC/bcy
Agencies nominating projects shall file, with their
nomination, prepared testimony which fully supports the nomination.
Nominating agencies shall promptly furnish a copy of their
nomination and prepared testimony to any party making a written
request to the nominating agency. The use of prepared testimony is
required to reduce extensive hearing time and expedite the
proceeding for the benefit of all concerned.
All nominations shall be verified by the nominating
party. verification may be made before a notary public or by
certification or declaration under penalty of perjury.
In addition to submitting the Grade Separation Nomination
Form, each partv,.or its representative, nominating a crossing for
inclusion in the Grade Separation Priority List, is required to
appear in person at either the San Francisco or Los Angeles
hearings to present evidence concerning its nomination. Supple-
mental data may be submitted at the hearings in support of a
nomination. The data may include facts not known at the time of
the nomination filing date, such as crossing accidents, occurring
after the nomination filing date but on or before March 31 of the
.year during which the hearings are held, unless otherwise noted on
the nomination form. verification of all supplemental data must be
received by the Staff no later than one week after the last
scheduled day of hearing.
Appearance schedules will be published after all
nominations have been received. Appearances will be limited to one
witness per project. All information relating to the urgency of the
project shall be filed with the nomination in affidavit form.
Section 2454 (q) of the S&H Code states:
"(g) Notwithstanding the provisions of
Subdivisions (a) to (f), inclusive, the total
of such allocations for a single project shall
not exceed five million dollars ($5,000,000)
without specific legislative authorization,
except that the amount for a single project may
be increased to either (1) an amount that
includes the federal construction cost index
increase each year since 1976, or (2) an amount
which does not exceed one-third of the total
funds appropriated for grade separation
projects for the year of allocation, whichever
amount is less, as determined each year by the
Public Utilities Commission."
Agencies anticipating the need for an allocation greater
than $5,000,000 should be prepared to present evidence at the Grade
Separation Priority List hearings to justify the additional award.
Failure to supply all of the requested information or to
appear before the Commission will constitute grounds for exclusion
of a project from the 1086-'87 Grade Separation Priority List=
This order is effective today.
Dated OCT. 17, 1985 , at San Francisco, California.
DONALD VIAL
President
VICTOR CALVO
PRISCILLA C. GREW
WILLIAM T. BAGLEY
FREDERICK R. DUDA
Commissioners
GRADE SEPARATION APPENDIX 1
Sheet I of 5
TITLE 21 Department of Transportation
(Register 82, No.34--8-21-82)
SUBCHAPTER 13, GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS --APPLICATIONS FOR
ALLOCATIONS OR SUPPLEMENTAL ALLOCATIONS
Article 1. Applications
1552. Last Date of File.
April I of each fiscal year is the last date on which
applications for allocations of grade separation funds in that
fiscal year can be filed; provided, however, if April .I is a
Saturday, Sunday, or a State of California holiday, then the last
date of filing shall be the next business day following April 1.
Filing =s accomplished by filing the application with the
Department of Transportation in the manner hereafter stated.
1553. Place to File.
The complete application in triplicate must be received in
the Office of the District Director of Transportation, State of
California, in the transportation district in which the applicant
is located, no later than 4:00 p.m. on the last day for filing.
1554. Contents of Application.
The complete application must include a written request for
an allocation in a specified mo:ietary amount along with copies of
each of the following attached to it:
(a) All necessary orders of the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of California. Necessary orders
of the Public Utilities Commission include:
(1) An order Authorizing construction of the project;
(2) A statement of the applicant's position on the
annual priority list established by the Public
Utilities Commission pursuant to Streets and Highways
Code Section 2.452;
(3) In case the applicant and affected railroad or
railroads cannot agree as to the apportionment of the
cost of the project between them, an order
apportioning such cost pursuant to Public Utilities
Commission Code Section 1202.5, but in no case shall
an allocation be made unless the railroad or railroads
contribute no less than the amount required by Section
2454 of the Streets and Highways Code, except: as may
be otherwise provided by law.
GRADE SEPARATION (Cont.)
Appendix 1
Sheet 2 of 5
iia
(b) All necessary agreements with the affected railroad
or railroads fully executed by railroad or railroads and
applicant. The necessary agreements with the railroad =
include: -
(1) Permission to enter upon railroad right of way
for construction, or, in lieu thereof, an order of the
Public Utilities Commission or of a court of competent
jurisdiction authorizing such entry for construction
purposes;
(2) A description of the project on a plan setting
forth the area and items of the project and the
particular area and items of the project to which the
railroad or railroads agree to contribute;
(3) The percentage of railroad's or railroads'
contribution to the cost of the area and items to
which railroad or railroads agree to contribute;
(4) Identification and estimated cost of the area and
items to which railroad or railroads do not
contribute;
(5) Agreement that railroad or railroads shall
contribute a minimum of 10 percent of the cost of the
project without a maximum dollar limitation on the
railroad's contribution, except that the contribution
may be less than 10 percent of the cost of the project
where expressly so provided by law.
(S) When two or more railroads are affected by a
project, their combined contribution must be a minimum
of 10 percent of the cost of the project without a
maximum dollar limitation on the combined contribution,
except that such combined contribution may be less
than 10 percent of the cost of the project when
expressly so provided by law.
(c) A certified resolution by the applicant's governing
body authorizing the filing of an application.
(d) Certified resolution by the applicant's governing
body stating that all matters prerequisite to the awarding
of the construction contract can be accomplished within
one year after allocation of the funds for the project by
the California Transportation Commission.
GRADE SEPARATION (Cont.) APPENDIX 1
Sheet 3 of
(e) A certified resolution by applicant's governing body
stating that sufficient local funds will be made available
as the work of the project progr4,sses.
(f) Copies of all necessary Environmental Impact Reports
or Negative Declarations, with a certified Notice of
Determination and approval or acceptance of these
documents by the Lead Agency. In cases where an
Environmental Impact Statement or Negative Declaration has
been prepared for the project pursuant to the requirements
of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and
implementing regulation thereto, such documents may be
submitted in lieu of an approved Environmental Impact
Report or Negative Declaration and Notice of
Determination, provided the Environmental Impact Statement.
or Negative Declaration fully develops the factors
required in Title 14, Section 15143, of the State
Administrative Code including Title 20, Section 17.1 (d)
(2), of the State Administrative Code and such
Environmental Impact Statement or Negative Declaratia: has
received Federal approval.
(g) General plan of the project, including profiles and
typical sections.
(h) Project cost estimate, which is to be broken down to
construction, preliminary and construction engineering,
work by railroad forces, right of way costs, and utility
relocation.
1555. Project Limitation.
Participation of the grade separation fund is limited to
only that portion of the project which, in the determination of the
California Transportation Commission, is necessary to make the
grade separation operable and to effect the separation of grades
between the highway and the railroad track or tracks, or necessary
to effect the relocation of track or highway. Off-track
maintenance roads shall be nonparticipating unless the existing
access for maintenance purposes is severely impaired by the
project. Participating items include, but are not limited to,
approaches, ramps, connections, drainage, erosion control of
slopes, such as ivy, iceplant, and rye grass, and preconstruction
ER
costs, such as right of way acquisition, preparation of
It
environmental impact reports and utility relocation, necessary to
make the grade separation operable. In any dispute as to scope of<
project or qualification of an item, the decision of the California
Transportation Commission shall be conclusive.
GRADE SEPARATION (Cont.) APPENDIX 1
Sheet of 4 of 5
1556. Allocation Limitation.
Initial allocation of grade separation funds by the
California Transportation Commission shall be limited to that based
upon applicant's estimate of cost of project specified by applicant
and utilized by the Public Utilities Commission of the State of
California in establishment of applicant's priority pursuant to
Streets and Highways Code Section 2452 of the State of California,
and in no case shall an original and supplemental allocation for a
single project exceed a total of fire million dollars ($5,000,000)
without specific legislative authorization in effect for the
project at the final date and time for filing an application. A
planned project must be a complete and operable project, and effect
the separation of grades, relocation of the highway or railroad, in
order to qualify for an allocation.
Article 2. Supplemental Allocations
1557. Last Date to File.
The last date on which an application for a supplemental
allocation can be filed for the subsequent fiscal year is May 1 of
the current calendar year. If May 1 is a Saturday, Sunday, or a
State of California holiday, then the last date of filing shall be
the next business day following May 1. A formal application must
be filed by the applicant, accompanied with the project final
report.
1558. Place to File.
The complete application in triplicate must be received in
the Office of the District Director of Transportation, State of
California, in the transportation district in which the applicant
is located, no later than 4:00 p.m. on the last day for filing.
1553. Contents of Application.
The application must include a written request for a
supplemental allocation in a specified amount along with copies of
each of .the following attached thereto.
(a) A certified resolution by the applicant's governing tody
certifying that:
(1) Applicant has authority to make request for
supplemental alloca*ion;
(2) The project has bean completed and has been
accepted by the governing body;
(3) The actual and final cost of the project has
been determined and is set forth in the supplemental
application;
GRAD SEPARATION (Cont.) APPENDIX 1
Sheet 5 of 5
(4) All costs set forth in the request for a
supplemental allocation were necessary to make the grade
separation operable and effect the separation of grades
or the relocation of track or highway.
(5) That railroad or railroads have contributed 10
percent of the cost of the project unless a lesser
contribution is expressly provided by law.
(b) Evidence that funds would have been allocated for the
project had the actual cost been used by the Public Utilities
Commission of the State of California in determining the
project's ranking on the priority list.
(c) A final accounting of the cost of the project with a
a statement explaining in detail why the original
allocation was not sufficient.
1�
APPENDIX 2
Sheet 1 of 4
ADDRESS LIST
GRADE SEPARATION NOMINATIONS
R. E. Welk, President
Alameda Belt Line, The Oakland
Terminal Railway
P.O. Box 24352
Oakland, CA 94623
Alan C. Goudy, President
Almanor Railroad Ccanpany
909 Terminal Sales Bldg.
Portland, OR 97205
Ph. 503-227-1219
Dan Barringer, General Manager
Amador Central Railroad Company
Martell, CA 95654
Ph. 209-223-1660
D.A. Bell, Chief Engr. Region
Burlington Northern Railroad Co.
2000 First Interstate Center
Seattle, WA 98104
Ph. 206-625-6111
G.A. Allen, General Manager
California Wastern Railroad
(DBA: Mendocino Coast Railway)
P.O. Box 907
Fort Bragg, CA 95437
Ph. 707-964-6371
V. S. Lindgren, President
Camino, Placerville and Lake Tahoe
Railroad Ccampany
P. 0. Box L
Camino, CA 95709
Ph. 916-644-2311
K. J. Tinker, General Manager
Central California Traction Company
1645 N. Cherokee Road
Stockton, CA 95205
Ph. 209-466-6927
R.P. Igo, General Manager
Harbor Belt Line Railroad
P. 0. Box A
Wilmington, CA 90748
Ph. 213-834-4594
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance of Why and Engineering
Attn: R.H. Knorr
Holton Inter -urban Railway Ccmpany
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
Ernest E. Bridgewater
Levin -Richmond 7'enninal Corp.
(Parr Terminal Railroad)
402 Wright Avenue
Richmaxi, CA 94804
Ph. 415-232-4422
W.C. Parks, Vice Pres. & General Manager
Los Angeles Junction Railway Company
5200 E. Sheila Street
Los Angeles, CA 90040
Ph. 213-267-5489
G. Cottini, Vice Pres. -Operations
McCloud River Railroad Company
P. 0. Drawer A
McCloud, CA 96057
Ph. 916-964-2141
K. Beard, Jr., Vice-Pres.-Opers.
Modesto & Empire Traction Company
P. 0. Box 3106
Modesto, CA 95353
Ph. 209-524-4631
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance of Way and Engineering
Attn: R.H. Knorr
Northwestern Pacific Railroad Company
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance of Way and Engineering
Attn: R.H. Knorr
Petaluma & Santa Rosa Railroad Company
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
John T. Christian, Chief Engineer
Port of Sacramento
Sacramento -Polo Fort
District Belt Railroad
P.O. Box 815
West Sacramento, CA 95691
Ph. 916-371-8000
A. G. Beckman, Director of Operations
Port of Stockton
Stockton Public Belt Railroad
P. O. Box 2089
Stockton, CA 95201
Ph. 209-946-0246
Carl Wilson, Gen. Superintendent
Quincy Railroad Company
P. O. Box 487
Quincy, CA 95971
Ph. 916-283-2840
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance of Way and Engineering
Attn: R.H. Knorr
Richmond Belt Railway
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
J. L. Verhaal, Division Superintendent
Sacramento Northern Railway
1025 19th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Ph. 916-442-6755
APPENDIX 2
Sheet 2 of 4
Rick Cecil, General Manager
San Diego and Arizona Eastern
Transportation Company
743 Imperial Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
Ph. 619-233-7486
Thomas F. Larwin, General Manager
San Diego Metropolitan Transit
Development Board
620 C Street, Suite 400
San Diego, CA 92101
Ph. 619-231-1466
Mrs. Sue J. Sword, V.P. & Manager
Santa Maria Valley Railroad Company
P. O. Box 340
Santa Maria, CA 93456
Ph. 805-922-7941
P. B. Rundle, General Manager
Sierra Railroad Company
13645 Tuolumne Road
Sonora, CA 95370
Ph. 209-532-3685
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance of Way and Engineering
Attn: R.H. Knorr
Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
B.D. Schneider, President
Stockton Terminal & Eastern Railroad
1330 North Broadway Avenue
Stockton, CA 95205
Ph. 209-466-7001
APPENDIX 2
Sheet 3 of 4
ADDRESS LIST
GRADE SEPARATION WMINATIONS
PAILROADS
Q. W. Torpin, Vice President Frank Wengert, Division Engineer
et Railway Company Union Pacific Railroad Company,
One Santa Fe Plaza California Division
5200 East Sheila Street 5480 Ferguson Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90040 Las Angeles, CA 90022 -
Ph. 213-267-5111 Ph. 213-725-2222
A.H. Renne, Asst. Gen. Mgr.-Engr.
The Atchison, Topeka and
Santa Fe Railway Co.
One Santa Fe Plaza
5200 East Sheila Street
Los Angeles, CA 90040
Ph. 213-267-5111
J. L. Verhaal, Division Superintendent
Tidewater Southern Railway Company
1025 19th Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Ph. 916-442-0819
W. S. Clark, Pres. & Gen. Manager
Trona Railway Company
P. O. Box 427
Trona, CA 93562
Ph. 619-372-4854
J. T. Smith, Division Enginee�
Union Pacific Railroad Co.,
Western Division
P.O. Box 511
Stockton, CA 95201
Carman Chappell, General Manager
Ventura County Railway Co.
P. 0. Box 432
Oxnard, to 93032
Ph. 805-486-4428
G.L. Murdock, Engineer
Maintenance r.,f Uby and Engineering
Attn: R.K. Knorr
Visalia Electric Railroad Co.
One Market Plaza
San Francisco, CA 94105
Ph. 415-541-1000
L. T. Cecil, V. Pres.
Yreka Western Railroad Co.
P. 0. Box 660
Yreka, CA 96097
Ph. 916-842-4146
Use this address for all projects involving California Division (Southern
California) crossings. This includes all crossings with the assigned
railroad designation number "3".
Use this address for all projects involving Western Division (former
Western Pacific Railroad Company) crossings. This includes all crossings
with the assigned railroad designation number 04".
'.'
CALTRANS
(Send one copy to each addressee)
j R. C. Cassano, Fief
Office of Structures Design
n Department of Transportation
State of California
Attn: H. Frank Hiyama
P.O. Box 1499
Sacramento, CA 95807
APPENDIX 2
Sheet 4 of 4
E. C. Bonnstetter, Attorney
Department of Transportation
State of California
P.O. Box 1438
Sacramento, CA 95807
ADDITIONNL PARTIES
(Send one copy to each addressee)
Harold S. Lentz, Asst. Gen. Attorney Frederick G. Pfrcumer, Gen. Attorney
Southern Pacific Transportation Co. Santa Fe Industries, Inca
Southern Pacific Building, Rom 839 114 Sanscme Street, Rm. 1208
One Market Plaza San Francisco, CA 94104
San Francisco, CA 94105
Joe S. Gray
General Solicitor
Union Pacific Railroad Ccmpany
555 Capitol gall, Suite 490
Sacramento, CA 95814
APPENDIX 3
Sheet 1 of 2
NCMINATION FOR
EXISTING OR PROPOSED CROSSING NCMINATED FOR
SEPARATION OR ELIMINATION
(See Appendix 5 for instructions.)
1. Naninating Agency:
Name
Address
2. Contact Person:
Name Title
Telephone Number ( )
3. Crossing Number and Location:
Public Utilities Comaission Crossing Number
Street Name City _ County
Railroad Company Name
4. Type and Number of railroad Tracks:
Main Branch Passing Siding/Spur
Total
5. Approach Roadway:
width (feet) Number of Lanes
6. Crossing:
width (feet) Number of Lanes
7. Average Daily Vehicle tblume:
Vehicle Count (ADT) Vehicle Count Date(s)
Estimated Vehicle Volume as of the Nomination Filing
Date (ADT)
8. Average Daily Train Volume:
Passenger Through Freight Switching Total
9. Speed:
Vehicular (Miles per hour) Train (Miles per hour)
10. Crossing Blocking May (Minutes per day)
11. Nearest Alternate Route (feet)
12. Secondary Accidents:
Vehicle -Vehicle Vehicle -Object
13. Type of Project Proposed: (Check one)
Underpass �_/ Overpass Z= Other Z= Describe
14. If Proposed Crossing: (Check one)
A Grade Crossing is Practicable-----------------------------
A rade Crossing °s not Practicable ---------- w----------�_
Form GSN-1 (Revised 9-85)
APPENDIX 3
Sheet 2 of 2
15. ESTIMATED PROJWr COST (as of April 1, 1987)
Right-of-ifty Allowance .......................................
$
Preliminary Engineering .............................
$
Construction, Engineering ............................
$
Total Engineering Cost......................r................
$
Bridge Construction .................................
$
Railroad Work .......................................
$
Highway Approaches and Connections ..................
$
UtilityRelocation .............................
$
Contingencies .......................................
$
Cost of Removing Existing Crossing (Where Applicable)
$
Total Construction Cost ......................................
$
Total Project Cost ...........................................
$
Form CEN -1 (Revised 9-85)
ia
APPENDI X 4
Sheet l of 2
FICMINATION FORA
GRADE SEPARATI.ON NOMINATED FOR ALTERATION
OR RECONSTRUCTION
(See Appendix 5 for instructions.)
1. Naminating Agency:
Name
Address
2. Contact Person.:
None Title
Telephone Number (( a
Crossing Number and location:
Public. Utilities Camission Crossing Number
Street Name City County
Railroad ConTeny Name
4. Horizontal Structure Clearance:
Width (Feet) Number of Lanes
5. Vertical Structure Clearance:
Overpass (Top of Rail to Structure, Feet)
Underpass (Pavment to Structure, Feet)
b. Center Divider:
Yes No
7. Speed Reduction (Quantitative):
Vehicle Railroad Slow Oder
8. Load Limit:
Vehicle Railroad
9. Average Lily Vehicle Volume:
Vehicular Count (ADr) Vehicle Count Date(s)
Estimated Vehicle Volune as of Nomination Filing
Date (ADH
10. Average Deily Train Volume:
Passenger Through Freight Switching Total
11. Secondary Accidents:
Vehicle -Vehicle Whicle-Object
Fozm GSN-2 (Revised 9-85)
APPENDIX 4
Sheet 2 of 2
15. ESTIMATED pRc) XT COST (as of April 1, 1987)
Right-of--6dsy Allowance .........................................
$
Preliminary Engineering .............................
$
Construction Engineering ............................
$
Total Engineering Cost .......................................
$
Bridge Construction .................................
$
Railroad 6,brk.......................................
$
Highway Approaches and Connections ....0 .............
$
Utility Relocation ..................................
$
Contingencies ................... 0.0.................
$
Cost of Removing Existing Structure(Where Applicable)
$
Total Construction Cost ......................................
$
Total Project Cost ................ I..........................
$
Form GSN-2 (Revised 9-85)
ia
APPENDIX 5
Sheet 1 of 3
GRADE SEPARATION NOMINATION INSTRUCTIONS
EXISTING OR PROPOSED CROSSING NOMINATED FOR SEPARATION OR
ELIMINATION FORM GSN-1
Items 1 and 2 -- Self-explanatory.
Item 3 -- For identification of railroad -highway crossings,
Public Utilities Commission crossing numbers are
assigned to all crossings. The crossing numbers are
generally painted on the crossing warning devices;
however, if necessary, the crossing numbers may be
obtained from the Commission staff.
Item 4 -- (If unknown) The type of track may be obtained from
the railroad company.
Item 5 -- Show width and number of lanes of roadway pavement
within 200 feet on either side of the crossing.
Item 6 -- Show width and number of lanes of roadway pavement at
the crossing.
Item 7 -- Show the latest vehicle traffic count (ADT) and
the estimated ADT as of the nomination filing date.
For proposed crossing projects, show the estimated ADT
upon opening.
Item 8 --
It is preferred that the average daily train volume be
obtained by a written request from the railroad,
otherwise, the source of the information should be
provided in the narrative. It is further advised that
the daily train volume should be confirmed by direct
observation.
The vehicular speed should be the posted speed limit.
The train speed should be the maximum speed attained at
the crossing. The train speed data may be obtained
from the railroad company or by properly operated radar
ecuipment. The source of the information should be
provided in the narrative.
APPENDIX 5
Sheet 2 of 3
Item 10 -- Show the total time in Minutes per day the warning
devices are activated at the crossing. The data may be
obtained by installation of a signal activation
monitoring device or by estimation of an average delay
per train based on direct observation of a reasonable
number of each type of train (passenger, through
freight, and switching) operating over the tracks at
the crossing. In the narrative, specify the method
used to collect the data.
Item 11 -- The nearest alternate route as measured along the
centerline of the railroad tracks.
Item 12 - A 10 -year accident history of the total number of
vehicle -object and vehicle -vehicle accidents that may
be attributed to the presence of the grade crossing.
Item 13 -- Self-explanatory.
Item 14 -- In the narratil►e section of the nomination, show
sufficient evidence that construction of an at -grade
crossing is physically practical and feasible.
Item 15 -- The estimated project cost shall be as of April 1,
1987. The cost shall be itemized as shown and any item
left blank shall be explained. The estimated cost .
shall be limited to that portion of the project which
is necessary to make the grade separation operable and
to effect tha separation of grades between the highway
and the railroad tracks. The project cost shall be
rounded to the nearest thousand dollars.
MOTE: For projects involving more than one crossing, complete the
appropriate form for each individual crossing and also show
a summary for the complete project.
APPENDIX 5
Sheet 3 of 3
GRADE SEPARATION NOMINATED FOR ALTERATION
OR RECONSTRUCTION FORM GSN-2
Items 1 and 2 -- Self-explanatory.
Item 3 -- Same as in Form GSN-1 except that the crossing number
is generally painted on the grade separation
structure.
Item 4 -- Show the width between fixed objects and the number of
traffic lanes.
Items 5 and 6 -- Self-explanatdry.
Item7 -- Quantitatively identify any vehicular speed reduction
that may be due to the presence of the structure.
Information regarding a railroad slow order may be
obtained from the railroad company.
Item 8 -- Show any vehicular or railroad load limit restriction
at the structure. If a restrictive limit has been
established, include a descriptive statement in the
narrative.
Item 9 -- Same as Item 7, Form GSN-1.
Item 10 -- Sara as Item 8, Form GSN-1.
Item 11 -- A 10 -year accident history of the number of vehicle -
object and vehicle -vehicle accidents that may be
attributable to the presence of the grade separation
structure.
Item 12 -- Same as Item 15, Form GSN-1.
NOTE: For projects involving more than one crossing, complete the
appropriate form for each individual crossing and also show
a summary for the complete project.