10 responses to “High-Cost Rail Part 91 San Bruno Wall”

1. jennifer

   June 10, 2013

   This looks like the half over- half under- construction, more in line with Belmont’s bare bones style, than with San Carlos’s more elaborate details (San Carlos paid for the upgraded design.) In any case, each very effectively slices these cities in two, using a combination of berms and walls.

2. jahzebel

   June 12, 2013

   yeah okay it doesn’t look good but what was there before _already_ split San Bruno in two, not to mention the holdup of traffic during rush hour train timings. At least this gets the trains out of the way of traffic. They still need to finish up the job but it’s an improvement over what was already there. I don’t own property in B’game near the tracks so if they are elevated up there then i don’t see anything wrong with that. I mean heck they’re TEARING UP completely the downtown for the entire summer for “beautification”, wider sidewalks, ad nauseum… the benefit to the business and people of B’game will be minimal (and reduction of parking will be significant)… The raised tracks will benefit us believe me, not to mention a probable reduction in the number of train-related fatalities on these local tracks.

3. James

   June 13, 2013

   It looks awful and I’m sure walking under the overpass at night is scary, too. What a waste of money. It also is a good way to create more blight along the peninsula. A tunnel was impossible? Not so in any other industrialized nation.

4. Joe

   July 22, 2013

   Here is an update from another local blog that is watching Caltrain:
   The San Bruno grade separation opened to train traffic, even if the project is far from complete. Trains now use the tracks built atop a mechanically stabilized earth embankment (basically walls held together by the weight of the dirt fill in between) that could be representative of future grade separations elsewhere on the corridor

5. fred

   July 22, 2013

   The City Council may want to consider how to get the most attractive and narrow above grade rail line through Burlingame. As State and Federal funds improve, this project may move forward quickly. Start planning a good viaduct rail line before the city is forced into a mess like this San Bruno grade separation.

6. fred

   July 23, 2013

   http://www.humantransit.org/2009/09/viaduct-love-in-berlin

7. Anne

   July 23, 2013

   Construction crews have begun excavating and removing portions of the road at the new San Bruno Caltrain station to lower the streets and allow for greater vehicle clearance under the crossings. Once completed, the clearance for each intersection will be approximately 15 feet. The work will require road closures on Angus, San Mateo and San Bruno avenues between now and Sept. 2.

8. fred

   July 23, 2013

   http://cahsr.blogspot.com/2009/03/grade-separations-done-right

9. jennifer

   July 23, 2013

   You’ll note these entries are 3-4 years old. It is amazing, however, how closely the conceptual drawing resembles the nearly finished San Bruno grade separation.
   Shortly after these photos of (more attractive) raised alignments were posted, similar ideas were suggested for some cities in our neck of the woods- I recall a short segment over a San Jose neighborhood and another taller concept over Fresno (‘might have been Bakersfield, I’ve forgotten)- So when the time came to reveal alignment cost estimates along the SF Peninsula Corridor a couple of years ago, HSRA consultants ranked a basic (not fancy) raised design as quite a bit more expensive than the method typically used for Caltrain grade sep. rail construction (I believe it is called berm and rammed earth)-This type is most recently seen in San Bruno.)
   I cannot recall the specific reason, but it might have had to do with construction in earthquake country. I think they’ve had about 100 well-paid consultants working on this project, and somehow, the public still remains in the dark. (They like it that way). Even more worrisome will be if Caltrans becomes the lead agency, as had been reported about a year ago.
   What happened to the results from all the testing (drilling) of the soil near the station, presumably for purposes of assessment for tunnel or trenching?
   The other problematic aspect of any train (or vehicle) on raised segments or alignments is how far the noise travels. On the flats, the noise is heard for blocks, but raised it will travel further. Even our freeway sound-walls ended up displacing their largely surface driven noise elsewhere. I’ve seen various noise barriers that supposedly absorb some rail noise, but those I’ve seen look unsightly. I cannot imagine how the base of Burlingame Avenue or Broadway would look with any of these.
   Burlingame (City of) and many property owners (but also indirectly merchants and we customers) are investing a lot of money into the streetscape upgrades, including significant widening of the sidewalks for al fresco dining, more strolling (and shopping$$$). It seems to me that these are the types of downtown experiences, that are also designed to get more people walking and biking into town, may be at risk if we aren’t very careful with these alignments—At some point, the “downtown” experience may be greatly diminished– then why not order take-out and shop online…..?

10. fred

    July 24, 2013

    The horns are the loudest part of the train, remove the train from at-grade and there is no need for the horns. As far as the wheels and rails, a sound barrier can be used to mitigate the noise and the barrier would only need to be a few feet all. Trench or raised, it’s still safer, cleaner and less noisy than at-grade.
    Burlingame got them to pretty-up the train station, they could get them to pretty-up a viaduct.