TR # 11 Proposed SITF Project - City of Sacramento

City of Sacramento

Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility

TR # 11 Proposed SITF Project

October 08, 2004

Project Team City of Sacramento

Mayor and City Council Mayor Heather Fargo

Ray Tretheway, Council member: District 1

Sandy Sheedy, Council member: District 2

Steve Cohn, Council member: District 3

Jimmie R. Yee, Council member: District 4

Lauren R. Hammond, Council member: District 5

Dave Jones, Council member: District 6

Robbie Waters, Council member: District 7

Bonnie J. Pannell, Council member: District 8

Department of General Services Hinda Chandler

Department of Transportation Nicholas Theocharides

Hector Barron

Ted Davini

Economic Development Department Paul Blumberg

Development Services Department Carol Shearly

Celia Yniguez

Parks and Recreation Department Bob Overstreet

Utilities Department Maria Solis

Consultant Team

SMWM / Arup Acanthus CH2M Hill CHS Consulting Group Hanscomb Faithful & Gould The Hoyt Company Jones Lang Lasalle LTK Engineering Services Nelson/Nygaard Simpson Gumpertz & Heger, Inc. Page & Turnbull, Inc.

Project Reports Technical Report #1: Existing Site Conditions

Working Paper #2: Armchair Tour of Intermodal Terminals

Working Paper #3: Transit Operational Requirements (draft)

Working Paper #4: Transit Operational Requirements (final)

Working Paper #5: Conceptual Programs for Transit and Joint Development and Evaluation Criteria

Technical Report #6: Final Conceptual Transit and Joint Development Programs

Technical Report #7: Baseline Traffic Simulation and Analysis

Working Paper #8: SITF Alternatives (draft)

Technical Report #9: SITF Alternatives (final)

Working Paper #10: Proposed SITF Project (draft)

Technical Report #11: Proposed SITF Project (final)

To see all Working Papers and Technical Reports, see the project website at: www.pwsacramento.com/sitf

Contents 1 Executive Summary ..................................................................................8 1.1 Response to Comments ..............................................................8 1.2 Purpose and Need for the Project..............................................11 1.3 Project Benefits ..........................................................................11 1.4 Terminology................................................................................12 1.5 Proposed Project........................................................................12 1.6 Design Refinements...................................................................14 1.7 Implementation...........................................................................14 1.8 The SITF Process ......................................................................18 2 Introduction..............................................................................................22 2.1 Terminology................................................................................22 2.2 Need for the Project ...................................................................22 2.3 Project Benefits ..........................................................................23 2.4 Regional Significance.................................................................23 2.5 Project Goals Objectives............................................................25 2.6 Content and Organization ..........................................................27 3 Site Design ..............................................................................................29 3.1 Heavy Rail Alignment.................................................................29 3.2 Urban Design and Landscaping.................................................32 3.3 Roadways...................................................................................39 3.4 Circulation ..................................................................................50 3.5 Utilities........................................................................................62 3.6 Hazardous Materials ..................................................................66 3.7 Comprehensive Approach to Federal Buildings Concern..........66 4 Terminal Design ......................................................................................69 4.1 Terminal Transportation Program ..............................................69 4.2 Terminal Building Program.........................................................70 4.3 Terminal Building Design Concept.............................................71 4.4 Structural Systems .....................................................................84 4.5 Historic Preservation ..................................................................85 5 Implementation........................................................................................99 5.1 Implementation Summary ..........................................................99 5.2 Phasing Plan ............................................................................108 5.3 Cost Estimate...........................................................................126 5.4 Cost and Revenue Model.........................................................131 6 Response to Comments........................................................................138 6.1 Summary..................................................................................138 6.2 Alternate Phasing Strategy ......................................................138 6.3 Scope and Cost Reductions.....................................................153 6.4 Funding ....................................................................................154 6.5 Additional Design Refinements ................................................157 6.6 Accommodations of Additional Transportation Modes ............157 6.7 Operational Scenarios..............................................................160 Appendix A. Order of Magnitude Cost Estimate

Appendix B. Economic Model

City of Sacramento Sacramento Intermodal Transportation FacilityTR #11

Proposed SITF Project

SMWM/Arup and Associated Consultants

October 8, 2004

Figures Figure 1.1.1 Project Area and Existing Conditions

Figure 1.1.2 Site Plan

Figure 1.1.3 SITF Project, Cost and Funding Schedules

Figure 3.1.1 Existing and Proposed Track and Depot Locations

Figure 3.1.2 Schematic Heavy Rail Arrangement

Figure 3.2.1 Study Model – Aerial View

Figure 3.2.2 Site Plan

Figure 3.2.3 Site Massing Diagram

Figure 3.3.1 Street Layout Plan – Keyplan

Figure 3.3.2 Street Layout Plan – Sheet 1 of 6






Figure 3.3.8 Roadway Profiles – G and H Streets

Figure 3.3.9 Roadway Profiles – 6th and 7th Streets

Figure 3.4.1 Pedestrian Circulation

Figure 3.4.2 Bicycle Circulation

Figure 3.4.3 Transit Circulation

Figure 3.4.4 Automobile Circulation

Figure 3.5.1 Utility Diagram

Figure 3.7.1 SITF Federal Building Comprehensive Approach

Figure 4.3.1 Lower Level Concourse Plan

Figure 4.3.2 Ground Floor Plan

Figure 4.3.3 Second Floor Plan

Figure 4.3.4 Third Floor Plan

Figure 4.3.5 Roof Plan

Figure 4.3.6 Cross Section and Elevation

Figure 4.3.7 Lateral Section

Figure 4.3.8 Transit Garage Floor Plans




October 8, 2004

Figure 4.5.3 SITF Historic Review Process

Figure 5.1.1 SITF Project, Cost and Funding Schedules

Figure 5.2.1 Pre Construction Staging Condition - 1st Quarter 2005 to 1st Quarter 2010

Figure 5.2.2 Construction Phase 1 - 1st Quarter 2010 to 1st Quarter 2012

Figure 5.2.3 Construction Phase 2 - 1st Quarter 2012 to 3rd Quarter 2012

Figure 5.2.4 Construction Phase 3 - 3rd Quarter 2012 to 3rd Quarter 2013

Figure 5.2.5 Construction Phase 4 - 3rd Quarter 2013 to 1st Quarter 2015

Figure 5.2.6 Construction Phase 5 - 1st Quarter 2015 to 2nd Quarter 2015

Figure 5.2.7 Construction Phase 6 - 2nd Quarter 2015 to 2nd Quarter 2017

Figure 5.2.8 Construction Phase 7 - 4th Quarter 2016 to 2nd Quarter 2017

Figure 5.2.9 Construction Phase 8 - 2nd Quarter 2017 to 2nd Quarter 2019

Figure 5.3.1 SITF Costing Boundary

Figure 6.2.1 Alternative Phasing Approach - Pre Construction Staging Condition

Figure 6.2.2 Alternative Phasing Approach-Phase 1





Figure 6.6.1 Additional Potential Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements




October 8, 2004

Tables

Table 1.7.1 SITF Project Funding Sources

Table 1.7.2 SITF Funding for Debt Service

Table 2.5.1 Physical Capacity

Table 2.5.2 Operations

Table 2.5.3 Joint Development Criteria

Table 4.1.1 Achieved Transportation Program

Table 4.2.1 Achieved Terminal Building Program

Table 4.5.10 Recently Moved Historic Buildings

Table 5.1.1 Section A – Related Projects with Costs not included in SITF Project Costs

Table 5.1.1 Section B – Related Projects with Costs included in SITF Project Costs

Table 5.1.2 Construction Phases, Schedule and Cost

Table 5.1.3 Economic Model Summary



Table 5.2.1 SITF Project Schedule

Table 5.3.1 Preliminary Order of Magnitude Project Costs

Table 5.4.1 Summary of Project Costs and Funding Sources


Table 5.4.3 Funding Sources for Debt Service and Required Reserve Payments


Table 6.2.1 Alternative Phasing Strategy Schedule

Table 6.2.2 Comparison of Phasing Strategies




October 8, 2004

1 Executive Summary The development of the Railyards area and the Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility (SITF) presents a tremendous opportunity for Sacramento and the region, including the residents, transit agencies, stakeholders, property developers, and neighbors. SITF Technical Report #11 is the revised version of Working Paper #10 and reflects comments received. Responses to public comments on Working Paper #10 are presented in a new Section 6 in this Technical Report, and include an alternative phasing approach, discussion of potential scope reductions, and a brief discussion of proposed design modifications. This Report concludes the Concept Design phase of the SITF project, and presents the development of the “Sacramento Northern” alternative, presented in previous Working Papers and Technical Reports, as directed by the Sacramento City Council on March 16, 2004. It includes descriptions of the SITF, together with the results of additional investigations and design work completed after selection of the proposed project, including phasing plans and a summary cost estimate and financial model.

Technical Report #11 is the culmination of a public process that began in July 2003. The consultant team produced a series of Technical Reports and Working Papers that resulted in the selection of a proposed project from among the four alternatives presented. A full list of the project documents can be found following the Project Team section and are available on the project website at www.pwsacramento.com/sitf

The SITF is a project of great regional significance. It is envisioned as a regional transportation hub that incorporates as many transit services as possible to cater to both intercity and commuter passengers, and includes a major parking component. This vision seeks to maximize transit service, connectivity, and patronage. Successful completion of the project depends on establishing mutually beneficial public/private partnerships and partnerships among local and regional agencies and governments.

The City of Sacramento is the project sponsor for the work done to date. The City views the SITF as a regional project, and has incorporated input from regional stakeholders and transit agencies throughout the process, both through the REBAC (Regional Elected Body Advisory Committee) and the Stakeholder Working Groups. The City will continue to seek regional input and support as the project progresses in the next stages.

A number of refinements to the “Sacramento Northern” alternative have been made in response to comments by the City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review and Preservation Board, city staff, project stakeholders, and members of the general public, and encompass transit, design, implementation and financial issues.

The purpose of this report is to present the refined conceptual design and implementation plan for the proposed Sacramento Intermodal Transit Facility (SITF) project for public information, review and comment. Technical Report #11 is a work in progress and not a final design document, and presents an opportunity for project stakeholders to help shape the project design and implementation plan going forward. The concept presented here, identified in this report as the “proposed project”, together with other alternatives that meet the project goals and objectives, and that meet the requirements of the environmental review process, will be the subject of environmental review as the project proceeds into the next stage.

1.1 Response to Comments

In Working Paper 10 the proposed project was presented to the project stakeholders, public officials, and members of the public in a series of public meetings and open houses, as well as on the City’s website. Comments were solicited and form the basis for the potential proposed modifications presented in Section 6 of this report. In general, comments on Working Paper #10 can be grouped into several categories: phasing, scope and cost, funding, and governance and operations. This Technical Report includes a new Section 6 that




October 8, 2004

outlines possible modifications to the proposed project to address these concerns. There are four primary goals to the proposed modifications:

• Accelerated Project Delivery/Alternative Phasing Strategies

• Improved Interim Operations

• Project Cost Reductions

• Alternative Funding Strategies

Representative comments have been grouped by topic area, and are paraphrased and summarized below. All comments are available for viewing upon request at City offices.

Phasing and Timing

• Do tracks and Depot now. Coordinate with Millennia's schedule.

• It's a fatal flaw to wait until 2010 to break ground. The City needs to find a way to expedite this project and overall Railyards redevelopment.

• Construct the Depot foundation in Phase 1.

• Don't build the new terminal first. Keep the Historic Depot working. But we will need a new terminal eventually.

• Use the REA Building as a temporary depot while the Historic Depot is rehabilitated. Coordinate with REA development.

• Phase the rehabilitation work at the Historic Depot and start as soon as possible.

• Relocate the LRT station and tracks to SITF-designated locations and north of the H Street ROW in Phase 1. Start using as soon as the heavy rail tracks move.

Project Costs

• As financially planned, the project is counting on a lot of things to happen.

• The City needs to pin down the real cost of the entire project and related projects, explore all potential funding resources and partnerships and take another look at phasing strategies to provide for up-front costs and to keep the cash flow working throughout the project.

• Keep the cost of Phase 1 low.

• Scale the SITF back to a more modest project, one that might be implemented sooner.

• Discuss site acquisition and "related projects" costs.

Project Components and Design

• Pedestrian/bicycle underpasses should be part of the SITF. The same for a historic trolley and high speed rail.

• Develop above grade levels and connections that provide vistas of the river and Railyards.

• Move the Historic Depot close to the realigned tracks and place the new terminal over the tracks. Locate joint development between the Depot and H Street.

• Move the buses underground.

• Short range and long range, provide an additional access point at the west end of the SITF.

Governance

• The ultimate governance structure of the facility needs to be identified to make the best use of potential operation and regional partnerships.




October 8, 2004

An alternative phasing strategy is presented in response to stakeholder comments that provides several benefits to the project including:

• Reduces overall project costs

• Reduces construction duration

• Lowers Phase 1 costs

• Potentially reduces the dependence on debt financing

• Moves and reopens the Depot earlier

• Improved coordination with SITF and Millennia schedules

• The provision of a temporary terminal allows the heavy rail tracks to be relocated as part of the Millennia project with a lower cost first phase for the SITF project. Construction of the Terminal Extension would not be required in Phase 1.

• Provides improved flexibility for changes in phasing, including options to address a ‘worst-case’ implementation scenario where the heavy rail tracks are moved prior to the completion of other SITF components

• Shifting construction of the Terminal Extension to a later phase allows the SITF facilities to better match expected growth in passenger demand. That is, the additional capacity provided by the Terminal Extension is not provided until it is needed at a future date.

• Increases the design flexibility for the Terminal Extension to be modified to reflect future demand patterns, operational conditions and technology.

This strategy assumes a more aggressive schedule and an earlier start date than the base phasing plan, with the total construction duration reduced from 7.5 years to 6 years and the completion date for the SITF moved forward from 2017 to 2012. Further, the relocation of the Depot is moved forward in the construction sequence, from Phase 4 in the base plan to Phase 2 in the alternative strategy. Although the project would be completed in a shorter amount of time, the alternative phasing plan would result in a greater amount of disruption to passengers and operators. The alternative plan is also dependent on obtaining funding and environmental approvals earlier than previously assumed. The alternative phasing plan does not assume changes from the site plan shown in Figure 1.1.2, with the exception of a reduction in the scope of the related I-5 ramp reconfiguration project.

A number of potential scope reductions and cost savings are identified in this report. Project savings are primarily realized by possible acceleration of the construction schedule and identification of possible scope reductions to the SITF, including delaying construction and reducing the size and finish level of the Terminal Extension. Simplifying the I-5 ramp reconfiguration project and advancing the extension of 3rd Street and the 4th Street/I Street intersection allows implementation of improvements sooner and more cost effectively. Accelerating the start date and construction schedule requires that additional funding sources be identified, as currently identified funding sources only become available in 2010. Refinements to the funding plan include a discussion of the possibility of securing additional capital contributions from the operators in lieu of lease payments to reduce the need for debt funding. Additional potential funding sources are identified and alternate funding strategies are identified, including an aggressive effort by the project sponsors to secure earlier additional state and federal grants, and pursuing public/private partnership financing arrangements with the Railyards developers.

Several project governance and operations scenarios are also presented that will be useful as the project sponsors begin to address these important issues as the project moves into the next stage of development.




October 8, 2004

1.2 Purpose and Need for the Project

The Intermodal Facility is a key public project for Sacramento and the region, and will be a catalyst for the redevelopment of the 240-acre Railyards area. The Intermodal Project Team was tasked with the assignment of developing concept plans for an Intermodal Facility that would meet the transportation needs of the Sacramento region and the various transit operators planned through the year 2025. This work is summarized in Working Paper #5. Analysis of the existing facility, track and platform layouts, and joint development potential quickly showed major drawbacks with the current condition. In brief, the existing Facility is deficient in three key areas:

1. The Historic Depot is inadequate to meet the combined program needs of the operators, even with the inclusion of the REA building.

2. The existing rail alignments do not meet the operational and capacity requirements of the freight and passenger operators.

3. The current track location prevents the creation of viable north-south urban connections at 5th and 6th streets, restricts land available for transit functions, and severely limits opportunities for revenue-producing and transit-serving joint development.

Maintaining the existing platform locations and building a new freight mainline along the northern track alignments would further limit access to the site, restrict revenue-producing joint development and prohibit the creation of strong urban linkages between the Railyards area and the existing downtown core. For additional discussion of the project need, see Technical Report #1 and Technical Report #6.

1.3 Project Benefits

The proposed project offers significant benefits for Sacramento and the region. As a key element in the regional transportation network, the SITF will help:

• Create a state-of-the art regional transportation facility that meets the needs of transit users and operators through the year 2025 and beyond

• Increase local and regional transit use by bringing together disconnected elements of the transit network in a single regional hub

• Bring new life to the Historic Sacramento Valley Station (the “Historic Depot”) by establishing the Depot as part of the core facility of the SITF and continuing its historic use as a regional transit facility

• Make transit an increasingly viable option for local and regional users by increasing choices and service levels within this regional hub

• Play a key role in the region’s air quality strategy by helping decrease the region’s reliance on automobiles

• Improve main line heavy rail capacity and reliability, both passenger and freight, by reconfiguring the main line and platform tracks through the site

• Stimulate smart-growth in the downtown core by enhancing transit oriented development in the urban core

• Enhance tourism through improved access to Sacramento and the region with strengthened connections to the California State Railroad Museum, the proposed Railroad Technology Museum, and Old Sacramento

• Celebrate transit in the daily life of the region by creating a recognizable transit landmark




October 8, 2004

1.4 Terminology

For clarity, the report uses the following terminology: “SITF” is the Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility, the “proposed project” refers to the SITF design and implementation plan outlined in this report, the “Intermodal Planning Area” refers to the portion of the Railyards area in which the SITF is located, bounded by Central Shops to the north, 7th Street to the east, I Street to the south, and the Sacramento River to the west. (See Figure 1.1.1) “Intermodal Facility”, “Facility” or “SITF” refers to the entire facility complex including the passenger facilities, passenger rail platforms, other transit areas, parking, and major open spaces. The “Terminal Building” is composed of two integrally related components, the Historic Depot and the new Terminal Extension, and houses the primary passenger, transit, and transit-related joint development program areas, including ticketing and waiting areas, baggage handling, administrative functions, and joint development program elements. The “Historic Depot” or “Depot” is the existing Sacramento Valley Station Depot that currently serves rail and bus passengers on the project site.

1.5 Proposed Project

The project as presented here is an approximately 14 year, $226.2 million dollar transportation project planned to meet the projected transit needs of the City and the region through the year 2025, and anticipate future transit growth. The design is based on the “Sacramento Northern” alternative presented in Working Paper #8 and Technical Report #9. The project is illustrated in Figures 1.1.1 and 1.2.1 and in Sections 3 and 4. Key Features of the proposed project include:

• Moving, rehabilitation and re-use of the Historic Depot as a component of the core transit facility

• Integration of the Historic Depot into an expanded Terminal Facility

• Transit functions and transit-supportive joint development in the Historic Depot

• Transit-supportive retail and commercial joint development in the REA Building

• Grade-separated and weather-protected connection to the heavy-rail passenger platforms

• Covered heavy-rail passenger platforms

• Covered intercity bus loading areas with direct access to the Terminal Extension

• Landscaped local bus area immediately to the west of the Historic Depot

• Landscaped entry plaza and drop-off area

• Reconfigured I Street ramps to I-5 and the I-Street Bridge

• Reestablishment of a 4th Street pedestrian connection across I Street

• New landscaped public open spaces surrounding the SITF, including a new plaza at 5th and I Street to mirror the Federal Building Plaza

• Improved urban connectivity to the surrounding community and developments

• Improved pedestrian and bicycle access

• Vehicular access to the west side of the SITF site

• Full compliance with all appropriate ADA requirements

• Potential for a grade-separated connection to the Railroad Technology Museum and the Central Shops area

• Dedicated transit parking and additional shared transit parking in the proposed Railyards development




October 8, 2004

• Re-aligned railroad ROW with accommodations for future high-speed rail structures above the grade-level ROW

• On-going coordination between the Intermodal Planning Team, the City, and the Federal Building stakeholders to address the special security and operational concerns of the Federal Building. Priorities for the Federal Building representatives include shifting the DNA light rail tracks north of H Street between 5th and 6th Streets, completion of the DNA light rail alignment as quickly as possible in the vicinity of the Federal Building, and completion of the 3rd Street extension as quickly as possible. Additional measures to address Federal Building concerns are described in Section 3.7 of this report

The project relocates the entire Historic Depot approximately 350’ north along an extension of the historic 4th street axis and integrates it into a compact and highly functional new Terminal Building. Moving the Depot maintains its historic relationship to a heavy rail alignment relocated to the northern project boundary. This alignment accommodates planned rail service growth and improves rail operations.

The design of the SITF is as compact as possible to facilitate intermodal transfers, minimize travel distances, and maximize the synergy and integration of the both the Depot and its extension. The Terminal Extension to the north of the Historic Depot provides passenger and service areas with optimized intermodal connectivity between rail, intercity bus, and LRT services. A generous under-track concourse connection provides direct access to the heavy rail platforms and eliminates the need for platform elevators and escalators. Passengers arriving by train will enter a great new hall, where the primary focal point will be the north wall of the Historic Depot that features the re-opening of the original passenger portals leading to the historic waiting room to allow for easy movement between old and new. From most vantage points, both interior and exterior, the old and new will be seen together.

Passenger pick-up and drop-off are located in an attractive landscaped public transit plaza in front of the Depot. Light Rail platforms are located on the east side of the Facility with direct connections to the Terminal Building, bus areas, and rail platforms. A landscaped local bus area with dedicated off-street loading bays is provided immediately to the west of the Historic Depot.

The Historic Depot is revitalized as the core facility and main SITF entry and the historic passenger processional from 4th Street through the Depot is restored. The Depot is programmed with a grand waiting area, ticketing and transit information, passenger amenities and transit-supportive joint development on the ground floor. Additional transit, passenger functions, passenger amenities and transit supportive joint development are located in the Terminal Extension. Upper levels of the Terminal Building are programmed with administrative spaces and revenue-producing joint development to offset operating costs. Careful massing, using a barrel vault roof that respects the height of the existing Depot, ensures that the addition contains lofty new spaces compatible with the existing Depot. The Terminal Building is compact and highly functional, with excellent intermodal connectivity and a clear, intuitive hierarchy of public spaces, with direct connections south to the existing downtown core, north to the Railyards area, west to the Sacramento River, and east along the H Street axis.

Moving the Depot north permits the downtown street grid to be extended by two blocks, creating development opportunities that reinforce linkages with downtown and improve street connectivity. The Facility terminates an extended 4th Street axis, with new revenue-generating development on the existing Depot site framing views from I Street to the Depot and facing a major new public open space in front of the Depot. The new development is compatible in scale and massing with the Depot and will be designed to address the special security and operational concerns of the Federal Building. A new open space at 5th and I Street mirrors the Federal Building plaza and enhances the REA Building, and new public plazas in front and to the east frame the Terminal Building. Transit parking, REA Building Parking and joint development parking is provided in a 6-level garage on H Street west of 4th Street, and includes transit-serving ground-floor joint development facing the plazas. Additional shared transit parking is provided in the proposed Railyards development adjacent to the




October 8, 2004

Terminal Building. The REA building is programmed with transit-serving retail on the ground floor and commercial space on the second floor. This alternative generally accommodates the Railyards development proposals as currently understood, with some modifications to accommodate the Intermodal Facility.

In the proposed project, 5th and 6th Streets cross over the heavy rail tracks, 7th Street crosses under the heavy rail tracks, and H Street is extended west to the Sacramento River.

The rail alignment generally conforms to the alignment proposed by Union Pacific in coordination with the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority. After preliminary design analysis, this alignment appears to accommodate three dedicated UP freight lines and two approximately 1200’ passenger platforms.

1.6 Design Refinements

A number of design refinements have been made to the “Sacramento Northern” alternative in response to comments by the City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review and Preservation Board, city staff, project stakeholders, and members of the general public, and area incorporated into the proposed project. A massing study revealed that a previously proposed transit parking garage located to the west of the Depot would overwhelm the historic Depot. Following discussions with the proposed Railyards developer, the parking spaces planned for this garage were relocated into the Railyards project in the parcel immediately east of the SITF. This creates the opportunity to have shared parking within the Railyards project, maximizing the efficiency of parking spaces. Another benefit is a better distribution of SITF-related traffic, reducing impacts and congestion by moving a portion of the traffic away from the front of the Depot. A secondary benefit is the synergy between the Millennia development and the transit patrons who park in the garage. The underground parking previously proposed for the current Depot site has been replaced with an above-grade transit and joint development garage. This structure buffers the open space from the freeway and like the adjacent joint development has a continuous retail frontage on the ground floor that lines the public open space with transit-serving joint development.

Meetings with the transit operators resulted in changes designed to improve the passenger experience, especially where transfers were concerned. The relocation of some transit modes maximizes the visibility and connectivity of the facility. Both the Greyhound and Amtrak Thruway buses were moved to the north side of the Terminal Building to improve the passenger transfer experience and minimize back-tracking. This change also permits the connection of the proposed SITF transit way (for buses and light rail) north of the Terminal Building to the intersection of F Street and 7th Street. To create an open vista to the front of the Historic Depot, the local buses were moved to the west of the Depot. Added benefits of this change are segregating the bus circulation from the automobile circulation related to the passenger drop off and avoiding the need for pedestrians to cross multiple traffic lanes to reach the Depot front door.

1.7 Implementation

An 8-phase construction phasing plan is presented (Section 5.2) that will allow implementation of the proposed SITF project while maintaining continuous operation of the Facility. Assuming funding is in place, construction is assumed to begin in early 2010, with the SITF completed in mid 2017 and adjacent joint development and public open space completed in early 2019. See Fig. 1.1.3 for a description of the major phase elements. Project development and Phase 1 of the project is estimated to cost approximately $89 million dollars, and includes completion of the programmatic environmental review process and other project development tasks, construction of the heavy rail alignment (by others), platforms and platform connections, the Terminal Extension, intercity bus boarding area, and temporary passenger vehicle and RT bus areas.




October 8, 2004

An alternative phasing strategy has been also been developed (Section 6.2) that would provide numerous benefits to project and address stakeholder comments.

The order of magnitude estimate for the SITF project construction cost is approximately $226.2 million dollars. This includes construction costs, construction cost contingencies, and construction soft costs. Major components that are included in the project cost include:

• New Terminal Building, including the new Terminal Extension and a relocated and renovated Historic Depot

• Heavy rail passenger platforms, access, and canopies

• Intercity and local bus facilities

• Relocated LRT platform and tracks

• Transit and commuter parking facilities

• Site improvements and public space landscaping, including open space landscaping, new plaza opposite Federal Building, and new open spaces on current Depot site

• Site utilities

• Street improvements

• Temporary facilities

• Design contingencies and soft costs

The SITF project is the public centerpiece of the new Railyards development, and successful SITF completion requires a successful Railyards redevelopment effort and additional financial contributions from public and private partners for certain related projects or actions not included in the SITF project costs. These projects are generally distinctly separate from the SITF but are relied on in the SITF implementation plan. Costs for these elements will be considerable, and funding sources will need to be identified to successfully realize the SITF. Additional costs not included in the SITF project cost include:

• SITF site acquisition

• Freight and passenger track relocation and remediation work

• I-5 freeway on-ramp reconfiguration

• Completion of the second pedestrian tunnel

• Roadway work on 5th, 6th, and 7th Streets

• Expansion of the LRT DNA line

• Interim Greyhound relocation

For discussion of these elements, see the Implementation Section 5.1.

An economic model for the project is included in this report, evaluating financial needs of both the development and operating phases of the facility. Development phase costs (design and construction) will be funded through a combination of Federal and State grants, Measure A funds, Countywide Impact Fees, Tax Increment, Transportation Impact Fees and debt (including TFIA loans and bonds). The following chart illustrates anticipated funding sources for each year of the design and construction process. This chart illustrates a shortfall in funding in years 2006 and 2007 totaling approximately $1 million, identified as “Other Subsidies.” This shortfall will need to be filled to enable the initial design and environmental activities to be completed.




October 8, 2004

SITF Project Funding Sources

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Ann

ual P

roje

ct C

osts

(Mill

ions

)

Other Subsidies

Debt

Federal/State Grants

Countywide Impact Fees

Measure A Funds

Tax Increment

Transportation Impact Fees


During the operating phase of the facility, operating income will be generated by joint development leases, transit leases, and parking revenue. This income will be used to pay operating costs and debt service on the debt accrued during the development phase. The operating income will be supplemented by ongoing Transportation Impact Fees, Tax Increment and limited Measure A funds to cover the debt service. The economic model forecasts operating cash flow shortfalls in the early operating years of 2015 through 2018. After 2019, increasing net operating income and additional available tax increment are adequate to cover operating requirements for the remainder of the period of indebtedness. The shortfall is a total of nearly $10 million dollars, with specific shortfalls indicated as “Other Subsidies” in the following chart:




October 8, 2004

SITF Funding for Debt Service

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

2031

2032

2033

2034

2035

2036

2037

2038

2039

2040

2041

2042

2043

2044

Ann

ual D

ebt S

ervi

ce (M

illion

s)Other Subsidies

Tax Increment

Measure A Funds

TransportationImpact Fees

Reserves fromPrevious Year

Net OperatingIncome


This shortfall can be addressed by a combination of:

• Cost reductions in the 5 to 10% range through value engineering

• Exploration of additional grant or local funding

• Increased revenue opportunities from transit partners or fees

• Structuring debt to defer partial payments in the early years until adequate cash flows can be established

Beyond solving the identified funding shortfalls, the primary risks to the financial feasibility of this project are:

• Securing land and track relocations without incurring direct costs to the project

• Reconfiguring the I-5 interchange from other funding sources to enable transit parking and joint development on the current Historic Depot site

• Development of a viable Railyards program to establish a critical mass of economic activity

• Capturing market rents from all tenants

• Securing anticipated levels of grants and local funding

• Achieving passage of Measure A, Countywide Impact Fees and amendments to secure extension of redevelopment Tax Increments an additional 10 years

• Managing project scope and cost growth

• Obtaining debt financing on favorable terms

These issues should be tested rigorously to identify and mitigate risks while continuing to pursue other potential sources of funding and financial support. Each of these items is critical to the financial viability of the




October 8, 2004

project. Financial success relies on strong public support and the ability of the team to secure expected performance in each of these critical areas.

1.8 The SITF Process

The SITF Project is a multi-year, three-stage project. Stage 1 consists of conceptual SITF programming, design and implementation planning, as well as preliminary roadway engineering and traffic studies. In Stage 1, the SITF has been developed in a public process designed to encourage input and solicit comments from the public, transit operators, project stakeholders, and local and regional public agencies and officials, including the REBAC and the Sacramento City Council, through public open houses, stakeholder working groups, and other public meetings. Partners with the City of Sacramento working on the SITF include the Railyards developers (Millennia), Union Pacific, Regional Transit, REA Partners, and the Railroad Museum. Transit operators, including Amtrak/CCJPA, Greyhound, Regional Transit, and Yolobus provided input through the Stakeholder Working Groups.

As part of the process, the consultant team presented distinct yet functional SITF alternatives for consideration and comment. The alternatives were measured against the project goals and evaluation criteria, outlined in Technical Report #6, to reach consensus on an Intermodal Transportation Facility for Sacramento and the region. All schemes were subject to a rigorous evaluation that included functional, fiscal, phasing, and operational analyses. Ultimately the schemes were evaluated for their consistency with the development goals of greater Sacramento and the “Sacramento Northern” alternative was chosen for further study as the proposed SITF project. See Technical Report #9 for a description and evaluation of the project alternatives and the recommendations for the proposed project.

Following public review and comment of Working Paper #10, the consultant team has identified potential scope and design revisions and an alternative implementation plan that will be presented to the City Council for approval in this Technical Report #11. See Section 6 for additional information. This will conclude Stage 1 of SITF project.

Following the completion of Stage 1, the project will proceed into Stage 2, environmental review. The review will consist of a program level environmental document subject to CEQA, and project specific environmental review subject to CEQA and/or NEPA. In addition to the proposed project presented here, multiple alternatives that satisfy the goals of the SITF project and the requirements of the environmental process will be considered as part of the environmental assessments. Reviews will be conducted as required by the various funding sources, and are anticipated to takes several years. Historic review and approval will be conducted as part of the environmental review. See Section 4.5 for more discussion of historic issues. Right of way engineering may also be completed during the environmental review process. Upon completion of the environmental review process, and successful acquisition of project funding, the SITF will proceed into Stage 3, final design and project construction. Right of way acquisition and final design will occur during Stage 3.

The SITF process has been proceeding during UP’s negotiations with Millennia, the proposed Railyards developer. At the direction of Council, the SITF project assumes that the Millennia Railyards project will be completed, and is therefore designed to accommodate the Millennia’s plans as currently understood, with some modifications.

Proj

ect

Are

aEx

istin

g C

ondi

tions

Inte

rmod

al

Inte

rmod

al

Plan

ning

Are

aPl

anni

ng A

rea

SACRAMENTO INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION FACILITY

Project Area and Existing Conditions

Figure 1.1.1

8 October 2004

Clie

nt

City

of

Sacr

amen

to

Co

nsu

ltan

t Te

am

SMW

M/A

rup

Aca

nthu

s

CH

S C

onsu

lting

Gro

up

CH

2MH

ill

Han

scom

b Fa

ithfu

l & G

ould

The

Hoy

t C

ompa

ny

Jone

s La

ng L

asal

le

LTK

Eng

inee

ring

Serv

ices

Nel

son/

Nyg

aard

Sim

pson

Gum

pert

z &

Heg

er, I

nc.

arch

itec

ture

inte

rio

rsp

lan

nin

gg

rap

hic

des

ign N

Inte

rmod

alPl

anni

ngA

rea

CA

PITO

LM

ALL

CA

PITO

LM

ALL

HIS

TORI

CD

EPO

T

STAT

EC

API

TOL

SACRAMENT

O

RI

VE

R

Clie

nt

City

of

Sacr

amen

to

Co

nsu

ltan

t Te

am

SMW

M/A

rup

Aca

nthu

s

CH

S C

onsu

lting

Gro

up

CH

2MH

ill

Han

scom

b Fa

ithfu

l & G

ould

The

Hoy

t C

ompa

ny

Jone

s La

ng L

asal

le

LTK

Eng

inee

ring

Serv

ices

Nel

son/

Nyg

aard

Sim

pson

Gum

pert

z &

Heg

er, I

nc.

arch

itec

ture

inte

rio

rsp

lan

nin

gg

rap

hic

des

ign


Site Plan

Figure 1.1.2

8 October 2004

0

50'

100'

150'

200'

N

Task

Act

ivit

ySI

TF P

roje

ct a

nd

Co

st S

ched

ule

SITF

Pro

ject

Fu

nd

ing

So

urc

es a

nd

Sch

edu

le

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2005

51015202530354045 020

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

1120

1220

1320

1420

1520

1620

1720

1820

19

Pro

ject

Dev

elo

pm

ent:

Co

mp

lete

pro

gra

mm

atic

envi

ron

men

tal p

roce

ss, f

un

din

g p

rocu

rem

ent,

pro

per

ty a

cqu

isit

ion

, pre

limin

ary

eng

inee

rin

g,

coo

rdin

atio

n w

ith

UPR

R, P

UC

an

d u

tilit

ies

Phas

e 1:

Co

nst

ruct

hea

vy r

ail r

ealig

nm

ent

(by

oth

ers)

,p

latf

orm

s, c

ano

pie

s, p

edes

tria

n t

un

nel

, Ter

min

alEx

ten

sio

n, i

nte

rcit

y b

us

bo

ard

ing

are

a, t

emp

ora

ryp

asse

ng

er v

ehic

le a

nd

RT

bu

s p

ick-

up

/ d

rop

-off

are

a

Phas

e 2:

Rem

ove

exi

stin

g h

eavy

rai

l tra

cks

and

co

mp

lete

so

il re

med

iati

on

(b

y o

ther

s), t

emp

ora

rytr

ansi

t w

ay

Phas

e 3:

Co

nst

ruct

sin

gle

LR

T tr

ack

and

pla

tfo

rm w

ith

two

sto

rag

e tr

acks

, co

nst

ruct

fo

un

dat

ion

fo

r n

ew

Dep

ot

loca

tio

n, s

eism

ic r

etro

fit

Dep

ot,

co

nst

ruct

par

kin

g s

pac

es in

Mill

enn

ia s

tru

ctu

re

Phas

e 4:

Rem

ove

dis

use

d L

RT

Am

trak

ext

ensi

on

, mo

vean

d f

inis

h D

epo

t

Phas

e 5:

Co

nst

ruct

H S

tree

t ex

ten

sio

n, p

asse

ng

erp

ick-

up

/ d

rop

-off

are

a, R

T o

n-s

tree

t b

us

bay

s,la

nd

scap

ing

an

d t

emp

ora

ry p

arki

ng

so

uth

of

H S

tree

t

Leg

end

: Oth

er S

ub

sid

ies

Deb

t

Fed

eral

/ St

ate

Gra

nts

Co

un

tryw

ide

Imp

act

Fees

Mea

sure

A F

un

ds

Tax

Incr

emen

t

Tran

spo

rtat

ion

Imp

act

Fees

Phas

e 6:

Rec

on

fig

ure

I-5

Ram

ps

(rel

ated

pro

ject

by

oth

ers-

cost

no

t in

clu

ded

in S

ITF

pro

ject

co

sts)

Phas

e 7:

Co

mp

lete

loca

l bu

s fa

cilit

y, R

EA /

Fed

eral

Bu

ildin

g P

laza

Phas

e 8:

Co

nst

ruct

par

kin

g s

tru

ctu

re, J

oin

tD

evel

op

men

t (b

y o

ther

s), 4

th S

tree

t se

gm

ent,

an

dp

ub

lic p

laza

so

uth

of

H S

tree

t

Co

st $

8.4m

Phas

e 6

Co

nst

ruct

ion

(By

oth

ers)

Leg

end

Pre

Co

nst

ruct

ion

Act

ivit

yC

on

stru

ctio

n A

ctiv

ity

Co

st $

12.5

m

Co

st $

68.6

m

Co

st $

490,

000

Co

st $

55.5

m Co

st $

20.2

m

Co

st $

9.1m

Co

st $

7.6m

Co

st $

22.8

m

Co

st $

90,0

00

Co

st $

10.1

m Co

st $

3.7m

$39.

1m

(By

oth

ers)

Co

st $

1.7m C

ost

$1.

4m Co

st $

4.1m

Annual Project Cost ($ millions)

$1.0

m$2

.3m

$2.3

m

$7.6

m$7

.6m

$38.

0m$3

8.3m

$31.

8m

$13.

0m$1

1.0m

$7.0

m

$16.

1m

$8.8

m

$2.2

mar

chit

ectu

rein

teri

ors

pla

nn

ing

gra

ph

ic d

esig

n

Clie

nt

City

of

Sacr

amen

to

Co

nsu

ltan

t Te

am

SMW

M/A

rup

Aca

nthu

s

CH

S C

onsu

lting

Gro

up

CH

2MH

ill

Han

scom

b Fa

ithfu

l & G

ould

The

Hoy

t C

ompa

ny

Jone

s La

ng L

asal

le

LTK

Eng

inee

ring

Serv

ices

Nel

son/

Nyg

aard

Sim

pson

Gum

pert

z &

Heg

er, I

nc.


SITF Project, Cost and Funding Schedules

Figure 1.1.3

8 October 2004

arch

itec

ture

inte

rio

rsp

lan

nin

gg

rap

hic

des

ign




October 8, 2004

2 Introduction The City of Sacramento is reinventing the Railyards as a vibrant, active, and urban district with the SITF as its centerpiece. The proposed northern track alignment required for modern rail and future high speed rail will permit the expansion of Sacramento’s historic street grid and the creation of a new transit-oriented, mixed-use infill neighborhood in the abandoned historic Railyards. The historic role of the Southern Pacific Depot as Sacramento’s center of rail transportation will be retained by an extraordinary action: the physical move of the Depot. This will insure that the Depot retains its historic use as a rail transportation facility, while also becoming an integral part of an expanded regional transit hub serving the city and the region. The historic relationship of the Depot to the city, which has been marginalized by the addition of freeway ramps, surface parking and the loss of its historic axial approach, will be restored. The SITF will face a great new public space, activated by new development and providing a new open space for the City.

The Sacramento City Council selected the Sacramento Northern concept for continued development on March 16, 2004. The concept presented here, together with other alternatives that meet the project goals and objectives, and that meet the requirements of the environmental review process, will be the subject of environmental review as the project proceeds into the next stage. A number of refinements to the “Sacramento Northern” alternative have been made in response to comments by the City Council, Planning Commission, Design Review Board, City Staff, project stakeholders, and members of the general public, and encompass transit, design, implementation and financial issues.

2.1 Terminology

For clarity, the report uses the following terminology: “SITF” is the Sacramento Intermodal Transportation Facility, the “proposed project” refers to the preferred SITF design and implementation plan outlined in this report, the “Intermodal Planning Area” refers to the portion of the Railyards area in which the SITF is located, bounded by Central Shops to the north, 7th Street to the east, I Street to the south, and the Sacramento River to the west. (See Figure 1.1.1) “Intermodal Facility”, “Facility” or “SITF” refers to the entire facility complex including passenger facilities, heavy rail platforms, other transit areas, parking, and major open spaces. The “Terminal Building” is composed of two integrally related components, the Historic Depot and the new Terminal Extension, and houses the primary passenger, transit, and transit-related joint development program areas, including ticketing and waiting areas, baggage handling, administrative functions, and joint development program elements. The “Historic Depot” is the existing Sacramento Valley Station Depot that currently serves rail and bus passengers on the project site.

2.2 Need for the Project

The Intermodal Facility is a key public project for Sacramento and the region, and will be a catalyst for the redevelopment of the 240-acre Railyards area. The Intermodal Project Team was tasked with the assignment of developing concept plans for an Intermodal Facility that would meet the transportation needs of the Sacramento region and the various transit operators planned through the year 2025. Analysis of the existing facility, track and platform layouts, and joint development potential quickly showed major drawbacks with the current condition. In brief, the existing Facility is deficient in three important areas:

1. The Historic Depot is inadequate to meet the combined program needs of the operators, even with the inclusion of the REA building.

2. The existing rail alignments do not meet the operational and capacity requirements of the freight and passenger operators.




October 8, 2004

3. The current track location prevents the creation of viable north south urban connections at 5th and 6th streets, restricts land available for transit functions, and severely limits opportunities for revenue-producing and transit-serving joint development.

Maintaining the existing platform locations and building a new freight mainline along the northern track alignments would further limit access to the site, restrict revenue-producing joint development and prohibit the creation of strong urban linkages between the Railyards area and the existing downtown core. For additional discussion of the project need, see Technical Report #1.

2.3 Project Benefits

The proposed project offers significant benefits for Sacramento and the region. As a key element in the regional transportation network, the SITF will help:

• Create a state-of-the art regional transportation facility that meets the needs of transit users and operators through the year 2025 and beyond

• Increase local and regional transit use by bringing together disconnected elements of the transit network in a single regional hub

• Bring new life to the Historic Sacramento Valley Station (the “Historic Depot”) by establishing the Depot as part of the core facility of the SITF and continuing its historic use as a regional transit facility

• Make transit an increasingly viable option for local and regional users by increasing choices and service levels within this regional hub

• Play a key role in the region’s air quality strategy by helping decrease the region’s reliance on automobiles

• Improve main line heavy rail capacity and reliability, both passenger and freight, by reconfiguring the main line and platform tracks through the site

• Stimulate smart-growth in the downtown core by enhancing transit oriented development in the urban core

• Enhance tourism through improved access to Sacramento and the region with strengthened connections to the California State Railroad Museum, the proposed Railroad Technology Museum, and Old Sacramento

• Celebrate transit in the daily life of the region by creating a recognizable transit landmark

2.4 Regional Significance

The SITF is a project of great regional significance. It is envisioned as a regional transportation hub that incorporates as many transit services as possible to cater to both intercity and commuter passengers, and includes a major parking component. This vision seeks to maximize transit service, connectivity, and patronage. Successful completion of the project depends on establishing mutually beneficial public/private partnerships and partnerships among local and regional agencies and governments.

Features of the SITF that enhance its role as a regional transportation hub include:

• High levels of planned service at the site by all the numerous modes that currently or in the future are planned for Sacramento, including Amtrak rail and bus; Capitol Corridor trains, regional rail, California High Speed Rail, Greyhound, RT bus and light rail transit (LRT), other local transit operators, shuttle services and others. This is why it is called an “intermodal” or “multi-modal” facility.

• Compact and easy-to-navigate layout that facilitates transfers between the same service and different modes.




October 8, 2004

• Amenities geared to transportation users, such as food services, travel planning, commuter parking and specialized services.

• Efficient, state-of–the-art transportation and support facilities at a single location shared by several transit operators. Combining operational benefits with providing more scheduled service and connections results in higher usage all around. The service offered and the users would be mutually supportive and result in a more successful facility.

• The SITF is located at the historic and geographic center of the region: at the confluence of the Sacramento and American Rivers, the crossroads of the major rail lines, and the interchange of major interstate highways; midway between the Sierras and the Bay, at the juncture of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys, and at the starting point of the nation's first transcontinental railroad, the SITF offers unparalleled access to the regional transportation network.

SITF Connects Communities

In considering where people are and where they want to go, more people will “go through” the SITF, whether they are traveling for daily work, business trips or pleasure. This would occur because service will be routed from outlying points to the hub at the SITF. At the hub, service would more frequent and connections easier than at any other place in the region.

By using the transportation scheduled through the facility, riders would be one or two transfers away from regional and worldwide destinations. On the first leg of a trip, car, bus, LRT or bicycle would be used to leave local neighborhoods and towns to connect to regional service at the SITF. For example, currently LRT goes to South Sacramento, Rancho Cordova and out the I-80 Corridor. In 2005, the system will extend to Folsom and to the Depot, the precursor of the SITF. Additionally, Auburn, Roseville and other Placer County towns would connect via Amtrak and local buses to SITF. Yolo County residents would travel via local bus and Amtrak to the SITF.

Regional service at the SITF, such as Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) trains, regional rail, Amtrak trains/ buses, and Greyhound buses will transport people to destinations that are a few hours distant. While the CCJPA operates between Auburn and Bay Area cities, Greyhound and/or Amtrak serve Valley cities such as Stockton, Redding and Fresno. Also, Amtrak and bus operators offer ties to destinations like Yosemite, Tahoe, Reno, casinos and ski resorts.

Through SITF connections, travelers could cross the continent via Amtrak and Greyhound. Worldwide, national and statewide travel could also be one connection away through airport shuttles to Sacramento International Airport and Bay Area airports. In the future, the Downtown Natomas Airport (DNA) LRT line will take people to the Sacramento airport while the California High Speed Rail will whisk riders to destinations in Southern California as well as the Bay Area.

The same is true in reverse. Through the SITF, the world, nation and region can connect to Sacramento, valley and foothills communities. Furthermore, each trip would be more direct, faster, and convenient by going through the connections at the SITF. This transportation center would be a regional facility in the same way as the airport or the freeways.

SITF Improves Regional Choice and Quality of Life

When an increasing percentage of trips go through the SITF, the ensuing better service will result in making transit an increasingly feasible choice. People will not have to schedule work, visits or meetings around transit. They can have a full workday or a full day of activities and use SITF-routed transit as their means of travel.

The entire Sacramento region is one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the United States. As local roadways and interstate freeways get more crowded, travel times increase, and delays become commonplace.




October 8, 2004

Using transit helps to improve congestion and air quality. In turn, personal quality of life can be maintained or even improved.

In that the SITF provides a real means to attract people to transit, it can be an important factor in the region’s air quality strategy. Its development could help the region achieve measurable air quality gains and avoid sanctions.

Having a regional transportation hub is increasingly a component in many siting decisions for corporations, firms, conventions and meetings. It is also a factor in fostering the mobility of many individuals who choose not to or cannot drive.

The SITF will be a landmark facility with a solid nucleus of joint development that will offer choices in shops, restaurants, offices and other facilities. This identity, joined with convenient transportation options and access to destinations, will attract development. It will have high volumes of people flowing through it that will further attract development.

In addition, the SITF will be the gateway to regional destinations, such as the State Capitol and offices, Federal Building and agencies, the Mexican Consul, Old Sacramento, the California State Railroad Museum and other State museums, the Convention Center and Community theater, Crocker Art Gallery, the Sacramento Zoo and countless other varied cultural, business and tourist attractions. It also will provide easy access to Sacramento financial institutions and office centers, major retail shopping centers, entertainment centers and unique districts that are downtown and beyond.

Having the SITF as a landmark also brings respectability to transit alternatives as well as greater use and viability. In this role, it will be similar to Grand Central Station in New York City, Union Station in Washington, D.C., Union Station in Los Angeles and the Ferry Building and future Transbay Terminal in San Francisco.

2.5 Project Goals and Objectives

The project goals and objectives have been previously defined in the evaluation criteria presented in Working Paper #5. The evaluation criteria are shown in the following table:

2.5.1 Physical Capacity Criteria Objectives

1. Transportation Program A. Meets current and projected demand for transit, paratransit, and freight operations.

B. Meets current and projected demand for transit vehicle loading, layover, storage and servicing.

C. Meets projected space needs for passengers.

2. Expandability A. Accommodates expansion of the facility over time to meet growth in demand beyond the planning horizon

B. Limits the amount of disruption and demolition required for subsequent expansion. Allows operations to continue while under construction.

C. Provides flexibility to add new transit services or connections at the facility.




October 8, 2004

2.5.2 Operations 1. Transit Operations A. Meets the distinct operational requirements of the operators.

B. Provides efficient circulation (minimizes distance and time) for transit vehicles within the facility and on the adjacent roadway network.

C. Establishes flexible space for circulation, parking, and support services that can be shared where appropriate and adapted over time.

2. Pedestrian Access A. Provides safe, accessible, and convenient pedestrian circulation within the facility.

B. Provides safe, accessible, and convenient pedestrian connections between the facility and surrounding areas.

3. Bicycle Access A. Provides safe and convenient bicycle connections between the facility and surrounding areas.

B. Provides adequate bicycle parking facilities.

4. Automobile Access A. Provides adequate curb length to accommodate pick-up and drop-off activity by private vehicles and taxis.

B. Provides adequate parking to support the transit functions of the Facility.

C. Provides efficient circulation (minimizes distance and time) for automobiles within the facility and on the adjacent roadway network.

5. Intermodal Connectivity A. Optimizes intermodal connections by providing convenient and attractive access between modes, including minimizing travel distances, vertical level changes and roadway or track crossings, and providing visual connections and wayfinding signage.

B. Improves connections between existing operators and adds new connections to other modes not directly provided at the facility.

2.5.3 Joint Development Evaluation Criteria Criteria Objectives

1. Transit Program Compatibility A. Does not unreasonably constrain opportunities for a functionally optimized transit facility

B. Compatible with current and planned freight operations and Railroad Museum operations

C. Increases peak and off-peak transit ridership by incorporating transit oriented development

D. Increases opportunities for off-peak and backhaul ridership 2. Phasing Impacts A. Allows phased/incremental development of commercial areas

B. Facility can be continuously operational during construction C. Does not conflict with phased implementation of transit

components D. Is flexible to allow for market changes

3. Funding Potentials & Fiscal Impacts

A. Is fundable using identifiable funding sources B. Produces revenues that reduce the public cost of facility

rehabilitation/construction C. Reduces public cost of facility operations D. Does not increase net operating cost of facility




October 8, 2004

4. Site Impacts A. Improves site circulation and access B. Improves connectivity over planned rail lines C. Improves connectivity between existing and new site

development D. Allows the segregation of transit intensive areas from

commercial areas E. Maximizes potentials for shared support facilities, including

parking and vertical circulation 5. Urban Context Impacts A. Improves pedestrian and bicycle safety and access to the SITF

B. Increases number of people accessing the facility via all modes C. Is integrated in every direction with the surrounding

neighborhoods and destinations including the Railyards development, the Railroad Museum, the riverfront, Old

Sacramento, the Federal Courthouse, and other major nearby destinations.

D. Facility Joint Development and Railyards development should not produce disproportionate negative impacts on surrounding neighborhoods

E. Minimizes negative impacts of grade-separated crossings F. Maximizes north-south and east-west urban connectivity

6. Urban Design Potential A. Creates an architecturally significant place/address for the SITF B. Is compatible with the scale, massing, materials, and

architectural and landscape elements of the surrounding development

C. Allows mixed pedestrian access 7. Historic Facilities opportunities and constraints

A. Meets the criteria of the “Principles of Agreement Related to the Sacramento Intermodal Station, May 17, 2001” for use of the Historic Depot and REA buildings

B. Uses the unique historic architectural and cultural features of the Depot and REA building to maximize transit-serving joint development opportunities (see Section 8 for more information)

C. Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for renovation and/or adaptive re-use.

D. Meet’s the requirements of the City of Sacramento’s Historic Preservation Ordinance

E. Gains approval of the State Historic Preservation Office 8. Incremental Traffic and Site Circulation Impacts

A. Meets the traffic and transit circulation goals and objectives of the city at each development phase.

2.6 Content and Organization

This document presents the refined design of the proposed project for the SITF. It includes the results of additional investigations and design work completed after selection of the concept.

This report includes the following sections:

Section 1. Executive Summary

Section 2. Introduction

Section 3. Site Design. Includes information on the heavy rail alignment, urban design and landscape, roadways, circulation, utilities and hazardous materials.




October 8, 2004

Section 4. Terminal Design. Presents the design for the Historic Depot and Terminal Extension, including the transit and building programs, descriptions and illustrations of the terminal design, and discussion of historic preservation issues.

Section 5. Implementation. Includes the proposed phasing plan, order of magnitude cost estimate and summary financing plan, as well as a discussion of project risks.

Appendixes are available through the City including the detail cost estimate and financial model.

TR # 11 Proposed SITF Project - City of Sacramento

Documents

Transcript of TR # 11 Proposed SITF Project - City of Sacramento