Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7.A <br />Page 38 <br /> <br />Group 6 - challenges <br />Aerial <br />. Will cause shadows <br />. Noisel vibration concerns <br />. Decibel levels not kn'own <br />o Example: BART is not as quiet as forecasted <br />. Track will be dose to houses <br />. Would freight stay on Caltrain track? <br />Trench (covered/uncovered) <br />. Concern about impact on residences <br />. Costs go up with trench <br />. Are 4 tracks necessary, can we use only 2? <br />. Are tracks functional for both? <br />. Noise bounces off walls <br />. Costs <br />o How much fronl taxpayers <br />. How much open/ how much closed <br />. Concern that this does not change or interfere with Redwood City <br />oWe want what is best for our city <br /> <br />3. What other c01nbinations 'lvould you like to be studied? <br /> <br />Group 1 - other combinations to study <br />. Stacking in covered trench <br />. Hybrid low berm <br /> <br />Group 2 - other combinations to study <br />. Double track cut/cover box <br />o Double track in tunnel (deep tunnel is best option) <br />o Sheet #11 of 24 on combination draft typical sections HSRA document <br />of 3/24/10 <br />. 67' right of way <br />o Double track cut and cover all under-ground <br />o Box 'with double track in tunnel <br />. Double covered trench <br /> <br />Group 3 - other combinations to study <br />. Note: there is a problem \vith the approach: integrate Caltrain with HSR. <br />Convert Caltrain to express trains. This is so trains could use each other's <br />tracks with one dispatch system <br />. Deep tunnel and trench combo <br />o Least disruptive <br />. Deep tunnel and at grade with grade separation, specifically for 4C <br />. Leave Caltram as is, go with grade separations as it is now <br />. Deep tunnel, leave Caltrain as is <br />