HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.1 BART Extension Study CITY OF DUBLIN ( ® � 0-36
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 14, 1985
SUBJECT Bay Area Rapid Transit District Livermore-Pleasanton
Extension Study Supplemental Analysis
EXHIBITS ATTACHED Letter from Richard Wenzel , BART Project Manager dated
October 7 , 1985 ; Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study ;
Resolution No . 12-84; Resolution No . 13-84
RECOMMENDATION Review report and identify any concerns with respect
to the Supplemental Analysis , so those concerns may be
conveyed at the Technical Advisory Committee level .
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION In response to the publication of the Bay Area Rapid
Transit District ( BART) - Livermore-Pleasanton Extension (LPX) Report in
December of 1983 , the Dublin City Council adopted Resolution No . 12-84 on
January 23 , 1984 requesting that BART construct the extension in two phases .
The first phase would extend BART along the I-580 alignment at least to the
eastern limits of the City of Pleasanton. The City Council also adopted
Resolution No . 13-84 which indicated its support of the City of Livermore ' s
BART Rail Alignment , when such alignment was selected and approved by the
Livermore City Council for Phase Two of the Livermore-Pleasanton extension.
The BART District has recently released a report analyzing the various BART
line extension alternatives east of the Pleasanton City boundaries ( see
attached) . The purpose of this supplemental analysis is to investigate the
possible alignments from the eastern City limits of Pleasanton to Downtown
Livermore and to secure the adoption of a preferred LPX alignment from the
BART Board for this phase .
In the analysis , the BART Staff has analyzed a number of various BART line
alternatives for the second phase of the extension. The BART Staff has
indicated that the R-S alternative appears to be the most promising. This
extension would run parallel to El Charro Road using the existing dry
channel bed of the relocated Arroyo Mocho Channel . BART Staff pointed out
that it is necessary that this channel be relocated in order for the line to
be feasible .
The analysis also identifies the various alternatives for an interim
storage/maintenance yard. It is pointed out that if the original Phase Two
alternative identified in the December 1983 report as Alignment I-G is
adopted , the interim facility would need to be relocated somewhere along the
north side of I-580 within the Camp Parks area. However, if the City of
Livermore supports the route identified as the most promising in the
supplemental analysis , Route R-S , BART has identified a possible site for
the interim storage yard in the vicinity of Segment F-R which extends along
the northerly end of El Charro Road.
The BART Technical Advisory Committee will be meeting on October 24, 1985 •
A representative from the City Manager' s office will be in attendance at
that meeting.
It is recommended that the Council review this report and identify any
concerns it may have with respect to the Supplemental Analysis , so those
concerns may be conveyed at the Technical Advisory Committee level .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO :
ITEM NO. 8-/
B A R T BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
'12WA� 800 Madison Street
P.O. Box 12688
Oakland, CA 94604-2688
Telephone (415)464-6000
October 7, 1985
WILFRED T. USSERY Mr. Paul Rankin
PRESIDENT Planning Department
JOHN GLENN City of Dublin
VICE-PRESIDENT P.O. Box 2340
KEITH BERNARD Dublin, CA 94568
GENERAL MANAGER
Dear Mr. Rankin:
DIRECTORS Enclosed are fourteen copies of the Livermore-Pleasanton
BARCLAYSIMPSON Extension (LPX) Supplemental Analysis Interim Report. This
1ST DISTRICT report reviews conceptual design features of new BART align-
ments extending from the eastern city limits of Pleasanton to
NELLOBIANCO
2ND DISTRICT downtown Livermore which are alternative routes to those
identified in the BART LPX Update Analysis (December 1983).
ARTHUR J.SHARTSIT This report also provides an update on the status of land use
3RD DISTRICT P P P
MARGARET K.PRYOR plans and policy decisions that have occurred in the LPX study
4TH DISTRICT area since the completion of the 1983 LPX Update Analysis.
ROBERT S.ALLEN Subsequent analysis, to be documented in the Supplemental
5TH DISTRICT Analysis Final Report, will consider patronage, costs and
JOHN GLENN revenues for the new LPX alternatives.
6TH DISTRICT
WILFRED T.USSERY A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting is scheduled for.
7TH DISTRICT October 24, 1985 at 10:00 AM at the City of Livermore Adminis-
EUGENEGARFINKLE tration Building, Conference Room A, 1052 South Livermore Ave-
6TH DISTRICT nue, to review this document. Input received from your agency
JOHN H.KIRKWOOD at this meeting will be used to direct further analysis that
9TH DISTRICT will complete the Supplemental Analysis Final Report. A draft
of this report is scheduled for completion and TAC review in
early December.
Attached is a list of individuals to whom we have sent notices
about the completion and availability of the Supplemental
Analysis Report. This list includes: (1) people who were on
the BART mailing list for the 1983 LPX Update Analysis; (2)
people who signed the attendance list at the August 1, 1985
LPX Supplemental Analysis community meeting and; (3) people
who have contacted BART directly requesting that they be
included on the mailing list for this study. A copy of a news
release which will be distributed to the news media in the LPX
study area will be forwarded to you under separate cover.
Page Two
Individuals from your community who contact BART for copies of the Interim
Report will be directed to your agency. Please make copies of these reports
available to the public and inform us if additional copies are needed. Please
contact Marianne Payne, Project Coordinator, at (415) 464-6173 if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
C .
Richard C. Wenzel,
Project Manager
Attachments/Enclosures
RCW:MAP:mjo
cc: Richard Ambrose, City Manager ,
Barbara A. Neustadter, Manager of Planning
Marianne Payne, Project Coordinator
-ESOLUTION NO. 12 - 84
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-------------------------------------- ,
A RESOLUTION OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN
CITIES OF LIVERMORE, DUBLIN AND PLEASANTON
ON RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THE LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON
BART RAPID EXTENSION STUDY
WHEREAS, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District has prepared a
Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study which evaluates new alternative
alignments, and station/yard locations; and
WHEREAS, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District held a public hearing at
the Alameda County Fairgrounds on January 17; 1984 , to receive comments
from the public on the Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study; and
WHEREAS, representatives from the City Councils of Livermore, Dublin
and Pleasanton met on January 18 , 1984 , to hear additional public comments
and to discuss the alternative alignments and station locations in the
Livermore-Amador Valley; and
WHEREAS,- the Council representatives at the January 18 , 1984 , joint
meeting did reach an agreement on the preferred alignment. and location of
stations that would best serve the residents and businesses in the
Livermore-Amador Valley.
NOW, THEREFORE, BT IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City Council does
hereby join with the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton and resolves that:
Section 1 . The City Council strongly supports the immediate extension of
BART rail service to the Livermore-Amador Valley.
Section 2 . The Livermore-Pleasanton Extension be included in Stage I of
the Metropolitan 'Transportation Commission' s New Rail Transit
Starts and Extensions .
Section 3 . The preferred rail route through the Valley for Phase I of the
extension is the I-580 alignment at least to the eastern limits
of the City of Pleasanton.
Section 4 . Three stations be included in the Phase I extension at the
following locations :
a. Castro Valley
b. Near the Stoneridge Mall, between Dublin and Pleasanton
c . In the vicinity of the future Hacienda Drive interchange
Section 5 . BART proceed with the immediate acquisition of all station
sites in the Valley.
Section 6 . The Mayor is authorized to sign the attached joint letter from
the Cities of Livermore, Dublin and Pleasanton to the Bay Area
Rapid Transit District and Metropolitan Transportation
Commission indicating our agreement on the items included in
Sections 1 through 5 of this resolution.
Section 7 . This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its
passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January, 1984 , by the
following vote :
AYES : Councilmembers Drena, Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt and
Mayor Snyder
NOES : None
ABSENT: None
Mayor
ATTEST:
RESOLUTION NO. 13 - 84
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
--------------------------------
AGREEING TO SUPPORT THE CITY OF LIVERMORE
PREFERRED BART RAIL ALIGNMENT
EAST OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON CITY LIMITS
WHEREAS, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District has
included several alternative routes for the BART rail. alignment
east of Pleasanton; and
WHEREAS, Phase II of the Livermore-Pleasanton extension
is not expected to be completed until sometime after the
completion of Phase I; and
WHEREAS, the City of Livermore has not made a final
decision on the exact rail alignment east of Pleasanton.
NOW, THEREFORE, BT IT RESOLVED that the Dublin City
Council does hereby resolve that the City Council will support the
City of Livermore ' s BART rail alignment when such alignment has
been selected and approved by the Livermore City Council for Phase
II of the Livermore-Pleasanton extension.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become
effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of January,
1984 .
AYES : Councilmembers Drena, Hegarty, Jeffery, Moffatt
and Mayor Snyder
NOES : None
ABSENT: None /
Mayor
ATTEST: ,
City Clerk
BART
Bay Area Rapid Transit District
LIVERMORE-PLEASANTON
EXTENSION STUDY
Supplemental Analysis
Interim Report
System Conceptual Design
October, 1985
De Leuw, Cather & Company
Engineers and Planners•San Francisco
in association with
DKS Associates, Oakland
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION I-1
Overview I-1
Background 1-1
Scope of Supplemental Analyses 1-5
Content and Organization of this report I-6
II. ROUTE ALTERNATIVES II-1
Overview II-1
Quarry Area Corridor II-6
Isabel Avenue Corridor II-25
Recommended Route I1-32
III. STATIONS AND YARD III-1
West Livermore Station III-1
East Livermore Station III-4
East Livermore Storage/Maintenance Yard III-6
APPENDIX A: SOURCES OF DATA A-1
APPENDIX B: GEOLOGICAL-GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION B-1
i
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND EXHIBITS
Page
Figure 1 RECOMMENDED LPX ALIGNMENT AND STATIONS:
LPX FINAL REPORT, 1976 I-3
Figure 2 MAJOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS - VALLEY
AREA II-3
Figure 3 GRAVEL PIT MINING PLANS II-9
Figure 4 LOCATION OF PRINCIPAL CORRIDORS II-12
Figure 5 EL CHARRO ROAD CROSS-SECTION II-16
Figure 6 STUDY SEGMENTS - DUBLIN TO LIVERMORE II-19
Figure 7 ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS IN EAST
PLEASANTON GRAVEL PIT AREA II-20
Figure 8 BART IN KITTY HAWK-ISABEL CORRIDOR,
LIVERMORE 11-28
Figure 9 BART AT-GRADE ALONG THE EAST SIDE OF
PROPOSED ISABEL AVE./KITTY HAWK RD. II-31
Exhibit 1 BART BOARD OF DIRECTORS RESOLUTION
NO. 3098, "A PREFERRED ROUTE
ALIGNMENT FOR A LIVERMORE-
PLEASANTON EXTENSION" 1-4
TahlP 1 IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
SHOWN ON FIGURE 2 II-4
11
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
OVERVIEW
This Interim Report reviews conceptual design features of proposed
BART alignments extending from the eastern city limits of Pleasanton to
downtown Livermore. These proposed alignments are alternatives to the
routes identified in the BART Livermore-Pleasanton Extension (LPX)
Update Analysis (December 1983). This report also provides an update
on the status of land use plans and policy decisions that have occurred
in the LPX study area since the completion of the 1983 LPX Update
Analysis. Subsequent analyses, to be documented in the Supplemental
Analysis Final Report, will consider patronage, costs and revenues for
these new LPX alternatives.
BACKGROUND
Previous Alignment Studies
The overall purpose of the 1983 LPX Update Analysis was to reevaluate
the alignment recommended by the Livermore-Pleasanton Extension Study
Final Report, 1976, to reflect policy decisions, land use, and other
changes that had occurred since 1976. The LPX Update Analysis
I-1
identified new alignments and station locations, and presented the
conceptual design features, patronage projections and cost estimates for
these new alternatives. These alignments are depicted in Figure 1.
The two primary route alignments identified in the 1983 report were the
I-580 Freeway Route Alignment and the Railroad Corridor Route. The
LPX Update Analysis also identified station alternatives for each of these
two route alternatives. These included a Pleasanton Station, a West
Livermore Station, and an East Livermore Station. In addition, a yard
site alternative common to both of the route alternatives was identified.
Adopted Portion of Alignment
On March 22, 1984, following extensive public and agency review of the
LPX Update Analysis, the BART Board of Directors adopted Resolution No.
3098, "A Preferred Route Alignment for a Livermore-Pleasanton
Extension" (see Exhibit 1). In response to adopted resolutions by the
Cities of Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore in support of LPX along "the
I-580 alignment at least to the eastern city limits of Pleasanton" and in
support of a downtown Livermore alignment, this policy adopted a
portion of a preferred LPX alignment and directed staff to proceed with
a supplemental analysis for the purpose of completing the adoption of a
preferred alignment.
The 12.8-mile adopted portion of the preferred LPX alignment extends
from the existing BART Bay Fair Station in San Leandro to near the
4-2
.tnrtr,Ilan � 4
1• '
• ��. ..�[ . 2.9 t
6.s
bpi —1
i.[•• tom,-'� _ _�'
� 9.9
'an 1.7 l.n 6: 10.E °t '\ ?}!I+s�{ catty v x7 •..x•oq w
l'�r0 : w �.a••.or o rAp a'rll 3 San I,� 1 —--�— tj
�o t• r .�i 1 :AA \if y VA.A$W rt•..yr w � I1 � t•.
lk
a•y0 . (` ,,,���iii 0.•�' uulr..D L.FJ .1 r
'�t� po. alll O..r•.1 3 � <� f�>� \� � f t � t� - i y .•f
i Ir+.• •t aroe'•r � � � ••A:/ C :-. `�f I fr•'�'�'�b �•�. 1 �' _-
_?, . „' t-ADOPTED ROUTE 1.5 •%'— p-�.'T, .tvl,r.,.or. 3 _:.1 5et�.*tM• ��--
,. -- -- ,I a I . ,,... L FREEWAY ON=
EXISTING;. ;.-.;yam •" from �•p��: ^..
Casho 1. 1 i
BAY�Aflk BART .A•!��• ;a.^
Ht I• .. 1 ` `�� �� 4r,� •wr..iHn...r 1 f.'•1.- I
(WA) Up • .rte•": 1983 UPDATE ANALYSIS ROUTES 1 31
" " ^� . �- DUBLIN/NORTHWEST �� �� RAILROAD ROUT— 2 ��
San lormle ��.
/ .� `• - CASTRO VALLEY STATION ?- a. I_ l tvenEAST LIVERMORE
v.♦ \";��.;"4,� n PLEASANTON $ 3.<� �. 1111► —�
•� tl.WEST LIVERMORE
`5�1�'•`! 7.� �•\\ ��.1 ..,NByYlufd
w • .3 .�. •Il ue• f �.e �d.+.. .f ••1 �:J•ro Acr.w: r =^�1i,t M.�•�, IttJ
,. •-i. n. .,, .) ♦W r rq �•, -" 1 2.1 2.S
' .._.J�C�-AM r.:nM.•l: 1 /r'1 '� \ � ��� e 0� ���11�• �
„•, _ •'s , „ _ I PLEASANTON '" Mq• A ; i
t 1.2
At
„a .e •. ►Ir`• !rl►s (M •�r.,wr Mai
...A•� • .\I2rn• KZ
^i J' !. ,[cantle. •�. .e r -t •�• r�1 ..L. •4� �.9 bA�3 1/C�/
a.r•i ,I/ 1.7 • w�� 1�v•�±.�•nr �• +lam l /� K 1 :nip
I '� b f ( ^,U�I n ia�n��•:ry`�' r' ' .;;, _�rna t'•A rv,..�u r.�^r^..� �, ..,�. Bti�Abkr I�s�)I`•,, 1983. PROPO S
ED..S•-
"a 22 STATIONS
000�l ,C"t- 1976-PROPOSED
'' 'Nl! :^
rlar
• L I STATIONS I
�
'• yr ��;: b I PROPOSED YARD
•,. oecA
• S trr 1.1 •DIt �• - , /.r knits
1,! Ulm
13 ' 2. 1976 PROPOSED IIIIIn
Source:8r k• 1.. • Pt. y: •a,' ROUTE
DeLEUW/IjZ,T
RECOMMENDED LPX ALIGNMENT AND STATIONS FIGURE
GATHER associates LPX FINAL REPORT, 1976 1 '
EXHIBIT 1 -
BEFORE THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
SAS: FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
In the Matter of Adopting
A .Preferred Route Alignment
For a Livermore-Pleasanton Extension / Resolution No. 3098
WHEREAS, in order. to continue the orderly planning process necessary
for a possible Livermore-Pleasanton Extension, the Board of Directors
of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District wishes to adopt
a preferred route alignment based upon the BART Livermore-Pleasanton
Study Update Analysis (December 1983) ; and
WHEREAS, realignment of the proposed BART extension from downtown'
Pleasanton to an alignment along I-580 north of the Pleasanton
central business district will Significantly reduce capital
expenditures of the extension and serve existing/planned transit-
related development; and
WHEREAS, on January 23 and 24, 1984, the Cities of Dublin, Pleasanton
and Livermore adopted resolutions supporting the Liverr.-ore-Pleasanton
Extensionalong "the I-580 alignment at least to the eastern limits
of the City of Pleasanton"; and
WHEREAS, the City of Livermore recommended on January 17, 1984, a
do:•m tor-:n Livermore alignment and the Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton
adopted resolutions on January 23 and 24, 1984, supporting the City
of Livermore's BART rail alignment; and
WHEREAS, BART staff will proceed with a supplemental analysis
which will investigate alignments from the eastern city limits
of Pleasanton to do::ntown Livermore as alternatives to routes
;dent;fied in the Update Analysis for the purpose of completing
the BART Board adoption of a preferred Livermore-Pleasanton
Extension alignment from Dublin to Livermore;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, .that the BART BoarO of Directors
adopts a preferred alignment for the portion of the BART Liverr;;ure-
Pleasanton Extension from the existing Bayfair Station to a Dublin
Station r.ith the following characteristics :
1. A two station 12.8 mile extension with selected station
sites at Redr:ood Road (Crstro Valley) and the I-5110/1-G80
interchange (Dublin) near Stoneridg:: gall .
2. The general route aligillment traverses SP,-2::11 right-of-way
and I-580 right-of-way with this portion of the Liverrore-
Pleasantcn Extension teri:iinating near the interchenge
of I-580/i-630.
Adopted March 22, 1984
I-4
I-580/I-680 interchange. The general route alignment traverses SR-238
right-of-way and I-580 right-of-way, with a Castro Valley Station near
Redwood Road and a Dublin Station at the I-580/I-680 interchange near
Stoneridge Mall.
SCOPE OF SUPPLEMENTAL ANALYSIS
As directed by the BART Board, the purpose of this Supplemental
Analysis is to investigate alignments from the eastern city limits of
Pleasanton to downtown Livermore as alternatives to routes identified in
the 1983 report. The overall objective is to complete BART Board
adoption of a preferred LPX alignment from Dublin to Livermore. This
analysis focuses upon new alignment alternatives within two general
corridors between I-580 and downtown Livermore:
o Quarry Area Corridor. I-580 to the vicinity of the vicinity of
El Charro Road interchange, then southeasterly through the
gravel pit area east of Pleasanton, then southerly to the
Southern Pacific/Union Pacific railroad corridor in the
vicinity of West Livermore, and then easterly along the
railroad corridor.
o Isabel Avenue. I-580 to the proposed Isabel Avenue-Kitty
Hawk Road corridor, then southerly to the SP/UP railroad
corridor, and then easterly along the railroad corridor.
I-5
Primary considerations in the evaluation of new alternatives include the
availability of right-of-way and possible geotechnical problems and
environmental consequences associated with traversing the gravel pit
area. Another key set of issues concerns the status of land use plans
and policy decisions affecting proposed commercial, residential, and
industrial development projects in the LP% study area since 1983 and
their potential effects on the viability of proposed alignment, station and
yard alternatives.
Public and staff input are being solicited throughout the extension
analyses. A community meeting was held on August 1, 1985, prior to the
initiation of this study, to obtain input from members of the community
on possible alignment alternatives and related issues for consideration in
this study. Another community meeting will be held upon completion of
the study to solicit input on the study results. Additionally, a
Technical Advisory Committee comprised of staff representatives from the
Cities of Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore, Caltrans and the County of
Alameda has been formed to provide technical guidance and review and
to serve as a focal point for community involvement.
CONTENT AND ORGANIIZATION OF THIS REPORT
This Interim Report of the Supplemental Analysis is organized into three
Chapters. Following this Introduction, Chapter 2 identifies the
conceptual design features of the new alignment alternatives. The third
and final chapter provides an update on land use plans and policy
I-6
decisions that have occurred since 1983 which may affect the viability of
the proposed station and yard site alternatives. These station and yard
site alternatives will be considered for the new alignments as well as for
the I-580 Freeway Route and Railroad Route. Appendix A describes the
data sources used. Detailed geotechnical considerations are presented in
Appendix B.
Subsequent analysis, to be documented in the Supplemental Analysis
Final Report, will consider patronage, costs and revenues for the new
LP% alternatives and revised patronage estimates for the I-580 Freeway
Route and Railroad Route alternatives. The new alignment alternatives
and the I-580 Freeway Route and Railroad Route alternatives will be
presented in comparative form in the Supplemental Analysis Final Report.
I-7
CHAPTER II
ROUTE ALTERNATIVES
CHAPTER II
ROUTE ALTERNATIVES
OVERVIEW
This chapter presents the conceptual design features of route alignment
alternatives extending from the eastern city limits of Pleasanton to
downtown Livermore. The study area under consideration is generally
bounded by Interstate 580 to the north, the Southern Pacific Radum
Branch Railroad to the west and south, and Kitty Hawk Road to the east.
Within this study area, alternatives are identified within two general
corridors between I-580 and downtown Livermore:
o Quarry Area Corridor. I-580 to the vicinity of the El Charro
Road interchange, then southeasterly through the gravel
quarry areas east of Pleasanton to the SP/UP railroad
corridor in the vicinity of West Livermore, and then easterly
along the railroad corridor.
o Isabel Avenue Corridor. I-580 to the proposed Isabel
Avenue-Kitty Hawk Road corridor, then southerly to the
SP/UP railroad corridor, and then easterly along the railroad
corridor.
II-1
In order to appreciate the various factors affecting the viability of the
proposed alignment alternatives, it is necessary to consider the physical
features and development plans for these corridor areas. Therefore,
these features are discussed in some detail in the following paragraphs,
prior to the description of the route alternatives themselves. Key
issues include the availability of right-of-way and potential geotechnical
problems involved in traversing the quarry areas. The rapidly
continuing residential, commercial and office expansion in the San
Ramon/Livermore Valley is depicted in Figure 2. Table 1 summarizes the
size and number of employees projected for the Approved and
Announced Developments to September 1985.
Because of the intensive residential and commercial subdivision activity
which has taken place, special attention was given to exploring joint use
of or paralleling existing or proposed public and railroad rights-of-way.
These include:
o Existing right-of-way of Arroyo Mocho skirting the westerly
and southerly boundary of the Jamieson gravel pits, in part
paralleling El Charro Road, and the proposed relocation of
Arroyo Mocho skirting the northerly and easterly shores of
the Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation
District (ACFC&WCD) groundwater recharge project.
o Right-of-way for the Arroyo Mocho-Las Positas Flood Control
Channel, between El Charro Road and Santa Rita Road.
II-2
-r-. / Ill .-��' - '�'• \ .FI' (._- 1. _ — V � _ _— I - `l ,•.' 1 •
B ho -Ra ch 'ml. Ranch-D:2 ml:� i/i J "�• �.T°ro,
IN
1 P n JJJJ- iU ,,.1). (��.t�•' �^r C- �I-_•r•. �-�`'¢-� \/<� )•J.� .J 't_ __ I ,r! I '�. ! - _ - •(\t:.
I •L'1 - 11� fit^ `75,I.':' - 7 S^� �.2.' L :�' ) C -•.\n /�• I �
,
-
,L ,'+" I `.i;r 1 .11`- 1 � f'�} �L J o- •'� rte-- I � "i - � ;1(l.
' )� �( ° •,I � . �[1'.``_� s ;t••�:..•'1./-.i'(:.- - ,��" . �{ -_.� \r::•. _ _ -___ _-'c-.�_.t �`.t _ _ __ � __a \\-. \ - z-=-sue.....-.
X__1 `: [- , `acs \�"'�' fi\ :�4._. b,, � �L- ':i'- - ,t�
J _ �,
. i.",-,. 'jC�. U J ._J!•",y',_�. r\ li _ IlC,
�q.�}\ r�l 1 1. �r•C l _ mac, gel° I�� t%+_ '� `ti' �' :I _
---------
'"'�'` 1. _ _�✓%)..�•:, _.`� %�; :mot:. 4- `;.i c - �, /�. !., e < <..=,� \ �--c ._ �
...f' :".c L 'o ti�°, ,.\ , . ••"••..-: _� •_.. - I � �.> -- `7.. - 7 - t' .l- I - -;*! ( `\ - -- --I�
a `'r� 1 'j �`^ 1 .�• .� `?'�<,:, - it• 1 , "�.x, -c t- �; ,2g i a
\... .i S" r -_- �✓ - '>-'� _�`�- �:Z.a -''t
J•ti l - y :-.7 1 \� �.�y I, /'
b= c
l
\\\� - .✓ • ,� ' i
`t--" ��`• -� •�'-•: �°I. � .ice`- ( }'
,/; ) ) ��' �t._'�.\ •' - ' �- _ -
'I 7��- - fit` (;-- :.1. �. •�!�
E- - Las Positas \ +l
V I oS' _ v c
_ C i
?ter-
I`
-
� pan Ea on ,, --✓�
C e X. t
J 1 P `,A '\E, %
` P ),�:��
1��4111 e :f.' ,.-.,\ !L' i .`� `1.a•- g'_, KZ � _ Z. 1, i - ���-� { p ._-'ti
I...J._ )�`:.' °': �� ..� c I/ F. �•;} �/ I /` /�` r !,
a:. ■ti01 �l. w :• 1 � ..I '1tr lli° I ��� \ � _ �. � / �`- -t .
II i.:� —- _,� i a 'I _ ,\. .;< e, _ ./ �• ,�
rata 3 \ 1 I! 11 ,,t -1 n, i;.,i`' '�(�f: -r ti• i�. .\
S I 1 .t,'.,,, tial`.L.l:J I. /„ / it -,1.'I -Q �- P• "\!\ -'I\�`:;1 � 4� , Y � !�"
`7 ,Irt.u; �-h} .Iles ." I_ •I \ � :', `��-1_�`ti:J:-. .. - u 1i�.� �\ �/�1 -�'" - �- --- I .�1 _:-' `�r`. .l '-•" er.'
r\
f '1 ' rrie- !.t.. t"d :i•, t,r'= -h''� Y - .1. .� ��- - - i_
•I - ..� � � � v � a�.-�.��'�- • .. .. ,._. � k 8 +I\�,�._i�-,v ----7��j iii r� �r- ���� L�� �-wJ' \`1\ � I 1 � � � •.f. -�1 i i
�•. - - - "'° - - �..1 �;'r`1u� IIVJIr ✓7 Ifr'•'' :$ '� f! 11 � -�.n \•\./ - ;, - \ _ - � �- "E %•-
-H n.�' i 12
_
y. yl =��I I I�.lyrr'ta �, J� ii' i, t.j ti•�n 1•' - I �'
_ ! .F `Lid (: .lI`. ,a - ./• '`�,� IE. t�.l .f - .) '+
.,�
tr
r �
�•�: '(ice. .J.:
-- Y 2 7
- --Selma-.._ -� --�- - ~- -- -- =•C'-+.1'. _ - - -:,� - -- 1—
----- --- -- — `� I C. C v
� i Court
��'I e =-'--•-�-' -_,-��i� ;,�,. �'. t,. 1 IQ-;. - l
of Trin ty Co
'•`"z ! - v --I , y�_ , � '�:(`�+ 1' -' t-.:g� '�O '_// 1 I,� J,�o�ta� a- � ,,,.�/_ \. -� �1 Preston- -
�/-Tnad`' , I•' /, AndCn i,., • 1 4
_ h
j
30 Pleasanton Parma_ t� I� uu .,1 I ( _ -\ _ / bluff .l' Foley` -1 6 'um , r 1.
:
,
,
`% •• 1 I ..� - oyo
Hacienda. u.),.. ark / / I-580 ITe h - 1. '\acs`-
\ 41 IK
i 42 v� \ �`�.t 10 Du yin - -- G>\eascv.. e�
has/e 241 .� ?, -. \. � Poroiar - 18 .•<<•
.37 •e a° < -- I I ! �:'-• i ° .' , I 13 �-'" _ __ 17 Marathon
Y , ` .\ I ., I\ { .Heights
Complex - '31'--; ,,Q��. �y 34 I. �, , r` _28 •\ :rJ ` ., -"— - ,
9
:�; ,: <i `-�. ' I _•..,,c r�S ^�1\ f _ \� iu �Siw 6 - _ '�,n.. y,�% o r ►� wAt;
I f-
�, ---
'I - �• -Hacienda Bus e �ark •-�\ / g \�-----_ 'I Livermore L' '�=�' �Il�i \r ! / a ;q
ers r° 9 Industrial ._._ r r ^• .J -'
Ph �eyi y}n°` y \ ..................'. \ I Park
rTM \ Industrial �/ ) i w.• Pr :I :tee" /��. M ..
"'-/ � ,-- -�• ` .- Park Triad I s , V R °- «r,'I"�, .tt- { C I••{ _ .L�'
/%J/,°•.)•S_=m Z \I /r°)j0 / \ `o� \\ ��j_/� �, � a _ "' i Z / `�i G '1�__� G r
w.
Valleyy s
-,• _�. "";1 •Business' _ '{i ,i •, �:yy, i••r
LIVE
RMQRE -
I. lr � /_�, f:� •`Park- - 5(^ ./T.,,i f'�� h ( � ¢ - _ �/ ,1:(. > �,
f)I lil, '\ 1,.y�i ` ( -i• =-1 a. c c....., 31 - I: , •A, l •,/ /.. c,�J
•i','� n - /'a-'; -" - -6� - _�� t •mil ��°� p m
/ '-.f - •� rte..
t Im •4; ,), :I i. v, ':}� 2 9 `2T:., _ r -'Oi:-•�;`r^;.,;. °' -,I I I _:/ 'Ir ire' ..j f �. ',ii`:✓i
F
I ��,,i _ JIS r -may }., ✓ - kT _cs. •'I—,\v,, �\, wr
- Residen a /
EASANTON. Y `�
�.�. t 'I
. .., �. r '- r .: .- _.`\", :, `:-� £e.,. _e `a,` �i," .✓. �I ;� La ;Industr a /Commercial' - - _ -
:
-
J' _ 4 -
1
I:
K.
.-r
> r - 'LEGEND -
_.,' `!.
i
M d W
I.
_ 1
)"--, (/
FIGURE
LATHECATHER MAJOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS - VALLEY AREA. 2
R associates
Revised Sept. 85
II-3
TABLE 1
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
SHOWN ON FIGURE 2
Summary of Approved and Announced Developments
Tri-Valley Area Commercial Projects
September, 1985
Project Gross Sq Ft Employees at Acres Status
(000's) Buildout
DUBLIN
I. Automation Elec 60 231 Announced
2. Automation Elec 40 154 Approved
3. Bedford Prop 187 519 Announced
4. Enea Brothers 287 703 Announced
5. Festival 52 102 Approved
6. Great Western 67 258 Approved
7. Shamrock Ford 4 8 Approved
8. Valley Datsun 30 59 Approved
LIVERMORE
9. Airport Ind Park 1,185 2,008 80 Approved
10. Airway Bus Park 1,184 2,320 Approved
11. Brittania 870 20 Future
12. Crain 180 15 Future
13. Diablo Ventures 654 1,817 Announced
14. Dividend 2,019 3,422 Approved
15. Dublin Prpperties 741 1,255 50 Approved
16. Foley 4,554 7,719 300 Announced
17. Greenville 3,536 3,963 175 Announced
18. HDK 620 1,051 132 Approved
19. Hivest 683 1,158 43 Approved
20. Intel 380 644 24 Approved
21. Kacor 341 577 23 Approved
22. Las Positas 4,417 Deferred
23. Livermore Ind Pk 281 492 18 Approved
24. RC Johnson 2,338 5,993 Announced
25. Rinker 216 285 22 Approved
26. Shaheen Ind Park 352 598 25 Approved
27. Southern Pacific 1,485 2,517 155 Approved
28. Terry Rose 415 68 Approved
28A.Triad II 3,635 10,097 393 Approved
Source; ICKS Associates
II-4
TABLE 1 (Cont.)
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS
SHOWN ON FIGURE 2
PLEASANTON
29. Auf der Maur Approved
(Stanley Bus Park)
30. AVAC Hilton 181 171 Approved
31. Clorox 96 267 Approved
32. DoubleTree Inn 89 84 Approved
33. Farmers Insurance Approved
34. Ferreri 80 208 Approved
35. Fromm Ind Park 1,160 2,017 Approved
36. Hacienda Phase I 7,325 23,456 Approved
37. Hacienda Phase II 4,330 16,151 Announced
38. Holiday Inn 133 125 Approved
39. Meyer/Rinker 1,084 2,851 Approved
40. Mozart 988 3,365 Approved
41. Pleasanton Park 778 2,335 Approved
42. Santa Rita Ind 213 431 Approved
43. Valley Bus Park 846 1,827 Approved
Summary of Residential Developments
LIVERMORE
A. Anden Chateau
B. Anden Springtown
C. Citation
D. Damian
E. Ferrell
F. Hivest
G. Homestate Savings & Loan
H. K & B Charlotte
T K R R Dalton
J. Lounsbury
K. Northwood Portola
L. Northwood Springtown
M. Spruiell J & W
N. Hoffman
II-5
o The parallel Southern Pacific and Union Pacific (formerly
Western Pacific) rights-of-way from Radum Junction easterly
through Livermore, along Stanley Boulevard, Railroad Avenue,
and East First Street.
QUARRY AREA CORRIDOR
Physical Features and Proposed Development
Almost half of the corridor area is composed primarily of areas from
which sand and gravel have been extracted in the past or where
aggregate production is now underway or planned for the future.
Smaller acreages are occupied by existing or planned facilities of the
Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
(ACFC&.WCD) and by the Livermore Municipal Airport, including its
approach zones.
Quarry Operations. The nature of the gravel quarry operations and the
condition of the properties following depletion of the mineral aggregates
make the quarry pit area unsuitable for future industrial or residential
development. The current reclamation plans for the gravel pit
operations, however, indicate that operators will leave the quarry area
in the "after condition" with narrow corridors of undisturbed earth or
backfill materials which would be suitable for the support of a BART
line.
II-6
Substantial portions of the study area are owned by two major sand and
gravel extraction and processing firms: Kaiser Sand and Gravel and the
Jamieson Company. To identify potential BART alignment alternatives
through the quarry area corridor, the operation and reclamation plans
of these firms have been thoroughly reviewed. The results of this
review are summarized below.
o Kaiser Sand and Gravel is the largest operator in the study
area and owns most of the property bounded by the
Southern Pacific San Ramon Branchline and El Charro Road.
Reclamation plans for this firm indicate that mining
operations will cease around the year 2005, when most of the
present reserves are expected to be depleted. It is assumed
that the aggregate processing plant at Radum Junction would
be dismantled at that time.
Existing mining extends to a depth of 135 feet or more for
sections within the Kaiser property. Although these deep
areas are or will be backfilled, the prevailing ground level in
the "after condition" will be substantially lower than existing
ground levels. Some of the Kaiser property has or will be
backfilled with sound overburden. Other areas, however, have
been used for the disposal of fines. These silty materials, of
extremely low bearing capacity, are commonly referred to as
II-7
"slickens." It is not geotechnically feasible to extend a BART
alignment through these slickens areas.
The present reclamation plan calls for sections along the
northerly perimeter of the Kaiser property and west of El
Charro Road to become portions of the "chain of lakes," a
series of groundwater recharge basins approved by the
ACFC&WCD and described in greater detail below. A large
pond to the south would be devoted to storage of slickens.
Some relatively solid east-west dikes of undisturbed material
or high-quality backfill, however, will remain.
o The Jamieson Company, the second largest operator, controls
most of the property extending from El Charro Road to a
north-south line about one-half mile west of Kitty Hawk Road.
Ownership is vested in the name of the Pleasanton Gravel
Company. Mining operations of this firm are tentatively
visualized to extend to the year 2020. Over the next three
to four decades, the mining plan details the sequential
excavation of a series of "cells," as shown in Figure 3.
The northerly group of cells, numbers 1 through 4, identified
in order from west to east, will be excavated and partially
backfilled over the next two decades or less. These cells
extend northerly to property recently acquired by the City
of Livermore and along the southerly boundary of the
II-8
Livermore Airport
JAMIESON RANCH I
CITY OF LIVERMORE
............
Relocated Arroyo Mocho
:.•..•:..•.:.•..•.•..•...•.•.....'.•.'.':.'.•.'.'.•..•:.•.•.•.'.•.•.•.':.'. :..........
:... . `
Future
::........
.:..:.•::.'..::.'.:..•..'::.•::....::
# ' Isabel Ave -
:TRIAD
JAMI SON COMPA Kitty Hawk Rd.
W W W
:� .4::
CORE
KAISER SAND. & GRAVEL.
co I
PLEASANTON.
I J I I W : ;:;
W v ss: GRAVEL I
Arroyo Mocho
i
Y BLVp, �� ♦.i
U•P•R R' ST ANLE
-- S.P.T•CO' ��
°0800' To PLEASANT ON I
FIGURE
DeLEUW/AWN GRAVEL PIT MINING PLANS 3
CATHER associates
II-9
Livermore Municipal Airport. The southerly tier of cells;
numbers 5 through 8, identified in order from east to west,
will be excavated over the following two decades. For
planning purposes it appears feasible to coordinate BART
extension plans with the excavation and subsequent
backfilling of the northerly cells, numbers 1 through 4.
Each cell, roughly rectangular in shape, will be divided by
an east-west longitudinal dike constructed of suitable earth
materials. The north-south dikes will be built along the
boundary of each cell. The several east-west and north-south
longitudinal dikes will each have a bane or bottom width of
110 to 200 feet, and a top width of 50 feet or more.
Separating the northerly and southerly tiers of cells will be
an east-west internal core dike about one mile long, which
will carry Jamieson Company's conveyor belt system and
internal access roads. The northerly side of this core could
be made available, however, for a BART alignment, as could
the east-west dividing dikes extending across the midpoint of
the four northerly cells.
The Jamieson Company also owns several parcels, some of
which are partially depleted, south of Stanley Boulevard and
extending for about 3,500 feet west of Isabel Avenue.
II-10
Jamieson Ranch. As previously indicated on Figure 3, a portion of the
Jamieson property north of the quarry area is used as a working ranch.
The ranch is bounded by El Charro Road to the west and southwest, the
gravel pits to the south, the Triad parcel to the east, and the R. C.
Johnson parcel and Livermore Airport approach and expansion areas to
the north.
The "Chain of Lakes. The northerly halves of cells number 1, 2, 3 and
all of cell number 4 are planned to be used for a series of water
percolation and groundwater recharge basins or reservoirs. This project,
sponsored by Zone 7, ACFC&WCD, is referred to as the "chain of lakes."
The series of lakes, (Figure 4) will extend in a sidewise "L" shape, with
the base of the "L" paralleling Kitty Hawk Road, and the stem along the
northerly edge of the gravel pit area extending westerly to a line about
half way between the Kaiser haul road and Santa Rita Road. Ownership
of the land areas within the "chain of lakes" is understood to be
subject to ultimate conveyance to Zone 7, Alameda County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District.
Because of water quality considerations, inflow into the "chain of lakes"
will be restricted to relatively high quality waters from Arroyo Del Valle;
runoff from Arroyo Mocho, which serves urban areas, will be excluded.
Inflow into the chain will begin in the Lone Star Gravel Company pit
area, which is located outside of the study area near Arroyo Del Valle,
south of Stanley Boulevard. The waters will then flow downstream
II-11
To Tracy-jo
- 580
To Hayward T
co
3
Realigned Arroyo Mocho
a
Las Positas Blvd.
Jamieson Ranch
S
•• O°°• •��� Livermore Municipal
ATC° F� C ••••�''•., Airport - --- --
.________Livermore Sewa e
c o ••..� Treatment. Pla
O'
•
�
LIVERMORE ORE
cc
cd
. o
s
..
• co
0
3
CL
r
O
G
2
�0 T
t _
P Jamieson ; Y
t6 Gravel •
a Kaiser
c Sand and Gravel
N Cr
Valley Ave.
= UPRR
Radum SpTG9�
IeY Blvd..
PLEASANTON stars Lone Star
_-_ Gravel
Cu
co
\3
DeLEUW R -
FIGURE
CATHER �associates LOCATION OF PRINCIPAL CORRIDORS 4 GATHER
II-12
northerly and westerly through the "chain of lakes," to the lowest lake
in the Kaiser Sand and Gravel area west of El Charro Road.
It is anticipated that the "chain of lakes" will eventually be landscaped,
and that their ultimate development may be similar to that at Shadow
Cliffs Regional Park, which also occupies an abandoned gravel extraction
site. A BART line following the shoreline of the "chain of lakes" would
offer pleasant scenic views to rail passengers.
The Arroyo Mocho Flood Control Channel. In identifying possible BART
route alignment alternatives through the quarry area corridor,
consideration was given to the existing alignment and the proposed
relocation of the Arroyo Mocho Flood Control Channel.
The Arroyo Mocho originates in the hills southeast of Livermore, near
the San Joaquin County Line. It flows along the valley floor collecting
runoff from the urbanized portion of south Livermore, and then passes
under Stanley Boulevard and the two railroads adjacent to Murrieta
Boulevard. Continuing westerly, it parallels the two railroads about 500
feet to the north of its intersection with El Charro Road, where it turns
northwesterly, joining the Arroyo Las Positas at a point about one-half
mile south of I-580, near El Charro Road. This channel runs diagonally
from the southeast to the northwest through the gravel quarry area.
This reach would be subjected to maximum discharge of 5,400 cfs for the
100 year storm following ultimate development of the watershed.
II-13
The reach where the Arroyo Mocho parallels El Charro Road follows an
elevated, tangent alignment with levees on either side, all supported on
a long, relatively narrow embankment of undisturbed original ground.
The embankment is bordered by deep gravel pit excavations on either
side, that is, between the Jamieson and the Kaiser mining areas.
The cross section of the channel paralleling El Charro Road, and
between the Kaiser and Jamieson mining pits does not have sufficient
hydraulic capacity to handle design floods. Widening of the channel is
considered impractical because of the restricted width of the supporting
embankment.
Realignment of the Arroyo Mocho Around the "Chain of Lakes". Since
the present flood control channel through the gravel pit area does not
have adequate capacity to carry anticipated flood flows, studies have
been conducted to explore relocation of the channel around the easterly
and northerly sides of the "chain of lakes," beginning at a point near
the intersection of Isabel Avenue and Stanley Boulevard.
No specific date has been established for the channel relocation. It is
dependent in part on when the proposed West Livermore annexation and
local Assessment District now under consideration by the City of
Livermore is approved or when other sources of funds become available.
However, relocation could reasonably be expected within the next 15
years. Once the channel is relocated, as seems probable, the present
II-14
stream bed paralleling El Charro Road could be regraded and become
available as a trackbed for BART (see Figure 5).
Arroyo Mocho Riaht-of-Way. Historically, the streambeds of the several
creeks and arroyos in California have been owned by the holders of the
large parcels traversed by these channels.
However, as channels are relocated and/or enlarged, broad fenced
rights-of-way are being conveyed to Zone 7, ACFC&WCD to accommodate
the enlarged channels and for adjacent maintenance roadways. The
underlying fee to the area now occupied by the reach of Arroyo Mocho
paralleling El Charro Road is owned by the Jamieson Company and by
Kaiser Sand and Gravel. Assuming the Arroyo is relocated, this
right-of-way could be acquired from the gravel companies for the BART
extension.
In summary, the relocation of the Arroyo Mocho would create a ready
made alignment which, with relatively simple regrading, could be
into a two-mile long roadbed for BART tracks.
El Charro Road. A substantial portion of El Charro Road follows a
diagonal alignment supported on a long embankment with stepped
terraces on either side. Immediately paralleling El Charro Road on the
southwest is the excavated and retained Arroyo Mocho Flood Control
Channel, which is retained by levees.
II-15
Future Widening
Alternative BART Location
Elev. Existing Arroyo Mocho El Charro Rd,
-400 Alternative BART •400-
Location
, ••`r Y•- ; {T,°1:ti7�•?.r�r,',.a.M(::rt.}rj!:e .I-ive �'.'1:•.
Gravel Truck Haul Road `` rs� Y
—350 '��� ~:fi', ...s(._;.!•r + L t:t)�7,'�•r�`�'.L5 ti,y,•I+-GT' r i. r-n•ic';;k7;? sir,:;ax i'Tk rt ,tier aitt Y fo?>.t .S; I���ii
v+:..:rt:.rr:.� : a 3a0-
L.y �Y r ! iJ'L a r .>! L \ �.i S f. } f •' L 'y i'1 a•,
i ,�( S by q > .t t. r µy..k + y ' ii:Rrtlr \� •}.•r .art �:•`- a
r, � t ti. �+^•M1ff°t:,:ici,:�`i..r.. ia`s1•• r f �,.. .ri.'y.. , •,t, i t ?„ 1. `i. �.j �'L:.r,:y.i• t:••'•r yYti.
ON
1 ^•,t,t :-t:. v :,,^ :r:r�S^LyfS �l1;: 'r.•l�L: , \x\ c 4. •a' * �:4 s•,L;•.gCi ;�yL_ ,':i•y��iaY1�}..
:Y{, °'l•:fi�' -,� :IY, :4 -n.. -.\. 2}.,{. a+: :r•t' ;`s,..$'-n•4.s..,.}Yr•a:,.
'•'use c:ra.. �:i: 1+,. +'f. ...}.
�.l.L ,•.YJ=:, .��%. ',1•{� .a.::: `:T -:;�: %r3:: .J:l••�f-'='
,t. 4i:C,• -r"' •-�.•:•rY:- .•r:7i i'Jv[?'•:Y.�...
7 :P' 'ry�.!>wi: .r, ,•i!:i:` �:t.�?�• --t^.!tom:•,,. r••.
`:end ::Y�: t. r�4. .•, �.
i .c
.J
.i,:...::�Si
l. ;� :aF: l �.!r.'2� %a !,-;., •sf: L. C'::'�i+"r_Ve_�..,r sa -�::�•-...� .. �•`i•:
.:,y_ ':7. :li '14�: ..'1� l .:tt'. �F`F:: .Y... ,Y rl [`"'::,{ i)•..:- i1'�\•-1r:�(•
ii:Y.•r .•J". L: .>r ".p,. f'- ^:,• :Jr,••f:• f�""..vr�•fi:'.,i`�.n°i'^:j:? ::::'i;;r. p�
1c. ,tf•. �'�.. :i,•t .rr.r..r;:::T+.•:.::•C::L Y-w •.:-:' .� !YrT.��: ..k r-:
'•fi':v .•I•• _#t. ��':^r' -r.•r :.w:id .:r::>•-:,,u.;i:.. ry
•fit y
S:'•s.•2 ti
:•2
at•, fF: Y
1: a .1::�•::::»e' \.
..s C&.6.._�.�.. •:t
1
.r`
.!.r. '.•r'• +art ...1'.
e• i.
r%`.>s^ i rc'a .ri•' ;i•;•:S• :r.�. .s. .ti,:,!:�::�3,•..r:t. ;,:r•
30 � r
:,.. w�.-_ •t,-'atr r r•- t� t..�.. .'300—
.-.fir.•: .c: .f•..s •.. ,�.-':,,.r ,4.�g ��%,•:...:.
1• !.-\ •ice-:
,ef•. ••C.• t
'.1•::! .I ':Sir:•��::�•.
r. .v.
is •:t , •.�':
r".,t.. ,•F� :.t.,. 1� •:::• , •�. -,s•;+.crw ikw'• i".:• •:f L`'ie`':t-•••,.. - .:e`•• ..>,
.,a.. >a' .p- y.••t.t•. r, .Y.. s,:,;�����.r..rtt.�?:; _ t<•a.•.L�•`.rJ�3:r`n:[r•:•S.trlsv�-{:a_ra:«::i��:se.:_.
L••4. �%;.. a.>Ih,:�:V'7C`'�:}„y.:.'W:..>.Ii: •,'W:.f•: :.¢�%,•ilj:.�^.:-.n..t ,T,•.,=:'"�•"+ ..•-+
r xw:;r.. ,r.' .">fYa'„Sa:y.. tt;a.. a rY'• ''A.: .,;.. _4s�-!.,�.w.r• _.,i.. ,,t.:�:�>.n• q:.",.,t:•k> :rr.:.:. ;
��� E-...•,t-J... �,s, r n,,.r.•L,f:�+:." A{i:ji-.RK••-w+ •f .....a+:�;l'ri -:f,•,1. .7,. ,.•}•..a•... ,..>
Kaiser Gravel Pit _., .�.�-�:..�.i->:•- .:�:t.:.>.. r.•.;�- r..,,,•.. ..�';• si ..G,...:r.>�+`v: 'f�t•• ..4.!:. >a!jtZ
;5.;. 51.<t... -:i:, •ts. :..t,.. - :<:Ijt:i �.ti•'.'%i.: `r<r=1>,:.• .,. nL::i•n.'!:L:. :'ySr'.••i.. 2:l:ii'•p.• lr tN J�mleson Gr v P/� ��ria:,.
>w:rr ..;.. .J:• ?.f.. .1. •tCi� ..S iti. :'1�.a. w}•. 'r�'t�;f .,•:-':ii`::r.•.' il, .� fi'l•,rr-_• a el Il
t,::'•r•"s•+,. ..a.!�. ':iy:?v::t:iya:;aL ..t�:�ia•>:.t.-.2�. ...2_.hrk:!e.,1a .r::4'tv,..,,:....r,:4'.'r^. �w>..;-?:...r�S4 .r
..�;�'��'si;, r?M1 's,, ..i4 ..t. %f: :r:?:"'" . �;��:1:+..+:�J!'A...2di.., .....,•lr:,,. a:;:-n,
Zr>;•:;. .:,1¢•i;i1?�-, >•4ifd$.`.`.. ,.tfli:,r .. ...... .••in•.. •3:.; _.-��':;3'>': ��::'•,(>'• _';;;i ail,..;y ,�... .!T_,
�••V.... ... - f:c:e..:�'v' .,ly.,<:'�1':... .. lw ti:.,, _:J..f.��r.+'-�• a.yS. .i�•1.. :,c :Lr+•!r
Q ,:.. N.E. -►
•Wr '.r_ij7.......,v4{!:7i..:=i1b...,. ..,. ... r.•<kQ,lk:e..�:r•'.=.K ai.t. !' r+�••.•• �. r,L•.,W_,t
300 ft. 200 ft. 100 ft. 01. 00 ft, 200 ft.
Approx. Distance from q.E1 Charro Rd.
Looking Northwest ..
EL CHARRO ROAD CROSS - .SECTION. . m
m
c
CA
Although the full existing paved roadway width of El Charro Road will
continue to be required for gravel truck traffic, the lower terrace on
the northeasterly slope is at an elevation and is composed of virgin and
backfilled earth materials suitable for support of a BART alignment.
Las Positas Boulevard. Long-term plans for both the City of Pleasanton
and the City of Livermore had included the extension of Las Positas
Boulevard across the northern limit of the quarry area, with the
easterly extension from Pleasanton meeting the westerly extension from
Livermore at El Charro Road.
This extension is currently expected to be deleted from the Pleasanton
Master Plan. New long range plans in the City of Pleasanton suggest
the extension of Stoneridge Drive easterly to skirt the northerly edge of
the quarry area, thence intersecting with El Charro road. Continuing
easterly, this six-lane thoroughfare would follow the alignment identified
by the City of Livermore as "Las Positas Boulevard." A decision on the
two alternative plans is anticipated this December. Construction of Las
Positae Boulevard leaving Pleasanton remains undetermined.
Extending easterly of El Charro Road between El Charro Road and
Murrieta Boulevard, Las Positas Boulevard will consist of two
46-foot-wide roadways separated by an 18-foot-wide median within a
130-foot right-of-way. Provision for BART at grade along this corridor
would require an additional 40 feet of right-of-way width.
II-17
Livermore Municipal Airport. The City of Livermore is embarking on a
$9 million expansion program for the Municipal Airport. The primary
features of this expansion program include plans for a new 2,700 foot
second runway and hangars for about 258 private aircraft. Under a
subsequent phase, not currently funded, the City of Livermore Municipal
Golf Course will be remodeled to permit a westerly extension of the
existing main runway to a total length of 5,250 feet.
Route Alternatives
A total of six alignment segments have been identified within the general
quarry area corridor (see Figures 6 and 7). The alternatives are
described below, followed by a discussion of relevant design
considerations.
Segment F-R. Beginning from the west to east alignment parallel and on
the northside of Route I-580, BART would ascend on an aerial structure,
and using the long radius reverse curve, cross over I-580 on a skew
bridge about 1/4 mile west of the El Charro Road exchange. Proceeding
in a southeastly direction, the elevated structure would descend to
grade through property owned by Alameda County, crossing the Kaiser
haul road in the vicinity of the Jamieson Ranch. The alignment would
traverse the southwesterly corner of the R. C. Johnson property before
reaching the Jamieson Ranch. Note that Segment F-R is shown on
Figure 6 as an envelope of routes, of which this description corresponds
to a midpoint route.
II-18
_p�z':_
L
74-
V >
-----------
V _4
-7�
V
N
�N
S."fU T LJJ
T
p
'QA
s-AN .11 94sl,
M P-7, `{ a�\IE' I „`'` 1 .
_RM
.4
------------lyjy �JJ;F\-7 '-7
V,
..........
V W_
L
I. �,;;,J.i
V—X
San ft,&Off.
P 177
.7-
a \JA4 -A,
Aj
X
Ji, IT
IP=A A�
F RE
:7 Ito
J
\<
IL IV E -M'-'O--_R'E_
5
'TAT
CH 10STAT1,0 ;/`' ....
�K
I—L .................... ..... . ca
;----------- --- .;f
\A%J
IF
V
G. .. .. .........
LA
o.
An LIVER MC-3
w.
od <TA
;LEGEND
PRO
4F
POSED STATION,
AL
TERNATIVE
I.
'0 v.11 El ION.SITE
UDIEDIN
ROUTES S
01
1983 UPDATE
virm
i�,Z .....,SEGMENTS STUDIED
IN' 1985 ANALYSIS
z
W 2000'
FIGURE
DeLEUWD W_ STUDY SEGMENTS DUBLIN TO LIVERMORE,.. 6.
CATHER ;�_�associates
Showing Sub-Segments Thru Gravel Pit Area
I �(fl
LAI
Revised Sept. 85
H-19
Livermore Airport
a JAMIESON RANCH
CITY OF LIVERMORE
Se 9 ment R-L --
.............
.....i.l.i...
Relocated Arroyo Mocho
O
X.
.. ..........
.. . �...
I
I
} ? 1 I
Future
# ' Isabel Ave -
TRIAD •
NE Berm Alternative JA SON COMPA fe Kitty Hawk Rd.
Arroyo Mocho Alternative W W W =�
Segment R-C f/
KAISER SAND & GRAVEL
P,,LEASANTON I , �
U
'GRAVEL I 41
$egmentR-S �//�
qr r o f o Mocho ///Z®
R•R,
T S ANLE Y gLV D. II ♦.i
U.P.
S•P.T.co. I
0000 To PLEASANTo
N ' •
t •v
FIGURE
DeLEUW
CATHER/AD1` N ALTERNATIVE ALIGNMENTS IN EAST PLEASANTON GRAVEL PIT AREA 7
GATHER associates
II-20
A short section of El Charro Road would require relocation, eliminating
the existing dogleg fronting the Jamieson Ranch. The relocation would
displace two buildings on the ranch.
Settment I-A: This alternative extends along I-580 to a point east of the
El Charro Road interchange, cutting diagonally to the southeast westerly
of the Livermore Airport, then along the southerly boundary of the
Airport and on the north shore of the "chain of lakes." From the
northeast corner of the "chain of lakes," Segment I-A runs southerly
along the eastern shore of the the lakes to the Union Pacific Railroad.
An alternative routing from the northeast corner of the lakes would be
along Segment R-L east to Kitty Hawk Road, then southerly to the Union
Pacific Railroad. This alternative would avoid the sharp curves around
the corner of the lakes but would traverse more property intended for
commercial development.
Beginning at the Jamieson Ranch, the remaining four alternatives
continue from Segment F-R on diverging routes through the quarry
area. They are described in sequence below from the most northerly to
the most southerly.
Seitment R-L. From east of El Charro Road, this alternative extends
from Jamieson Ranch along the northerly shore of the "chain of lakes"
south of the airport, then turns southeastly to intersect Kitty hawk
II-21
Road then proceeds southerly to the Union Pacific-Southern Pacific
Corridor, then turns easterly following the railroad corridor to
downtown Livermore.
Settment R-N. Paralleling El Charro Road, this alternative extends east
from the Jamieson Ranch along the southerly shore of the "chain of
lakes" supported on the east-west dividing dike of the Jamieson
Company northerly tier of quarry cells, to Kitty Hawk Road and the
Union Pacific Railroad.
Settment R-C. This alternative extends from the Jamieson Ranch
southeasterly along El Charro Road to the Jamieson Company east-west
dividing dike "core" between the northerly and southerly quarry cells,
then southerly to the Union Pacific Railroad.
Segment R-S. This alternative extends from the Jamieson Ranch
southeasterly along El Charro Road to the Arroyo Mocho, then easterly
parallel to and on the north side of the Union Pacific (formerly Western
Pacific) mainline to Kitty Hawk Road, north of its intersection with
Stanley Boulevard.
Segment R-S assumes that the Arroyo Mocho channel will be relocated
northerly to skirt around the northerly and easterly shores of the
"chain of lakes." The alignment parallels El Charro Road and would
utilize a regraded Arroyo Mocho channel bed. The entire length of the
route would be situated on original, undisturbed ground. Although the
II-22
route parallels El Charro Road and the heavily used truck haul
pavement, there would be no conflict between truck and BART
movements. The profile elevation along the proposed regraded Arroyo
Mocho channel is well above any potential flood water levels in the
"chain of lakes."
A grade separation would carry El Charro Road over the BART line and
possibly over the Union Pacific-Southern Pacific tracks. Continuing
easterly on Segment R-S, BART would be built at grade parallel to and
on the north side of Union Pacific, passing underneath the elevated
approaches to the proposed Kitty Hawk Road-Isabel Avenue railroad
grade separation adjacent to Stanley Boulevard and continuing easterly
through downtown Livermore as described for Segment G in the 1983
Update Analysis Report.
Desisen Considerations. It will be noted that Segments R-L, R-N, R-C,
and R-S all utilize portions of the El Charro Road-Arroyo Mocho
embankment, which is the ridge of undisturbed natural ground which
generally divides the Kaiser and Jamieson mining areas, as previously
shown in Figures 5 and 7.
BART alignment Segments R-N and R-C would be built substantially at
top-of-dike elevation along one of the east-west dike corridors. Segment
R-N would traverse the midpoint of Cells 1, 2, 3, and 4. Segment R-C
would traverse along the northerly side of the "core" along the
southern boundary of Cells 1, 2, 3, and 4. Both alignments would be
II-23
supported entirely on solid material rather than partially on slickens
and partially on solid backfill. In fact, through coordinating with the
Jamieson Company's mining plan, Segment R-C could be built on the
undisturbed central dike across the entire width of the cells. In
contrast, Segment R-N would rest on a dike of backfill. Both alignments
could cross the easterly leg of the "chain of lakes" at grade on dikes
-A ith no need for aerial structures.
Some additional design considerations for the quarry segments include:
o As will be discussed in Chapter III,. all route alternatives
have adequate room for an interim storage and maintenance
track.
o Of all the segments through the quarry area, only Segment
R-N could not be constructed on undisturbed earth.
o No speed restrictions due to alignment curviture would
likely be necessary for any . quarry segments except the
alternative of R-S that follows the easterly shore of the
lakes.
o All of the gravel pit segments would be at grade through the
quarry area. Segments utilizing the embankment of El
Charro Road could pass easterly over a depressed haul road.
II-24
ISABEL AVENUE CORRIDOR
Physical Features and Proposed Development
Kitty Hawk Road-Isabel Avenue has long been planned as a major
north-south traffic arterial traversing the westerly outskirts of the City
of Livermore. Kitty Hawk Road will occupy a corridor bounded generally
by the Livermore Airport and gravel pits on the west, and by
single-family residential neighborhoods on the east, all of which
constitute physical controls and which rule out consideration of
alternative parallel north-south corridors within close proximity. The
Isabel Avenue corridor has been included in the Master Plans of both
the City of Livermore and Alameda County for many years.
State Highway 84 Plans. Plans for a north-south freeway route through
this corridor were officially adopted by the California State Highway
Commission in the late 1950'x. These plans identified a route extending
from Brentwood in Contra Costa County via Collier Canyon Road, Kitty
Hawk Road and Isabel Avenue to an existing Interstate 680 interchange
near Sunol. Preliminary designs were undertaken and the areas of
required right-of-way were identified and portions of right-of-way were
acquired. The designation as a freeway route was rescinded during the
1970's, but Caltrans has recently reopened the proposal for
reconnaissance studies. Caltrans' planning is in very preliminary
stages, however, and the eventual use of the corridor is uncertain. A
few parcels of right-of-way still remain available in public ownership for
II-25
a lesser type of highway development. These portions of right-of-way
primarily extend from Stanley Boulevard southerly along the easterly
boundary of the gravel pits and for about one half mile northerly of the
Arroyo Mocho.
City of Livermore and Alameda County Master Plans. The current Master
Plans of the City of Livermore and Alameda County designate the Isabel
Avenue corridor to be developed as a divided limited access boulevard
rather than as a freeway. The Master Plan of the City of Livermore
specifies the following cross-section for this divided boulevard:
Total width of right-of-way: 130 feet
Width of median between 18 feet
curb faces:
Curb-to-curb width, 46 feet
northbound roadway:
Curb-to-curb width, 46 feet
southbound roadway:
Outer planning strip and 10 feet
sidewalk, each side:
Short segments of the above-described street improvements have already
been completed opposite the Livermore Sewage Treatment Plant, and
other portions have been built in part extending northerly from Las
Positas Boulevard. Completion of all of the improvements is proposed
under the 1985 West Assessment District, which may finance portions of
II-26
the proposed realignment of Arroyo Mocho around the north and east
sides of the "chain of lakes," as well as the new boulevard
improvements, including the railroad grade separation at Stanley
Boulevard. The Assessment District is presently "on hold," however,
pending determination of the particular parcels to be included in the
District, the cost of the improvements to be financed, and other
procedural matters relating to the formal establishment and approval of
the District.
Alternatives
One primary route alignment alternative has been identified within the
Isabel Avenue corridor (Figure 8). This alternative is described below.
Settment I-G. This alternative would extend east along I-580, turn south
at Kitty Hawk Road, parallel Kitty Hawk Road on the east side to Stanley
Boulevard at Isabel Avenue, and extend east along the northern side of
the Union Pacific Railroad corridor into downtown Livermore.
A variation of this alignment could be a route which parallels Kitty Hawk
Road on the west rather than east side. This alignment requires
substantially the same design considerations as an alignment along the
east side of the roadway and is therefore not detailed.
Desion Considerations. Major physical constraints along the Isabel
Avenue corridor require the following design considerations:
II-27
I
I
r
I
m
• 3
c
0 ¢
0
O
c
�
AIRWAY
BLVD
c .
m I �
, � I
cc
CHI#N OF Llt#C.E� i 0 I
0_
IW i
li to I �
t o
Cn
l I I I I m J
I a FO
TRIAD System Corp.
L( ight -
Industrial)
� I ! - 1
C;: I I °-
I
o I � O
Z ¢
V > o I I J 2
� Ot
a o I
Gravel Pits -°J
Sewage Treatment Proposed Road i I TRIAD Northbluff
n
}O a..ao` Proposed Plant connection
' l
2 .. Extension I
i I /i II
Proposed/
SaParatlon� I
Close Access KITTY HAWK RD.
PROPOSED ISABEL AVE/KITTY HAWK R ::-� At-Grade Aerial
PROPOSED ISABEL AVER -- = N k v Fron • Proposed \ ProPOSed Separation
BART At
O \ i
Road Extension t: \ I �/
- � \ \ PPPOYO
c inesa ark= I 1
. Single Family Housing I Airport Expansion \ 0 I
Q I Clear ton•
N # \
��New Access Rd. -- — \ u'
O
do
LO
I
Woelffel m
F-
500 0 Soo 1000 Oj O
stole feet m Airport Approach Area t"
)J y I
'
Z}
a
to
I�
DeLEUW
FIGURE
CATHER la-WsFociates BART IN KITTY HAWK-ISABEL CORRIDOR, LIVERMOR'E 8
II-28
o The alignment should be at-grade or on aerial structure at
the crossing of the Las Positas Flood Control Channel.
o Because of glidepath restrictions at the easterly approach to
the Livermore Municipal Airport, the alignment should be
at-grade or depressed opposite the runways.
o The alignment should be either at-grade or on aerial
structure at the channel crossing of the Arroyo Mocho.
As the Isabel Avenue corridor would be a combined vehicular-BART
corridor, it has been assumed that the BART alignment would cross over
to the east side of Kitty Hawk Road and become parallel to an upgraded,
limited-access or freeway-type facility about one-fourth mile south of
I-580. The alignment would enter the corridor in a long, sweeping, and
curved aerial structure from the west and would leave the corridor on
another sweeping curve to the east about one-fourth mile north of
Stanley Boulevard. The 1000-foot radii curves shown in Figure 8 would
restrict BART to 36 mph in the vicinity of the curves.
A route alignment in the median of Kitty Hawk Road does not appear to
be appropriate since vehicular access must be provided to several
commercial developments, primarily fronting the west side of Kitty Hawk
Road. Additionally, between-north of Airway Boulevard and south of Las
II-29
Positas Boulevard, the existing right-of-way in public ownership is too
narrow to accommodate both a divided boulevard and a BART alignment.
To provide adequate corridor width for a BART alignment, the City's
currently proposed 130-foot wide right-of-way north of Las Positas
Boulevard should be widened to about 170 feet. Additional areas would
be required at interchanges where separations would carry local streets
over the BART alignment and over-Kitty Hawk Road, in lieu of signalized
intersections at-grade with left-turn pockets. A typical cross-section
showing an integrated expressway-BART alignment is presented in
Figure 9.
To provide the basic alignment width described above would require the
removal of seven residences and three commercial buildings along the
east side of the street.
To avoid at-grade street crossings of the BART alignment, overpasses
would carry Airway Boulevard and Las Positas Boulevard over BART and
over Kitty Hawk Road. Additionally, any eventual extension of Olivina
Street that would cross the BART line would also require an overpass.
The loop ramp connections to city streets would be located on the west
side of Kitty Hawk Road.
II-30
f
Proposed Isabel Ave./
Kitty Hawk Rd.*
F
Went R/w East R/N
i
ISO, 46'.
I
-:BART (AT—GRADE)
r
` P
w
lot
46' 8 46'
siw siw
�ancs:
. 2% 2% �
Looking North
BART AT-GRADE ALONG THE EAST SIDE
OF PROPOSED ISABEL AVEJKITTY HAWK RD.
-n
m.
c
1
m
REMMIENDED ROUTE
Review of the right-of-way, design and geotechnical considerations
affecting the alignment alternatives substantiates the feasibility and
preferability of a quarry alignment. This routing avoids location
problems that might otherwise be encountered in attempting to fit BART
within the constrained Kitty Hawk Road-Isabel Avenue corridor.
Of the several alternative and technically feasible alignments described
through the gravel pit area, the most promising appears to be Segment
R-S, which parallels El Charro Road utilizing the existing dry channel
bed of the relocated Arroyo Mocho. This route offers the following
advantages:
o The entire length of the route would be situated on original,
undisturbed ground, not subject to subsidence from backfill
areas within the grave pit area.
o Although the route parallels El Charro Road and the heavily
utilized truck haul pavement, there would be no conflict
between gravel truck and BART movements.
o Segment R-S offers the most direct and shortest connection
cutting diagonally across the gravel pit area, but would not
sever potential industrial subdivisions, as could be the case
with Segments I-A, R-L, R-N, or R-C.
II-32
o The alignment has minimum central angle of curvature and can
be designed with long radius curves, thus avoiding any
speed restrictions caused by alignment.
o The route can be adopted without requiring the negotiation of
a complex agreement with the Jamieson Company to coordinate
mining and backfill activities with construction of the BART
line.
o The profile elevation along the proposed regraded Arroyo
Mocho Channel is well above any potential flood water levels
in the "chain of lakes."
The essential prerequisite to selecting Segment R-S, the El Charro Road-
Arroyo Mocho alignment, is assurance that the Arroyo Mocho channel will
in fact be relocated to skirt around the northerly and easterly shores
of the "chain of lakes."
II-33
CHAPTER III
STATIONS and YARD
CHAPTER III
STATIONS AND YARD
The 1983 LPX Update Analysis identified station alternatives for two
primary route alternatives: the I-580 Freeway Route and the Railroad
Route. Station site alternatives were identified for a Pleasanton Station,
a West Livermore Station, and an East Livermore Station. A yard site
alternative was also identified which is common to both route
alternatives. All of these alternatives are still considered viable for the
new alignments identified in Chapter 2 of this report. This chapter
provides an update on land use plans, policy decisions and issues that
have occurred since 1983 which may affect the viability of these and
alternate proposed station alternatives and yard site.
WEST LIVERMORE STATION
West Livermore Station at Murrieta Boulevard.
This station site, as identified in the 1983 LPX Update Analysis for the
Railroad Route, encompasses an area of 13 acres. Ten acres of this site
east of Murrieta Boulevard between Stanley Boulevard and the railroads
have been acquired by the City of Livermore and reserved for a future
public transit facility. This site is within walking distance to downtown
and offers reasonably good vehicular access to residential areas in the
III-1
southerly and westerly portions of the community. However, the size of
the proposed site may not be adequate to meet the future demand for
parking. Some of the proposed parking would need to be located on the
opposite side of Murrieta Avenue, requiring a long walk to the station.
West Livermore Station at Isabel Avenue.
The 1983 LPX Update Analysis identified an alternative to the Murrieta
Boulevard site at Isabel Avenue and Stanley Boulevard to the west. This
station site, which encompasses an area of 25 acres and could
accommodate 2500 parking spaces, is located in the northeast quadrant
of the proposed Isabel Avenue/Stanley Boulevard Interchange. Factors
which warrant consideration of this site include:
o Planned development of the Collier Canyon Road-Kitty Hawk
Road-Isabel Avenue corridor as a major north-south
transport route with direct interchange connections with
I-580.
o Availability of surplus state-owned right-of-way primarily
south of Stanley Boulevard, originally acquired for the
proposed Route 84 Freeway.
o Availability of still undeveloped private property north of
Stanley Boulevard.
III-2
In comparing this site with the Murrieta Boulevard site, however, it
should be noted that it is not within close walking distance to
downtown.
West Livermore Station at I-580/Collier Canyon.
The Segment I-G alignment alternative identified in Chapter 2 traverses
to downtown Livermore through the Isabel Avenue Corridor. This
alternative passes the West Livermore Station at I-580/Collier Canyon
Road, which was proposed for the I-580 alignment in the 1983 LPX
Update Analysis. Subsequent analysis, to be documented in the
Supplemental Analysis Final Report, will consider patronage for all of the
proposed LPX station alternatives. This will include a general analysis
of patronage for this station if it were to be included for the Segment
I-G alignment as a third Livermore station.
Central Downtown Livermore Station.
In the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Livermore
Redevelopment and Urban Design Plan (UDP), a BART station alternative
located within an 11.7 acre block between Railroad Avenue and First
Street was considered for central downtown Livermore. This site,
referred to as the "superblock," had not been analyzed previously by
BART. Prior to the City of Livermore's adoption of the UDP, however,
the status of ownership of this parcel changed, and the City
discontinued its further consideration as a future BART station.
III-3
BAST LIVERMORE STATION
Three potential station sitings in East Livermore were analyzed in the
1983 Update Analysis report: two alternatives at Mines Road, and a third
at Vasco Road. The Vasco Road site was removed from further
consideration, based upon factors described in the earlier document.
Selection and design of the Mines Road station depend upon a number of
closely-related planning issues, as follows:
o The opportunity for the Union Pacific and Southern Pacific
Railroads to effect general improvements in railroad
operations through the area by consolidating train movements
along one of the two mainline tracks, leaving the other
available for possible acquisition and use by BART. These
track rearrangements would provide for an improved profile
and horizontal alignment, and removal of approach
embankments and speed restrictions.
o City of Livermore resolution of the design options for the
future Mines Road grade separation, depending upon which
line will remain after track consolidation.
o The need for new culverts to alleviate existing drainage
deficiencies under the two railroads.
III-4
The choice of mainline railroad alignment and the related issues in this
area have been under active study by the two railroads, by developers
in the East Livermore area, by ACFC&WCD, Zone 7, and by the City of
Livermore. Debate continued throughout the Spring and Summer of
1985, but no decision had been reached as of mid-September, 1985. The
plan to improve main line rail alignment, profile, structural, and
drainage conditions in East Livermore essentially calls for retaining the
existing Southern Pacific right-of-way and track for joint use by the
two railroads, from a point east of the East First Street overhead to the
Arroyo Seco flood control channel, a distance of about 1-1/2 miles, and
for removing the elevated UPRR mainline. A UPRR industrial track
serving two or three shippers, and extending from North Mines Road for
about 1-1/2 miles to the east, would remain.
If this plan is implemented, the right-of-way of the Union Pacific
Railroad to be abandoned could become available for use by BART.
Either track alignment would provide for an East Livermore Station at
Mines Road, but the station layouts would differ, depending upon
whether the UP or SP right-of-way is available. The alternative layouts
are described in the 1983 Update Analysis Report, and conditions remain
substantially as shown in that document. Part of the area for the
northern alignment has been subdivided and street improvements have
been made, but there are no new structures.
III-5
BAST LIVERMORE STORAGE/MAINTENANCE YARD
1983 LPX Update Analysis Site - West of Vasco Road
The original 1976 LPX Final Report and the 1983 LPX Update Analysis
both identified an easterly terminal yard, located on a triangular-shaped
parcel fronting on the west side of Vasco Road. This site is in the gore
between the Southern Pacific (SP) track on the north and the Union
Pacific (UP) track on the south.
During the summer of 1985, this parcel was partially developed for light
industrial uses under City of Livermore Tract No. 3757. Street
pavements, drainage facilities, and utilities have now been installed, and
buildings are nearing completion near the Vasco Road frontage. It is
uncertain how much of the parcel will be developed in the future. BART
would need approximately 28 acres of the total 67+ acre parcel for the
storage/maintenance yard. It would be located at the extreme easterly
end of the ultimate track extension.
Identification of New Alternatives
It is possible that development may occur in the East Livermore area in
the near future, which would greatly increase costs for an East
Livermore storage/maintenance yard on the site identified in the 1983
LPX Update Analysis. To help identify new alternative sites, the
III-6
following space requirements have been established, based upon
preliminary analysis:
Storage Capacity 200+ cars
Total Track Feet of Operating 27,500± track feet
and Storage Tracks
Length of Storage Tracks 8,600 + track feet
Gross Area 28 + acres
The following two subsections discuss alternative yard sites.
Alternative Site - East of Vasco Road. This potential alternative site lies
north of the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and east of Vasco Road. A
yard here would be similar to that west of Vasco Road as identified in
the 1976 LPX Study and 1983 LPX Update Analysis. Current plans by
the City of Livermore call for the construction of the Vasco Road
overhead across the UPRR tracks to begin in the spring of 1986. The
o: a retaining wall along the front of the north abutment of
this bridge would allow a BART line to cross under Vasco Road to reach
this yard site.
Alternative Site - Between Union Pacific and Southern Pacific
Rights-of-Way, Extending from East First Street to Arroyo Seco. The
Union Pacific (UP) and Southern Pacific (SP) tracks parallel each other,
sharing the same right-of-way through downtown Livemore and to a
III-7
point about 1,200 feet east of the East First Street overhead. The
alignments then diverge as the UP climbs on its long approach
embankment to cross over the SP track at milepost 49.88. Within the
gore between the two railroads, a 5,000-foot long sliver of property is
in private ownership. This property is accessible only from Trevarno
Road. It has a maximum width of 250 feet. This property, together with
the UP right-of-way which may be abandoned, could be consolidated and
regraded. Assuming the need for direct rail access by one or two
existing but inactive shippers would no longer exist, an additional
paralleling strip of right-of-way occupied by the UP drill track on the
north could also be acquired.
Interim Storage/Maintenance Yard
The Livermore-Pleasanton Extension is proposed for construction in two
stages. The first stage extends to the proposed Dublin Station site.
This situation dictates the need for an interim storage/maintenance yard
in this vicinity. The interim storage/maintenance yard would serve the
:unctions:
o Turning back trains; storage of trains during off-peak hours
and overnight.
o Maintenance and cleaning of stored trains, to avoid the heavy
cost of deadheading equipment to and from the Hayward
III-8
Maintenance Yard. Heavy repairs would continue to be
performed at the existing Hayward repair shop.
o Storage of disabled trains, pending their return to the
Hayward, Richmond, or Concord maintenance shops.
BART operational criteria require that the interim storage/maintenance
yard include not less than 2,500 track feet of storage. This track would
be preferably arranged in a three-track layout so that a malfunctioning
train does not immobilize other trains which might otherwise be stored
behind it. Crossovers would be provided beyond the platform to
facilitate turnback movements. Additionally, the track arrangement
should permit two of the three tracks to be used as the main line track
when the second phase is completed through to Livermore.
If a route through the quarry area is adopted, a possible site for the
interim storage tracks is located along Segment F-R after the alignment
returns to grade and extends along the northerly end of El Charro Road
while traversing diagonally through the quarry area. The embankment
supporting El Charro Road and the existing Arroyo Mocho has adequate
width for the three-track facility.
However, if Segment I-G along the Kitty Hawk Road-Isabel Avenue
corridor is adopted, a site along I-580 would be necessary. A possible
location is on the north. side of the I-580 somewhere within Camp Parks.
This location would also suffice for any of the quarry alternatives.
III-9
APPENDIX A
SOURCES OF DATA
APPENDIX A
SOURCES OF DATA
The primary sources of data used in development of this Supplemental
Analysis Interim Report are:
o The Long-Range Mining Plan as prepared for the Jamieson
Company, and discussions with the quarry operators.
o Land Reclamation Plan as prepared for Kaiser Sand and
Gravel, a division of the Koppers Company.
o "City of Livermore, 1985 West Assessment District, Project
Report," dated April 1985, by Greiner Engineering of
California, Inc. This report describes various improvements
planned within the proposed West Assessment District,
particularly involving areas extending westerly to El Charro
Road, in the general vicinity of the Livermore Municipal
Airport, extending southerly along Kitty Hawk Road-Isabel
Avenue to Stanley Boulevard.
o Discussions with engineers of the Alameda County Flood
Control and Water Conservation District (ACFC&WCD), which in
cooperation with the gravel companies has developed plans to
A-1
operate a series of ground water recharge reservoirs,
referred to as the "chain of lakes," and for the enlargement
of the Arroyo Mocho Flood Control Channel.
o A Preliminary Report, submitted on the date of April 11, 1983,
for the City of Livermore for the proposed development of
Isabel Avenue as a major boulevard-expressway.
o County of Alameda Planning Department.
o Planning Departments, Cities of Pleasanton and Livermore.
o Caltrans, District 4.
o Information from consulting engineering firms representing
several developers.
A-2
APPENDIX B
GEOLOGICAL7
GEOTECHNICAL
INVESTIGATION
536 Galvestor Street • West Sacramento, California 95691
West Sacramer?o(916)371-1690 -Santa Rosa(707)575-1568
CONSULTANTS October 1, 1985
Engineers&Geologists
R. M. Barton
DeLeuw, Cather & Company
P.O. Box 3821
San Francisco, CA 94119 '
1P2/385/54
GEOTECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS-ARROYO MOCHO CORRIDOR
BART Extension Study--Dublin to Livermore
The following is in summary of geotechnical review and dis-
cussion of alternative segments of a proposed alignment of BART
extension between Dublin and Livermore. This review included
geotechnical information from our files and published sources;
field review of the site and discussions with Pleasanton Gravel
Company personnel and discussions with your office.
SITE-PROJECT
The alignment segment under consideration extends from a
point on E1 Charro Road +5000 ft south of I-580, east-southeasterly
+10,000 ft to WP/SP railroad right-of-way near Isabel Avenue/Stanley
Blvd intersection. Alternatively it may be southerly and westerly
of, northerly and easterly of or across an intervening area from
which Pleasanton Gravel Company is, or will be, extracting gravel.
Arroyo Mocho channel is the westerly limit of segment alter-
natives considered. It is paralleled on the east by E1 Charro Road.
Gravel extraction is in progress immediately east of El Charro; the
gro,ind underlying both Arroyo Mocho channel and E1 Charro has not
been, and is not expected to be, quarried. The existing and proposed
gravel quarrying operation is proceeding generally from the north-
west to southeast of the Pleasanton Gravel Company property, which
is bounded on the north by the Livermore Airport property and on
the south by WP/SP railroads.
The extraction operation is proceeding and is planned to
proceed as a series of cells, the longer-dimension of which is
oriented roughly east-west, and which will be separated by dikes
constructed of overburden materials and by a centrally-located
east-west oriented "ridge" or "spine" of existing material left
intact and used to transport quarried materials to centrally-
located processing.
B-1
i
CONSULTANTS
R. M. Barton
DeLeuw, Cather & Company
October 1, 1985
Page 2 1P2/385/54
The quarrying process proceeds by stripping a relatively uniform
thickness of overburden to gravel-bearing horizons and removal of
gravel for processing to a lower, relatively-uniform non-productive
horizon. Overburden stripping materials are used to construct cell-
dike-embankments founded on the lower, unworked horizon. The gravel
processing reject-materials are discharged as a slurry to a previously
quarried, diked cell; a high percentage of this material is fines
(i.e. smaller than #200 sieve) and is referred to as "slickens" .
When the cells are filled, they are topped with a layer of strippings
materials. The surface at the completion of this operation will be
lower than original ground, . and as internal drainage of the "slickens"
occurs, settlement of disposal-cell surface areas is projected.
It is our understanding that it is currently planned to create
a "chain of lakes" of the most northerly and easterly gravel-extrac-
tion cells; i.e. they will be only partly backfilled with waste, the
sides will be processed sufficiently to retain water and a series
of ponds will be formed. It is also understood that the existing
Arroyo Mocho channel is an inadequate flood flow waterway and that
plans are being considered for its improvement, which may include
shifting away from its present alignment in this area. It is also
understood that there may be some flexibility in the pattern of
planning for gravel extraction on the Pleasanton Gravel Company
property, with some possible option for rail-alignment accommodation.
At this time no specific rail-line improvements other than
roadbed have been identified for this segment of the extension.
Comments following regarding geotechnical conditions are generally
referenced to roadbed at or below existing ground-level, but are
applicable to other conditions and facilities.
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The quarry-area will ultimately be typified by three general
subsurface soil conditions. 1) Natural, intact ground profile
around the periphery, under the existing E1 Charro Road-Arroyo
Mocho channel strip and along the central "spine" of the quarry-
operation. 2) Dikes between disposal-cells will be trapezoidal
prisms of overburden materials placed as compacted embankment
based upon intact soils below the level of quarrying. 3) Disposal
cells with slurried processing-waste deposited on the base of
previous extraction, and topped with a cover of overburden
materials.
B-2
VT.;PG1
CONSULTANTS
R. M. Barton
DeLeuw, Cather & Company
October 1, 1985
Page 3 1P2/385/54
The natural intact soil profile is of alluvial origin, con-
sisting of on order of 20 ft of a silt/clay/sand mixture overlying
layers more predominantly gravel to the depth of exploitation
(60-70+ ft) . No major inherent soils defects for the proposed
construction are apparent in or typical to such materials. Hori-
zontal clearances to very steep quarry cut-slopes are a consideration
with respect to slope stability, but these materials are not highly
sensitive in this aspect. Obtaining appropriate clearances on the
site periphery does not appear difficult, and the "spine" area is
likely to be dimensionally of more than adequate width--disposal-
cell backfill will be a major beneficial factor for quarry side-
slope stability.
Inter-cell dikes will be processed overburden materials
supported on intact ground. Homogeneity of the materials and a
high degree of internal strength can be anticipated. Typical
construction is expected to result in embankment side-slopes on
order of 1:1, with top width on order of 100 ft. Compression
and residual compression characteristics of these materials
should be good.
The side-slopes as noted are over-steep for extended service
if unsupported; effective side-slopes steeper than, say, 1.5:1
would rely to some extent upon the buttressing of cell backfill
for appropriate service. The effectiveness of this restraint will
rely upon the realized depth of "slickens" in the adjacent disposal
area and upon the thickness and degree of processing of the adjacent
cell overburden-topping. Alignment and grade modifications of road-
b,, !! can be used to ameliorate slope clearance deficiencies should
they be emergently important.
The filled disposal-cells will be occupied by substantial
depths 25-39T-1t) of slic ens" deposited on the intact soil
quarry floor covered by, say, 10-15 ft of overburden "strippings" .
The "slickens" are deposited hydraulically and the grain-size
distribution of the deposit will vary with composition of the
reject and with distance from discharge point. The resultant
soil profile at a specific location may be randomly distributed
in grain size, may be composed primarily of the coarsest part of
the discharge, or of the finest. Typically, it has a very high
initial water content and very low initial strength; as it drains,
it compresses and gains strength.
B-3
CONSULTANTS
R. M. Barton
DeLeuw, Cather & Company
October 1, 1985
Page 4 1P2/385/54
The time for internal drainage of "slickens" and of compression
may extend over a period of many years for the fine-grained materials,
with continuing and ultimately large (in feet) settlement of the
surface. Total compression is related to thickness of "slickens"
and of overburden cover placed; incremental fills placed on the
typical cover can be expected to renew and increase settlement.
Rapidity of internal drainage can be significantly enhanced during
reject-placement, but such measures require prior determination of
economic feasibility.
Depending upon the degree of processing that can and is applied
to placement of the disposal cell cover, it may have the local
bearing and stability characteristics of the placed dikes as above.
Its over-all use, reaction to seismic stresses and gross load-carrying
characteristics are, however, largely controlled by the state of
weakness and compressibility of the underlying "slickens". Typically,
road-bed on the surface of filled/capped disposal cells would be
expected to experience large, irregular and continuing deflections
unless major ground-improvement procedures were undertaken..
Owing to the very great contrast in stability and compression
characteristics between the filled disposal cells and either the
intercell-dike fills and/or natural ground, alignments crossing
these two types of subsurface conditions could be expected to have
large and continuing differential settlement conditions occur at
the transitions and markedly dissimilar reaction to seismic loads.
CONCLUSIONS
Based upon the foregoing, it appears that any route traversing
the backfilled disposal cells, in whole or in part, is not likely
to be found feasible--in terms of economics or service. It does
appear desirable and feasible, and without major soils deficiences,
to utilize the existing Arroyo Mocho channel corridor for the
alignment to the extent that other planning and design criteria
will allow.
An alignment departing from Arroyo Mocho and traversing existing
natural ground north of the "chain of lakes" and to the east of the
ultimate quarry development ( "R-L" ) is considered feasible and amen-
able to readily avoiding quarry-site defects. An alignment essen-
tially utilizing the Arroyo Mocho corridor across the entire quarry
B-4
CONSULTANTS
R. M. Barton
DeLeuw, Cather & Company
October 1, 1985
Page 5 1P2/385/54
area ( "R-S" ) to the tracks on the south is similarly considered
feasible and desirable with respect to quarry-site geotechnical
defects.
An alignment departing from the Arroyo Mocho corridor at
the operational "spine" and .proceeding across the site easterly
thereon ( "R-C" ) is also considered appropriately feasible; the
width of the stable, intact soils corridor available along this
"spine" indicates that there would be substantial latitude to
accommodate the trafficway without .enroachment onto (or without
unacceptable lateral clearance to) "slickens" disposal-cells.
An alignment departing from the Arroyo Mocho corridor at the most
northerly of the "east-west" inter-cell dikes may be feasible
( "R-N" ) ; the major constraints appear to be related to the re-
latively narrow dimension of dike, limiting alignment/alignment
transitions to avoid encroachments onto, or being unacceptably
near, the "slickens" deposits and/or locally having "slickens"
remedial-work imposed upon the project in order to accommodate
needed alignment and maintain acceptable standards of service/
safety.
Clearly, detailed geotechnical evaluation should be performed
for the route selected to provide adequate assurance of appropriate
consideration of the above-discussed and other conditions. Amount
and level of such work needed is expected to ascend in the order of
above discussion (i.e. , "R-L", least to "R-N", most) .
I trust the foregoing meets your current needs; please call on
us as we can be of further assistance in this project.
Very truly yours,
TABER CONSULTANTS
4,;2 -T4L
H. R. Taber
R.C.E. 9165
C.E.G. 12
HRT/ns
Distribution: DeLeuw, Cather & Company (6)
B-5