Post on 19-Mar-2019
Final Technical Report RAILYARD ALIGNMENT AND BENEFITS STUDY
Appendix A: Conceptual Design Drawings,
Alignment Alternatives
�--\ \ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
v: TRANSBAY TRANSIJ CENTER
\ \
\ \
\ \
\
\ \
$DATE
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ "
\ .... \ .. \
,
$TIME
.--; 3?-Cl S-'I" dJ 0
APPROVED DT-X ALIGNMENTi
PROPOSED 4TH AND lOWNSEND STREET STATION (SEE EXHIBIT 2.2 FOR DETAILS)
$REQUEST
AT&T PARK:
BRIDGE/3RD STREET
POTENTIAL 3RD STREET STATION (SEE EXHIBIT 3.2 FOR DETAILS)
SITE OF PROPOSED CHASE CENTER WARRIORS ARENA
4TH St AND KING St -
A MISSION BAY
/ • ALIGNMENT (3)
CALTRAIN STATION/RAIL YARD
PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE ALIGNMENT (2)
500' 1000' 2000'
'I.. V)
� (v
POTENTIA LOCATION FOR 22ND STREET STA"'FION
/ EXISTING TUNNEL
',,, SECTION ',
---------------
NOTES
KEY
--- APPROVED DTX ALIGNMENT
--- PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE ALIGNMENT
--- MISSION BAY ALIGNMENT
-------- EXISTING RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
04-22-16 04-29-16 04-29-16CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280 BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY
TITLE
KEY PLAN CORRIDOR ALIGNMENTS
DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 1.0 STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCALE
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17"
REV
A Page A-1
Appendix A Refined Revised Rail Corridor Alignments
,., ,. \ ,.
... % ,.... \ ,. \ ,, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
,----TRANSBAY TRANSIT CENTRE BOX \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\ \. \ \ \ \
\ \ \ \
\ ' \,\ ', .......... \ .... ' , ...... ' ...... -\. -,.._ ... _
--------
_ ... --\ I \ I\ /\ ' ,b \ ,I
\ ;.,,.. ... _
�\\"',........ --------
�
-YI.I'. j,lfCUT & COVER STATION THROAT STRUCTURE
� -----�-----
-�-y�
�
CUl & COVER TUNNEL ----=v
"�- BORED TUNNEL 3 TRACK
3 TRACK
SCALE: 1 "=400' •
APPROVED DTX ALIGNMENT 14---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------'\\\ ,-------1-i---------
CUT & COVER MINED TUNNEL CUT & COVER TUNNEL
150 STATION THROAT vi
� �<"-------.------------.--------------,--------+----.------t,----=-s-� �=n�n �n �n=n�n�� -----,-------,---------,--�[HJ [L � nnn,�-�--
�--------+--�� 0 ------�
W 00 z 100 - +--------------j- -----i��------+----------+-----�-�l ___ -+---------t----<f-----+----------+--------+-��c--t---------t----------.-+--+------
U 0:: V1 �
I V1
i aJ
� I
i i 'f � r<)
�
I --------------1__ i <i> �
50 -------- • --------- i r<) I -+-----------+---,..--+------,:;;:--------- ------,-----,�---�--+-------+------+----------+-------+---+--+------------+--------;-----+------1-� -- ---- ! .... I :
0-
-- I --- I z ' I N
� .. I -I ... -:------ I- I __ ...- ? I
...... ----.... ---�-- (./} I i � ------ ---- --
--------- ·: -------....... ------.... ::-------------------L----- I w
_.,.-- I / -- .... , ----.... --------- I __ .-- I
',--._ -------- ,n_�------
' .... ,,_ '-----�
IC7"T r--
- .-- - ....
I ---- - - - ,--- LU
w - -- - - I -·------- ?, .... ---------------------;-,- --- ----------------------------- 0 39% . ---- .u.L-?---- --. ---. -. -----. -. ---. -----. -. -----. ---. -. __ !,__
-
• !.,_ __ --
•
-----• -
7 --1--- . ------- . --
- 50 -1 _ _____ �--�---�--/--�-�--�---
----�--�---�
---------------------------_-_--- ----�-�-�-=-=·=·=·=·=- :·:--�-�-�-�-�-;-�-�-�-�~- �-F .- �- �- �--�,-�-�-�-�-�-=·==· =· =·=·i· =· =·= ·=·=·
====
+-:;=t=======
---
---------.-?-- ---
�
-100- ------------- �..........
�
·-_...._ ·-
�---------1, __________ 1 __________ ,1 __________ ,1 __________ 1, __________ 1 __________ ,1 __________ ,1 __________ 1 _________ �1, _____ -0+00
$DATE $TIME
5+00 1 0+00 1 5+00 20+00 25+00 30+00 35+00 4 0+00 4 5+00 50+00
$REQUEST
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400' SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280 BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY
TITLE
ALIGNMENT 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 2.1 STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A
PLAN AND PROFILE
Page A-2
1 50
CUT AND COVER STATION
100 I I I
I
50 rn n n �
I-
� I l/ ---------------------
0 �
-
I
� ---- ----------------------------------------
-50
-100-
-150 . I
50+00 55+00
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
/
& COVER_______,,.,. STATION
APPROVED
CUT
+-(/)
I I-
� I
DTX ALIGNMENT
,ND COVER TUNNEL
[o__6] [ ! V ISION SFCTA COMMENT
FUTURE PIPE UP TO
TWIN BORED TUNNELS
CUT & COVER TUNNEL DTX STUB
LETTER 2010 3TREET SEWER \
28" OD
PLAN
SCALE: 1 "=400'
TWIN BORE TUNNELS - -
( - -
A
CENTRAL I BAYSIDE SEWER
rPROPOSE 1 PILE SUPPORTED
IMPROVM�NT PROJECT PROPOSED 4
s
X CENTRAL BAYS
! $ ( 7
I
(/) 40" UTILITY BANK I
SFCTA COM �ENT LETTER 2010z WER -
\-
9' DIA DE SEWEIR \
i s FCTA COMMENT LETTE R 2010 -��ROVME:� pt��_J _____ /
7-,---------
i _J -
--------- -- ------------------- ----------------
----------- .. -·-
----■---·
-----
01)( ALIGN�gl_1_. -.-. -·-. ------
� PROPQ?�.£ .-· -· -·-.-·
----· ----
----------
. . --------------------------------------------
I I
60+00 65+00
-----------------
I
70+00
I
�
2% ---------- ---------------------------- --. --------- ---
.
I I
75+00 80+00
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1"=80'
� ��
. .·-· 2%
. . -----. - ------ ■
·-·.
----··-·. .·-· .
. ----·. . --
--- ·-·
I I I I
85+00 90+00 95+00 100+00
' I"')
I-
w
w -f-�--
(/)
w
(/)
I
w
z
-��--- ■ -
u
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. ASSUMES RELOCATION OF EXISTING RAIL YARD. REFER TOEXHIBITS 4.1 &4.2 FOR STATION ARRANGEMENT WITH 4 AND 6 PLATFORMS. REFER TO PROJECT REPORT FOR RAILYARD RELOCATION PROPOSALS.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 2.2
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A
Page A-3
200
1 50
100
50
N
1-w
w
0 :::c..l/l
w
w
l/l
-50 w
z
_J
:r: u I<(
-
-100 ::a.
$DATE
V)
<( V) -1--1 0
� V) V)
:I: :r: - Ir-a: I-<( 00 C"I
� M .-'I
-
PENNSYL�ANIA Ave -----
---■ -------
M ISS1
ISSI PP.I St
:reXAS St
MISS©URI St
I\
+-(/)
<( l/l 0 0. -0:: <(
:::i:
�
I /
---
i ---
--
--
'- ___. --
---------
---
-----. -- -----------
I 1 05+00
--- -----
$TIME $REQUEST
------ ---
I 11 0+00
fWIN BORE TUNNELS
If' - "' If'�"'
I) I) /2 - -
/,/
,/ /
/
/ ---/
/ /
7'
.,....
l/l
:r: 1-0)
T @I
I I '·
,/
TWIN BORED TUNNELS
------/' -------/'
/'
. .--· ------. . .
-� ....._,....._
. --· ------ .
2% -------------------- -----------
I 11 5+00
I 120+00
I 125+00
....._ ....._
'--. '-
. . ---
....._ 'S::;
....._
k $ <
-1--1 V)
0
z N N
l-280
BOX
-1--1 V)
0 a: m N
MINNESOTA St
- I
EXISITNG TRACKS IN TUNNE�
-1--1 Vl
IL/)
IN DIANA St
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. 22ND STREET STATION LOCATION AND DEPTH AREINDICATIVE ONLY. REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
PENNSYLVANIA Ave
---- --------RROPOSED 22ND STREET STATION
·------ -�-----=-��.J..-J-,------- . .....:.----
-- --------:------t-s-s= =-: =.: ::..:-==:- - -:.= :-= � �:::::
PLAN
SCALE: 1 "=400'
+-l/l
:E
N N
� I
i i ....._
'- -......__ I ....._ ..........._ i ....._
....._ '-.. '
"
CUT & COVE� ST AT ION I
'
ml ,,m I 2�ND STR I/'·
I i _____ _J_
------7
...._ _______ ----
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .---------. . .
•
TWIN
tET STA fl ON
---------
TllJNNEL POR1AL
TIE IN TO EXISl1NG TRACKS
APPROX STN: 175
BORE! TUNNELS
I If'� "' If' -"'
\ )) \ )) " /2 - -
----------�----- �
.......
..
- -
"<: '·,
....._ -------=-="""
2% ----------------I ----------· ----------
------------------------------
-
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED
MJM SDF
06-03-16 06-03-16
CLIENT
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT ------
I I 130+00 135+00
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
PROFILE
I 140+00
I 145+00
I 150+00
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
I EXHIBIT 2.3 155+00
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A
Page A-4
GUT & COVER
STATION THROAT th D
�
3 0 :c.
CUT & COVER STATION THROAT
th
+V)
<t
z
<I'..
¼ :c. I-
----------- z
-
ti,
� 0 ':l 0
th
0 0 If) oO -
ce. -
�-:f;
SCA[E: 1 "=400'
00
I
TRIPLE TRACK TUNNEL
TRIPLE TRACK BORED TUNNEL
+V)
·. -
780.00'
R - 1207.57'
AT&T STADIUM
R - 870.00 1
---K""""--
3RD B R-lSTRE!ET
�G E
\\ w "'5w _J
EtYx-etn�� �Nrr-A:°L1-c;·N1��"'tr�-----.-----;::-----,--- �� �-�� ;.
i) CHINA BASIN I
3RD ST BRIDGE _IFOUNDATIONS
i J----
-- I ._.,..- I
..- ..- I ? ___ __. I
---------- I
--------------- I
-----------I I
0 -:------------1
? ----. ---------------- ..,,_-
-- ,_ ------- -----
-------50-+----------1 ----------------------------------
?
-100-:----------1
-150-:----------1
-- -- - - --- - - - - . - - - . - - - - - - -- --- - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -
U) z
�
----�
---i___ PILED FOUNDA" IONS (ASSUMED) "-�":...:....::,__- - - -
- -1.. -
N
1-ww
- - - - - -
, .... -.......... --- ---'·<�::---------�::.:---------
- - - - - - - - - /,..-
'r,1"'<1:"i::,,.,/rrT' • ...., ................ -... ....._
- -- -
... , -- ........ ...... --'"') .._ -'- -,.. ... ... '-------.ii --....... ------ • - - - - - - - "',-
-'-
1-vi-r---,/
',,
---::--. ------------- --------
---
\
�
2,5% - - - - - - ----.---.:_· .:.:.·
-.:..::-
-I
',,, SEE NOTE 3 ',,
.. ,, ',,
- - - - - - -
---====:::::::::::==:::�L.._��-r-1:t---::::-_-n.-"u- -
CONFLICT WITH PILESSEE NOTE LI
, _____ w_l w V)
wz_J
I u
tl- 1--, <t
-�--
------- --- -
-200�-------1--------+------------,f---------+-----------1--------+----------+--------+----------+-------+------
0+00 5+00 10+00 15+00
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
20+00
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
25+00 30+00 35+00 40+00 45+00
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVENOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. POTENTIAL CONFLICT WITH PILES TO AT&T ENTRANCEBUILDING MAY BE AVOIDED BY LOWERING ALIGNMENT ALTHOUGH BUILDING PROTECTION MEASURES WOULD BEREQUIRED.
4. CLASH WITH BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS WILL REQUIRE MAJOR PROTECTION WORKS OR COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16
CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY
PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.1
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 1111
X 1711
A
Page A-5
CHINA BASIN
---- - ------- --
3RD St STATION EXACT LOCATION TB0
,..
PLATFORM +CROSSOVER • I.
nnn
TRIPLE TRACK TUNNEL
LiJotu CUT & COVER STATION (SEE NOTE 3)
"'C� co
><(co
z 0 V) V) -
�
"'C
co
>-<(co
z 0 V) Cf) -
SITE OF, RROPOSED WARRIORS ARENA
-----
+-' V)
:c I:::) 0 V)
PLAN
SCALE: 1"=400' +(/)
I I=>0 l/l
�
I i
TWIN BORE TUNNELS
+(/)
I 1-l.O
$< (
+-' V)
0 a..
0:::<(�
(/)
<( l/l0 a..
I"')
'-__ , /.,J
!t'VJ
f:j--- VJ
50�- -\�===��=====:;::=========:;===:::::!!:�===:;:======::::;:::======:::;::::=::::j::::====:;::======i===;:========:;:==��::::;:::==::::;::::::!!!'----
i 3RD STREET BRID
IE
FOUNDATIONS i I
_J' i ----------
i ----------1.--1
- L __________ ---------------------- ----------- ---------- -- -------------------I _____ l.._ ____ ---- �----_:-::J
---------4--....,..-.---_-_-_-_-_-_---- --· -w---0- - ,___,___,
lrm1r��1--i1m1-LL _____ _JL __ :;:::::::=--+----+--+--
/�
=-TUNNE � BE LOW-50- 1-
w
w
I l/l
-100
-150-
-200-
w
z
_J
I u I<( :::;;:
PILE CONFLICT
MITIGATION REQUIRED
----
2,3% - . - ----
----
--
-.. --
--
----
-
---
----
-
--
----
-
----
----
--- I
l/l
w
w
l/l
-- .-·
w
-
_J
I u I-<( :::;;:
- .
-25o -;----------i---------i---------,1---------·1·---------1·---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1-------'
45+00 50+00 55+00 60+00 65+00 70+00 75+00 80+00 85+00 90+00 95+00
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400' SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTSHAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. FOR STATION DETAIL SEE EXHIBIT 5.1 AND FOR ALTERNATIVEBORED TUNNEL STATION SEE EXHIBIT 5.2. ADDITIONAL PLATFORM OPTIONS SHOWN FOR BOTH
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16
CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY PLAN AND PROFILE
DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.2
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A
Page A-6
N
1-1.J.l
LJ.l:I:
LJ.l
. ---
•
EXISITNG TUNNEL --•:::.:----::.:::.---
--- --.--:::.:---· ---::------:::::.-----·::-----
-;.:::: . - . -- --. - . -:::.·.:::. . - . -.:::. . - .
.-· -----::.:::.----
----::::.:-------::.·.::.-------·::-----·
EXISITNG PORTAL
�\ �.. CUT & COVER TUNNEL
PROPOSED 22ND STREET STATION
, 30 TRANSFER SUPPORT STRUGfURES
PLAN
SCALE: 1"=400'
200-,---------------------------•----•-------------- 1--------------�-1----------
-WIN BORE TUNNELS CUT & COV,R '
+- Oz
RETAINED CUTTI�G EXISTING T�NNEL EXISTING SURFACE TRACKS
,f' =-'<\ ,f' = '<\ LI)� � ti 150-+-----------l----------l-ii'-l- -l-�n==⇒�i__:w,�---1�---------l--l--�---l---:oF�----------;--------i-- -,�--------;-----------i-1 -----------;------
"'�-Jr--�-�A � (.{)i f
� N ::::l tn Cll >
CI) ct <(
81 � I
1 ,-- ---- ------1 l � 100 -----------j---------i----------t---------;--,---- --i!
-;-- --t---;----- --c------t------t---,t -11---------;---------;--i----------t------=�-
I 1 1-280 j � i '
--- --------- I ..... ----- ----
�----- --- -- I I N ---� � ------t:..=..:!:=--:,,-
1-I __ --------- -- - - - - -----�
50 ---+---1-,-I------+--------/--,/" -- - - ----------- --- - '""'-= ,,,.,,,.,
'�---------+------ +1-
w / -------�� ,,,. _______________________ ':,. !
I w - ---=- . ...;;;J __ ,...___________________________ I I
I -- -=-- "" v---=-- �
1· I ? ...'.;) -::::::--:.-_:-: ::-- 's. /
- - - -\_ I
- --_c.n --: :::,_-:::�::_':3-�_..�_-_.:._.
--
� -- - --�- - - - - - ..? . ----- ----- ----- -- --- -------• --------- . ----------- • -
---------------"'-----
+i .,.,I- -� --•- .- - ------- • -
:.:�
��
��:..:,_�:.:�-�-"Jr"c..:•�•_:_L __________ _:• _____ - - --•------�. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
0 - -------c.n 3t. - . --- 2 - -·
. . - - .
-w
z
...J - - - -- - --- . - -. - - -· - -- --- - -- - . -. - - . - -- --
-- - ----- I
- - . -50-- -
-1 00 �---"'------i---------i---------,1---------i---------i,---------i---------1---------i---------i---------i----�
$DATE $TIME
1 00+00 1 05+00 11 0+00 11 5+00 1 20+00 1 25+00 1 30+00 1 35+00 1 40+00 145+00
$REQUEST
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
I-• NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTSHAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. 22ND STREEET STATION LOCATION AND DEPTH AREINDICATIVE ONLY. REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16
CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280 BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY
TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY PLAN AND PROFILE
DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.3 STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A Page A-7
... .....
.... .... .... .... ....
�------------GUT & COVER
STATION THROAT
CUT & COVER STATION THROAT
+(/)
<t
z
SCA[E: 1 "=400'
TRIPLE TRACK TUNNEL
ti, z
z
� a:. ct)
TRIPLE TRACK BORED TUNNEL
+(/)
ti, 0z
z
AT&T STADIUM
3RD STRE!ET K""""-- ---5 W I NG B R-l�G E
f------_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-�;�-------------------------Eoo)-----------
���-;-----------s..,:i,1;l----------------------------__J \\
1 00 � � /' �a\-----;+�-------------- -+-�----------�----------1- -n-n-n- -n-mn~1-,-d---------------------�-.---------/1/-1-;---,--,-=-;----,---=------��'r
�� l CH I NA BASIN I
II �
! ri I I I "i � J 3RD ST BRIDGE _I
Ji FOUNDATIONS
50-;---------;---------i---�-;•----�--=
� -- I
----�---i___ PILED FOUNDA" IONS (ASSUMED) .__--
I
---- I ? ___ __. I
---------- I
--------------- I
-----------I I
"-�":...:....::,__- - - -- -1.. -, .... -.......... --- ---
'·<�::---------�::.:---------- - - - - - - - - /
,..-'r,1"<1:'i::,..,/rr.,.. • ...., ................ -... ....._
N
1-w w
0 -:----------I -------- ... , -- ........ ...... --'"') .._ -'- -,.. ... ... '-------.ii --....... ------ • - - - - - - - ',-
-'-
1-vi-r---,/
',, ---::--. ------------- --------
---
\
�
-? ---- I
, _____ w_l w V)
. ----------------- ..,,_-
-- ,_ ------- ----- -- -- - -... , - ----- -----50---+----------1 --------------------------------?
-
--------- ------ - ----- --- ---- -·. ----.. _ --- - . -
-100-:----------1 -
-150-:----------1
------ --- -- 3.o✓•----- - --
',,, SEE NOTE 3',, ,,
.. w z _J '
,, ---=--�_::����'- �JJJ_,._�==----a-"U- I
u
tl- 1-- --. -·-. ---. - -
-
----. --. - -. - -
CONFLICT WITH PILES SEE NOTE LI
~ 1 <t
-�--
·-·-·-· ··- -
-.. --------- -
-200�--------�---------i---------,
i---------i---------1,---------
i---------
i---------
i---------
i---------
i----�
0+00
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
5+00 10+00 15+00 20+00 25+00 30+00 35+00 40+00 45+00
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. POTENTIAL CLASH WITH PILES TO AT&T ENTRANCE BUILDINGMAY BE AVOIDED BY LOWERING ALIGNMENT ALTHOUGH BUILDING PROTECTION MEASURES WOULD BE REQUIRED.
4. CLASH WITH BRIDGE FOUNDATIONS WILL REQUIRE MAJOR PROTECTION WORKS OR COMPLETE RECONSTRUCTION.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
06-03-16 06-03-16 06-09-16CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY
PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.lB
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" B
Page A-8
3RD St STATION ENTRANCES
CHINA BASIN
"'C� co ><( co z 0 V) V) -�
"'C> co >-<( co z 0 V) Cf) -
SITE OF, RROPOSED WARRIORS ARENA
-----
+-' V)
:c I:::)
0 V)
PLAN
SCALE: 1"=400' +-V1
I I-::::>0 V1
�
LARGE BORE TUNNEL i
$< (
+-V1
I I-l.O �
�
+-' V)
0 a..
0:::<(�
+Vl
<( V1
0a..
50�=='1====::::;:=======:;::=========:;========:;:======::::;:::======:::;::::=::::j::::====:;::======i===;:========:;:==��::::;:::==::::;::::::!!!'----
i I
i
i ----------1.-1
3RD STREET BRIDI
E FOUNDATIONS
_L __________ ------ --------------- ----------- ---------- _J' i ------------ -------------------I _____ l..._ ____ ---- �----_:-::J
----------4--....,..-.---_-_-_-_-_-_---- --· -w---0- - ,___,___,
�
-50- I-w w I Vl
-100tttt�
Vl 700' PLATFORM
w z� _J -------
-150- I ----
I- PILE CONFLICT <( :::;;: MITIGATION REQUIRED
-200-
-- ,- --- --
-�--
- - - --- -- -- ----
--�----------------------
---------------� ------·
--- --
--- -
------+---------➔-=-- -· - --
----· --------■-
----· --------------
--------------- ---------· ----------------------
--- -- . -
---· ---
--- I
__ ..,. . -- .
- . - -+· -
Vl
w
w
Vl
w
z
_J
I 0 I<( :::;;:
- .
- - .
-25o -;----------i---------i---------,1---------·1·---------1·---------1---------1---------1---------1---------1-------'
45+00 50+00 55+00 60+00 65+00 70+00 75+00 80+00 85+00 90+00 95+00
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
PROFILE
Horiz: 1 "=400' SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
NOTES
1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY AND MAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. FOR STATION DETAIL SEE EXHIBIT 5.2 AND FOR ALTERNATIVE BOX STATION SEE EXHIBIT 5.1. ADDITIONAL PLATFORM OPTIONS SHOWN FOR BOTH
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED
MJM SDF
06-03-16 06-03-16
CLIENT
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY
PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.2B
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" B
Page A-9
N
1-1.J.l LJ.l :I:
LJ.l
-
...J
�\
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
$DATE
-
-
-
10Q
�
'Pr
00
7
/ --:;..;::-_.#'
- - -:..::::�__.,,.-__;:S'-� ----..::.-------- -- -----: ::::-:::::: :�__:_:-----
-------
--
.:..:---
--
-
-
-------
-- --
-�
------ ---
--
-- - ----·- ------- I-
w w ILI)
w w VI
--
3.0% -- -- - -·w -·z
-- - . -.- -- -- -- -- ...J . -------· --· - --
I --- ---u ----- -· -1-
- :::?:
�
TWIN BORED TtJN�ELS t
.. CUT & COVER TUNNEL
PROPOSED 22ND STREET STATION
- -7:.......,:
'Pr
�
LARGE BORE TUNNEL
--
-,,__ ------------------ -------------..
---. - ---. - -. -
-· -- ----. -· . ---- -· -·· ------ ---- -- - . -. -· - . -- -· -- -I ---------- . ---· -· -----------· --· -· --
I 100+00
I 105+00
I 11 0+00
I 11 5+00
$TIME $REQUEST
+-LI)
0zNN
�
! ! I i
PLAN
SCALE: 1"=400'
I '- I -
I ' I ' I I ' -�I��
I � J.. r
cu & COVER 1-. '
LJ.l 0::I-,,. v,-o-'01-C<C NI-Nl/1
I
I I
-· ,:i:;::. ·.,;:..
\ , 30
•
EXISITNG TUNNEL
--•:::.:----::.:::.------ --.--:::.:---· ---::---
---:::::.---.--::--__ :;..- __ . ___ ,,.-\
TRANSFER SUPPORT STRUGfURES
'F LI)
0 CX) 0N 0:: EXISTING TlUNNEL . "" I - N
LOWERED I I\ VERT(:::71 (:::71
I i i
--------::.:::.----
----::::.:-------::.·.::.--------::-----·
EXISITNG PORTAL
EXISTING SURFACE
I i I -------·-----------..--- .......
✓ '-l I ------�-
TRACKS
i (-------------------------------------- --..,_,,, r-.-, L.....I
'--
- --- -. -.
--- -. - -.
"" - ------- ·----- ------
-- �
- ----- - . - .
I 120+00
- -. --· - -
PROFILE
-- - --- - -----
I 125+00
Horiz: 1 "=400'SCALE: Vert: 1 "=80'
. -
---- V -------
- . -- ----· -- . -
I
130+00
------------ --------------------------
-· --. --- -· -..... ----
I 135+00
__ ..... ---- -· ---- ...
I 140+00
-. . . . .
I 145+00
.
+-LI)
N LJ.l >
<( ;:r: u 0::�LI)
w u
I i ! I I
.J..., i_ . i I
f,--
f,--
f,--
NOTES
/-; 1. THE STRATIGRAPHY SHOWN IS BASED ON LIMITEDINFORMATION AVAILABLE AT TIME OF STUDY ANDMAY CHANGE WITH ACTUAL GROUND INVESTIGATION.
2. VENTILATION AND FIRE LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTSHAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED AS PART OF THIS STUDY.
3. 22ND STREEET STATION LOCATION AND DEPTH AREINDICATIVE ONLY. REQUIRES FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
DRAFT CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
GEOLOGICAL KEY:
----?---- ASSUMED BOUNDARY
ARTIFICIAL FILL
YOUNGER BAY MUD
- UPPER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
- OLD BAY CLAY
- LOWER LAYERED SEDIMENTS
SLOPE DEBRIS/RAVINE FILL
FRANCISCAN COMPLEX BEDROCK
DRAWN CHECKED APPROVED
MJM SDF JS
09-08-16 09-16-16 09-16-16
CLIENT
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION
BAY PLAN AND PROFILE DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 3.3B
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" B
Page A-10
$DATE $TIME $REQUEST
' 0 I.{)
>_J I.J.I 1-<l: :::!,
X 0 0:: (L (L <l:
R/W
' 1 2' I
---
I
"<T
-
0 I '
N
� = � I'
"<T
-
t.O 1 0'I I '
N
45'
,.,..-. . . . '"
'. ''
'. . ... '' ' .. • .. ·. t '
< ... ' t.
t. . . < . . t.•·
t ... < . ''
Ir 4 '-�"< "t- ·. t _.
7'-3"!5'-7" 3' I 1
• ·. I. .'t- ·. t. ' I
. ' <· ... ·. t _. I . .
. I < ' . I. < . . '
__,__
;: ·r-'
. <
I. < . ' ,.. ·. T.
' I ' ,, � '
i TOWNSEND ST (RECONSTRUCTED) I I
90'
4 5'
' I
I ' I ' I i
I
1 2'
MEZZANINE
I I I
R/W
' I
I 5'7"! I 7' 7' 14'-6" 5' 7" : 1 i - ' I I I ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' I I I
PL TF RM I I - I I
--'- ' _.._ --'- : --'-I ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' ' ' '
SECTION
POTENTIAL
I
I 7' 1 i I
I ' I ' I
PL TF I
I' I ' I ' '
55'
OVER-SITE DEVELOPMENT
I
1 7' 5'7'! 7'-3" I
" I ' I'I'
RM I
I _,_ : __,__
' I ' I
Li\ ' '
,..,.-, • , ...
. .,, .. .
·,. _.. . "': -,• '
-:·: ·,·,. _.,•·
·,.. ' '. . .. .I>··'·, ... .' . .
, . .- '
. .
.I>··,_.
•• . .,.._. '.•·
•· . .
r�< .. '.I>·.
11". •, •·· 1,:. 9 _. .
•. .'.. .
• . . ' . •
• •
I� I�
• . ·�
3' SLURRY 4'-6" PCC
WALL WALL
CUT AND COVER TUNNEL
DfX ALIGNMEN=r
0 01--'--Pc N
;a: 01---
6 0 _J
z 0
V) LL
0 V) I-'
� _J
CUT AND cevER TUNN�L
DliX SJiUB
•
• •
7TH St
i
! •
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
4TH St
TWIN BORED TUNNEL£
PLAN
0 200' 400'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I-,�
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\ \
\
\
\ \ '
5TH St
' ' ',,,, "� ��
CONSTRUCTION ASSUMPTIONS:
1. STATIONS BUILT USING ASSUMED CUT AND COVER METHODWITH SLURRY WALL (APPROX, 3' THICK) AND A STRUCTURALCONCRETE WALL (APPROX. 4'-6" THICK),
2, DEPTH OF SLURRY WALLS AND OTHER GROUND TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED.
3, ASSUMED MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OF 10' WIDTH SHOWN BEYOND LIMIT OF SLURRY WALL,
4, TRACK AND PLATFORM DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON CURRENT DTX PROPOSAL
5. A MEZZANINE LEVEL IS PROVIDED AS AN ACCESS POINT TOPLATFORMS AND STREET LEVEL.
6. STREET LEVEL ENTRANCE STRUCTURES ARE NOT SHOWN.LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED.
7, STATION OPERATION AND PLANT ROOMS ARE ASSUMED TO BE SAME LEVEL AS MEZZANINE.
8. STATION STRUCTURE OUTSIDE RIGHTS OF WAY CAN BEDESIGNED FOR OVERSITE DEVELOPMENT,
OPERATION ASSUMPTIONS:
' 1 • FOUR TRACKS AND FOUR PLATFORM EDGES. FOUR STOPPING TRACKS AT SINGLE LENGTH PLATFORMS, ONE TRACK TERMINATES AT CURRENT RAILYARD LOCATION, ALL OTHER TRACKS PASS THROUGH FROM THE SOUTH,
2.
. L
3.
�� ��-
·----
DRAFT
DRAWN
MJM
06-03-16
C LI ENT
CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
CHECKED
SDF
06-03-16
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
----
ALIGNMENT 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
STATION CONFIGURATION OPTION C .._t _....._. .... _,.;;._,.::.,;,. ___ t--D _RA_W_IN _G_N_U_M_B_ER ______________ --1
EXHIBIT 4.1
STATUS
800' IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SC A LE REV
AS SHOWN AT 11" X 17" A
Page A-11
-
0 I[)
>_J Lu 1-<t ::::,; X 0 0::: CL CL <t
$DATE
---
I -
'ST
-
0 I -
N
� = �
I -
'ST
-
I.O I -
I") N
R/W
' 1 2' I
I 1 O'
$TIME
rr-. ., .. . . '• '.
. •. ' . '. •·
.t>· '
' . . ... -. ' ,. _. '
•· ."'· ''. _. . . .
·,,:. '. I.
. .
•· .
' V • ." • •··
.\>·· I_'
3' . ,, . : ·. . .t>.
I.
. ·, •· .. ,
. . .
. ' •. • .
. ' . . '
.,_. "i· . .
11· .· -� .
,,:. '_. .,
45'
Ir 4 '-�"
I 7'-3"! I
I'I'I I I .. ' -'-
' I'I''
'I
$REQUEST
5'7"
� TOWNSEND ST (RECONSTRUCTED)I I
90' R/W
45'
1 2' ' I I I ' 'I I ' ' ' I I
i ' I
I ,
MEZZANINE
5'7"
.\
r 5'7" I I I I I I
1 7' 1 7' 14'-6": : :
--,
I I I ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' I I I
.
PL T1F RM I I I I
I -'- ' -'- -'- : -'-
' ' ' I I I ' ' ' I I I ' ' ' ' ' '
11 4'
POTENTIAL OVER-SITE DEVELOPMENT
5'7"_ \
r 5'7" I I I I I I I I
1 7' 1 7' 14'-6" 1 7' ; : : : ' I I I
I I I I' ' ' 'I I I I' ' ' 'I I I I
.
PL T1F RM I I PL T1F I I I I
I __,_ : -'-- ____.,I,. : ____.,t,, I ' ' ' ' I I I I' ' ' 'I I I I' ' ' '' ' ' '
SECTION
1 7'
5'7"
.\
11RM -'-
4 '-6" PCC WALL, 3 SLURRY WALL
I I 7'-3" : I
I'I'I I I : -'-
-.. ' • l' ..
. .
. '
, . .- . . .
t>·· '
' •··
·1:,·. '
' •·
.I>··'. '. . .
.t>·· ': ,. _. . . .
"t>
. I.·
' _. . •· -,,:. ,_.
,_. _. -, •· ... •· . ' . . ... ... _. .· ' .
. ' '. t>·_ : . .
. .
�--_-;•.
I>--· ... • ,
I/ i.
�L(•' .·
. -:
•· .. ,
. 'L....
CUT AND COVER TUNNEL
DfX ALIGNMEN=r
V')
I-
� _J
0 01--'--PcN
•
CUT AND cevER TUNN�L
DliX SJiUB
• •
7TH St
i
! •
' I I I ' I I I ' I I I ' I I I ' I
I I ' I
I
Ii!I
11 ''
I I I i i :
I· j j : I
1 i rf r!J.,,. I I I!' I '// I/.
I' I ti'
I
i I, ' • I I I I •,• I
I I .' I t I
I I
I '
:I I • I II ' I I
I I II II II I
TWIN BORED TUNNEL£
PLAN
I I I I I I ' I I I I '
I I '
I III II I I I I I I I
I-,� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ '
5TH St
' ' ',,,, "� ��
CONSTRUCTION ASSUMPTIONS:
1. STATIONS BUILT USING ASSUMED CUT AND COVER METHODWITH SLURRY WALL (APPROX. 3' THICK) AND A STRUCTURALCONCRETE WALL (APPROX. 4'-6" THICK).
2. DEPTH OF SLURRY WALLS AND OTHER GROUND TREATMENTREQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED.
3. ASSUMED MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OF 10' WIDTHSHOWN BEYOND LIMIT OF SLURRY WALL.
4. TRACK AND PLATFORM DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON CURRENTDTX PROPOSAL
5. A MEZZANINE LEVEL IS PROVIDED AS AN ACCESS POINT TOPLATFORMS AND STREET LEVEL.
6. STREET LEVEL ENTRANCE STRUCTURES ARE NOT SHOWN.LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED.
7. STATION OPERATION AND PLANT ROOMS ARE ASSUMED TO BESAME LEVEL AS MEZZANINE.
8. STATION STRUCTURE OUTSIDE RIGHTS OF WAY CAN BEDESIGNED FOR OVERSITE DEVELOPMENT.
OPERATION ASSUMPTIONS:
' , . SIX TRACKS AND SIX PLATFORM EDGES.SIX STOPPING TRACKS AT SINGLE LENGTH PLATFORMS.2.
, L3. THREE TRACKS TERMINATE AT CURRENT RAILYARD LOCATION,
ALL OTHER TRACKS PASS THROUGH FROM THE SOUTH TO NORTH
�� ��-
·---
DRAFT
DRAWN
MJM
06-03-16
C LI ENT
CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
CHECKED
SDF
06-03-16
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
----
ALIGNMENT 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE
STATION CONFIGURATION OPTION D .._t ...,,....,. .... _,.;:...,.::,;,. ___ t--D _RA_W_IN _G_N_U_M_B_ER ______________ --1
EXHIBIT 4.2
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SC A LE REV
AS SHOWN AT 111
1 X 1711
A
Page A-12
$DATE $TIME
-
0 0
>...JI��X
0a::a..a..�
$REQUEST
R/W
I 1 2' I
I 9' ' I 'I'I 'I
•
�...•·":_ 9
.. •·•·
'· . . ' .. ... • '. •·•·' ..
. •· ' ·,:;. '. . • '. . .•
.. ' ... • ' . .. ' •·• '. . .• ' •·•·' . •· .. ' ' . . ' ,. . • '' . .• ',. . .•· ''.
-:·>. ' . . •· '' .:·:·._.' ' . . ' •· .
-:·: ,_. . ' . ·,
Ir -:·: •: 3' .• I.
. ; :·:·,.
.. • • •·•·
' . •
<>: ' .. .
• . . I>··': •. • •. . '.
. .--
55'
4 '-6"
[! 1 8' ' I
I
I
PLATFORM I'
I II
. '
'
I
I
1 1 0'
'---
i 3RD ST (RECONSTRUCTED) I
55'
� EXISITNG LRT
'- _,
I'
I
I
POTENT IA� RETAIL '
I'
I
I'
I'
I
I''
POTENTIAL RETAIL
MEZZANINE
5' 7" 5'7"
4 '-6" �1 4 '-6" 1 1 8' ' I
I
I
I PLATFORM '
I ..L ..L ..L ..L ' J..
'
I
I '
SECTION
"
t-..
•
,_,..•·. ..• • •
.
. ' . •
•·· • '. .
•. . '. .•
;-: ·, . . ..
' ..•·••·· ' ••
: ·, .. . . •·
• •· '... •.. . I .. . •·' ... .
' . • '. • . •· ' • •, . •. •
.. ' .. .• . ,. . • ' .
. .• ' • •· ' .
<>: ·, • '
. . "?; ·, • ' . •·• '' • •· '
K •·
.t>·· '-''
..
. .·,,:. 1
' . •· • ''•· .I>··': ... .
R/W
1 2' I I
'
9' ' ' I 'I'I 'I
� 3' s � 4'-
LURRY WALL
6" PCC WALL
00..---+----/,-;'
'00<;;]'
' I '
I
PU\TFORM
I
MISSION BAY Blvd NORTH
MISSION BAY Blvd SOUTH
1 � TWIN BORED TUNNELS
w
:::0
0
Vl .....
PLAN
SOUTH St
CONSTRUCTION ASSUMPTIONS:
1, STATIONS BUILT USING ASSUMED CUT AND COVER METHOD WITH SLURRY WALL (APPROX. 3' THICK) AND A STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WALL (APPROX. 4'-6" THICK),
2, DEPTH OF SLURRY WALLS AND OTHER GROUND TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED.
3, ASSUMED MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OF 9'WIDTH SHOWN BEYOND LIMIT OF SLURRY WALL.
4. TRACK AND PLATFORM DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON CURRENTDTX PROPOSAL
5. A MEZZANINE LEVEL IS PROVIDED AS AN ACCESS POINT TOPLATFORMS AND STREET LEVEL,
6. STREET LEVEL ENTRANCE STRUCTURES ARE NOT SHOWN.LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED.
7, STATION OPERATION AND PLANT ROOMS ARE ASSUMED TO BE SAME LEVEL AS MEZZANINE,
8, EXISTING LRT WOULD BE DIVERTED OR SUSPENDED DURING CONSTRUCTION OF ROOF SLAB. TOP DOWN METHOD COULD BE USED TO REINSTATE FOR EXCAVATION OF LOWER LEVELS
9. ADDITIONAL PLATFORMS OPTION SHOWN WOULD GIVE ADDITIONACAPACITY DURING EVENTS AT AT&T PARK AND CHASE CENTER
OPERATION ASSUMPTIONS:
1, THREE TRACKS AND TWO PLATFORM EDGES. 2, TWO STOPPING TRACKS AT DOUBLE LENGTH PLATFORMS. 3, ONE BYPASS TRACK. 4, ALL THREE TRACKS PASS THROUGH FROM THE SOUTH TO
THE NORTH. 5. CROSSOVER LENGTH IS FOR SWITCHING TO BYPASS TRACK ONLY
DRAFT
0
DRAWN
MJM
06-03-16
CLIENT
CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
200' 400'
CHECKED
SDF 06-03-16
800'
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO,
PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280
BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY
STATION CONFIGURATION OPTION A DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 5.1
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 111
1 X 17 11
A
Page A-13
-Ill 0
. .,.N
R/W
I'
i 1 2'
Cf. 31D ST
I, o·
76 J 1 5' I
v-EXISITNG LRTI I I
- I ,
I I � -
+--+-------------,.--------------1---r :-:,
.:-: 1· I •·· .. .-. ':
;,. .. ,. ... _; . ·,
::r: ..
-�.,_. ·, ... ...
I I I I I
·, .. :,, .. ... -. r
'
91 :-. ,.
i-----i�:.·= i•."·\
I II
•· .. -. •: ;, ..
$DATE
· ..... :,,_ .
� .. -,. ,. • . .
... _. ..: ·,. . :,, .
. ....
·, . <>:·.. ' . .... .
-_\:·.. . ·,. :
•·.-,. :•.• ·,. '
. ;,_. . .• '
. . . .• • ..... . .,-. I
·, _ _ ·.
-:·>·,.:
-.:.'
, .... •· .... •.
..... ' •· .
I /
/
I
\ PLATFORM PLATFORM
1
: I . _._ J"t _._ _._J )�--+\ --� �---'------,,---.,__• _� '
. ' : : ·, -:·: •:
· •..
. .... ·•·
:· .. .
. '
. ;,., . : ·,. :
:,,_. . :·, . · . ..., . :·,.: · •. -, .. ......
. . .._.. .
-,._
+ . :,, .. -.:.
-,. _. . .... . . -,. : · • . .... ' -:-.·,·, ..
' . .
' ::.\ .. ,.,.
------------------------
--:-:·,:
:-:·,. . : -:;,. .. . ' ' .
$TIME
SECTION A-A
$REQUEST
R/W R/W
I'
1 2' i EXISITNG LRT
9' ' ·:
'
I
1 7'
PLATFORM PLATFORM
060'
SECTION B-B
R/W
A�
B�
I I I
Ii I
THIRD TR�CK: DRQPS BEl..:OW PLATFORM LEVEL
•
r Ct.IT & COVERI � ENTRANCE STRUCTURE
_/JA
r�B t
PLATFORMS WITHIN TUNNEL ,6,:"
rCUT&COVER
/ ENTRANCE STRUCTURE0
r.----11:.:_�,,. 9_,__.:...::::,=
' 0 0
c-,,lf/-...;:'--ADDITIONAl PLATFORMS
(SEE Nq_TE 10)
MISSION BAY Blvd NORTH
MISSION BAY Blvd SOUTH
� LARGE DIAMETERBORED TUNNEL
!r w11 :::0:c,
Vl.....
PLAN
SOUTH St
CONSTRUCTION ASSUMPTIONS:
1, LARGE DIAMETER BORED TUNNEL IS CONSTRUCTED USING A SINGLE TBM FOR THE FULL LENGTH,
2, ENTRANCE STRUCTURES ARE CONSTRUCTED IN ADVANCE OF TBM 3, ENTRANCE STRUCTURES BUILT USING CUT AND COVER METHOD
WITH SLURRY WALL (APPROX. 3' THICK) AND A STRUCTURAL CONCRETE WALL (APPROX. 4'-6" THICK),
4. DEPTH OF SLURRY WALLS AND OTHER GROUND TREATMENTREQUIREMENTS TO BE DETERMINED.
5. ASSUMED MINIMUM CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OF 9'WIDTHSHOWN BEYOND LIMIT OF SLURRY WALL.
6. TRACK AND PLATFORM DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON CURRENTDTX PROPOSALS.
7. STREET LEVEL ENTRANCE STRUCTURES ARE NOT SHOWN.LOCATIONS TO BE DETERMINED.
8, STATION OPERATION AND PLANT ROOMS ARE ASSUMED TO BE WITHIN ENTRANCE STRUCTURES.
9, EXISTING LRT WOULD BE TEMPORARILY SUPPORTED DURING CONSTRUCTION OF ENTRANCE STRUCTURE.
10.ADDITIONAL PLATFORMS OPTION SHOWN WOULD PROVIDEADDITIONAL CAPACITY DURING EVENTS AT AT&T PARK ANDCHASE CENTER
OPERATION ASSUMPTIONS:
1, THREE TRACKS AND TWO PLATFORM EDGES • 2, TWO STOPPING TRACKS AT DOUBLE LENGTH PLATFORMS. 3, ONE BYPASS TRACK AND ONE STOPPING TRACK
BELOW PLATFORM. 4, THREE TRACKS PASS THROUGH FROM THE SOUTH TO
THE NORTH, 5. 3RD AND 4TH TRACKS COULD BE EXTENDED END OF TUNNEL
FOR TRAIN STORAGE.
DRAFT
DRAWN
MJM
06-03-16
CLIENT
CONCEPTUAL
DESIGN ONLY
CHECKED
SDF
06-03-16
APPROVED
JS
06-09-16
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PROJECT
SF RAIL YARD ALTERNATIVES AND 1-280 BOULEVARD FEASIBILITY STUDY
TITLE
ALIGNMENT 3: MISSION BAY STATION CONFIGURATION OPTION C
DRAWING NUMBER
EXHIBIT 5.2
STATUS
IN PROCESS, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY
SCALE REV
AS SHOWN AT 1111 X 17" A
Page A-14
OPTION 1 FUTURE WITH SURFACE RAIL: DTX + TRENCHED STREETSDTX AS ENVIRONMENTALLY APPROVED IN TJPA SEIS/EIR
OPTION 2: PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE: DTX + EXTENDED TUNNEL
OPTION 3: MISSION BAY: MODIFIED DTX + 3RD ST TUNNEL
16th & 7th Street - looking east, pedestrian perspective
CONCEPTUAL VISUALIZATIONS OF 16TH & 7TH STREETS
16th & 7th Streets - looking east (from 1010 Potrero) 16th & 7th Streets - looking east (from 1010 Potrero)16th & 7th Streets - looking east (from 1010 Potrero)