TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Similar documents
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

SF-LA (125 mph) 2: : :32. SF-SJ (110 mph)

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

August 6 th, Board of Directors. Kent Riffey Tony Daniels. Chief Engineer Program Director. Project Implementation & Phasing Workshop

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design (CARRD)

High-speed Rail in California:

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Caltrain Downtown Extension Project (DTX)

U.S. System Summary: CALIFORNIA

Electric Multiple Unit Procurement Update

Electric Multiple Unit Procurement Update

Streetcar Level Boarding Background Memo

4 COSTS AND OPERATIONS

Southern California - CHSRA

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Rail~Volution 2012 R. Gregg Albright

Clifton Corridor Transit Initiative. Briefing to Great Lakes Community February 11, 2016

Design of the High Speed Rail System in California. Orange County to Los Angeles Segment

Successful Passenger Rail in the State of California

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Clifton Corridor Transit Initiative. Briefing to Medlock Area Neighborhood Association (MANA) February 15, 2016

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO

800 Access Control, R/W Use Permits and Drive Design

July 17, In Reply Refer To: HSSD/B-176A

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

CONNECTING AND TRANSFORMING CALIFORNIA

San Francisco to San Jose Preliminary Alternatives Analysis

Caltrain Downtown Extension Study Ridership Forecast Summary

SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT DRAFT STAFF REPORT

Caltrain Modernization EMU Procurement

CONNECTING CALIFORNIA

October 30, 2002 PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ENERGY DIVISION

Chicago to St. Louis High-Speed Rail. IDOT District 8 Crossings. July 29, 2015

Development of 220 mph High Speed Rail Service for Illinois. Mark C. Walbrun, PE TranSystems Corporation

CALIFORNIA HIGH SPEED TRAIN PROJECT, A CASE STUDY: THE TECHNICAL CHALLENGES IN LOCATING INTERMEDIATE HIGH SPEED RAIL STATIONS

Presentation to the Senate Committee on Transportation. April 7, Carson City, NV

3.15 SAFETY AND SECURITY

Overview: Division of Rail & Mass Transportation

September 9, Ms. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E., Room 1A Washington, DC 20426

Overview of Regional Commuter Rail Webinar: Phoenix, Arizona December 18, 2013

Table Common AREMA Lateral Turnouts Currently in Use in Passenger Rail Systems

High Speed Passenger Rail Interoperability in North America

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration: Rail Regulatory Update

Technical Memorandum. To: From: Date: October 14 th, 2018 Project #: 1302 Project Name: Subject: Distribution:

SAN FRANCISCO TO SAN JOSE PROJECT UPDATE

CalMod Local Policy Maker Group (LPMG) Agenda

Customer Service, Operations and Safety Committee Tariff Modifications July 21, 2005

PAPER FOR AREMA 2006 ANNUAL CONFERENCE LOS ANGELES UNION STATION RUN-THROUGH TRACKS UNION STATION TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS. Paul Mak, PE, SE HDR Inc

City Council Report 915 I Street, 1 st Floor Sacramento, CA

April 22, In Reply Refer To: HSA-10/WZ-206. Mr. Jan Miller TrafFix Devices 220 Calle Pintoresco San Clemente, California Dear Mr.

June 27, In Reply Refer To: HSSD/B-176

Table Existing Traffic Conditions for Arterial Segments along Construction Access Route. Daily

APPENDIX A Basis of Design and Design Criteria Memorandum

APPENDIX E: BIBLIOGRAPHY

P2000 RAIL CAR AUXILIARY INVERTERS

TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM

Sepulveda Pass Corridor Systems Planning Study Final Compendium Report. Connecting the San Fernando Valley and the Westside

AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets

SPEED CUSHION POLICY AND INSTALLATION PROCEDURES FOR RESIDENTIAL STREETS

U.S. System Summary: ARIZONA/SOUTHWEST

DIRECTIONAL DRIVEWAYS AT HIGHWAYS WITHOUT CURB

Alternatives to an Open Competitive Commercial Collection Program Presented by Robert Craggs RAM/SWANA Conference

Subject - Revisions to PG&E Forms Entitled General Terms and Conditions (Form ) and Declarations (Form ).

RON ROBERTS SUPERVISOR, FOURTH DISTRICT SAN DIEGO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

DATE: MAY 3, 2007 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT DIVISION

Craig Scheffler, P.E., PTOE HNTB North Carolina, P.C. HNTB Project File: Subject

Amtrak Fleet Strategy

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT STANDARDS CITY OF GARLAND TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT

Traffic Impact Statement (TIS)

ADDITIONAL UTILITY RELOCATION COSTS ARE MISSING FROM THE ESTIMATE.

traversing them. Speed dips may be installed in lieu of speed humps where the 85 th percentile speed on a street is at least 36 mph.

CalMod Program EMU Procurement Update

High Speed Rail Conference

SAN FRANCISCO TO SAN JOSE PROJECT SECTION

Mobility Management: Caltrain

CalMod Program EMU Procurement Update. TJPA Board May 14, 2015

Position Paper. Telehandler Use: Lifting Suspended Loads

Appendix F-1 Description of the Long-Term Alternatives

Maintaining Pavement Marking Retroreflectivity

EXCEPTION TO STANDARDS REPORT

Support: The Crossbuck (R15-1) sign assigns right-of-way to rail traffic at a highway-rail grade crossing.

Moraga-Orinda Fire District

Mercer Island Center for the Arts Parking Management Plan

Please Refer to Attached Sample Form

Memorandum. This memorandum requires Board action. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DRIVEWAY DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES

CHAPTER 9: VEHICULAR ACCESS CONTROL Introduction and Goals Administration Standards

MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIAL PROVISION FOR PAVEMENT RIDE QUALITY (MEAN ROUGHNESS INDEX ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA)

Design For At Speed Test Diagnosis And Measurement

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. June Dear Customer:

David Martin, Director of Planning and Community Development. Establishment of LAX FlyAway Stop in Santa Monica

SHORE POWER RATE BC HYDRO 333 DUNSMUIR STREET VANCOUVER, BC

AMBER M. KLESGES BOARD SECRETARY. No.\w-Tm

CHANGE LIST for MDOT Traffic and Safety Geometric Design Guides. May 23, 2017: The following update was made to the web site.

Conceptual renderings subject to change

Charlotte Gateway Station A State & City Partnership June 24, 2015

Transcription:

California High-Speed Train Project TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Station Platform Geometric Design TM 2.2.4 Prepared by: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Dominique Rulens Checked by: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ John Chirco Approved by: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Ken Jong, PE, Engineering Manager Released by: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Anthony Daniels, Program Director Revision Description 0 16 May 2008 Initial Release Prepared by for the California High-Speed Rail Authority

California High-Speed Train Project This document has been prepared by Parsons Brinckerhof for the California High-Speed Rail Authority and for application to the California High-Speed Train Project. Any use of this document for purposes other than this Project, or the specific portion of the Project stated in the document, shall be at the sole risk of the user, and without liability to PB for any losses or injuries arising for such use. CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

California High-Speed Train Project System Level Technical and Integration Reviews The purpose of the review is to ensure: - Technical consistency and appropriateness - Check for integration issues and conflicts System level reviews are required for all technical memorandums. Technical Leads for each subsystem are responsible for completing the reviews in a timely manner and identifying appropriate senior staff to perform the review. Exemption to the System Level technical and integration review by any Subsystem must be approved by the Engineering Manager. System Level Technical Reviews by Subsystem: Systems: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Print Name: Eric Scotson Infrastructure: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Print Name: John Chirco Operations: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Print Name: Paul Mosier Maintenance: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Print Name: Paul Mosier Rolling Stock: Signed document on file 16 May 08_ Print Name: Joe Silien CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED RAIL AUTHORITY

Station Platform Geometric Design TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT... II 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 1.1 PURPOSE OF THE TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM...1 1.2 STATEMENT OF TECHNICAL ISSUE...1 2.0 DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES... 4 2.1 GENERAL...4 2.2 LAWS AND CODES...4 2.3 APPLICABILITY TO FEDERAL CODE OF REGULATIONS...4 3.0 ASSESSMENT/ANALYSIS... 5 3.1 BACKGROUND...5 3.2 GEOMETRIC CONSIDERATIONS...5 3.3 PLATFORM GEOMETRY...8 3.4 CHARACTERISTICS OF DIFFERENT PLATFORMS...9 3.5 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS SHARED USE CORRIDORS...10 3.6 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS HIGH-SPEED RAIL CORRIDORS...10 4.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS... 12 5.0 SOURCE INFORMATION AND REFERENCES... 13 6.0 DESIGN MANUAL CRITERIA... 14 6.1 STATION PLATFORMS...14 6.1.1 Platform Length...14 6.1.2 Platform Width...14 6.1.3 Platform Curvature...14 6.1.4 Platform Height Above Rail...14 6.1.5 Track Centerline to Platform Dimension...15 6.1.6 Platform Edge to Train Gap...15 6.1.7 Platform Cross Slope...15 6.1.8 Platform Longitudinal Slope...15 Page: i

Station Platform Geometric Design ABSTRACT The California High-Speed Train Project (CHSTP) will provide high-speed train service in the State of California with proposed terminal stations in Sacramento, San Francisco, Fresno, Bakersfield, Los Angeles, Anaheim, and San Diego. Intermediate stations will serve locations along the alignment. For much of the alignment, high-speed trains will operate along a dedicated track with stations that exclusively serve high-speed train operations. There are locations (LOSSAN and Caltrain corridors) where the California High-Speed Rail (CHSR) line will operate within a shared right-of-way with conventional passenger railroad lines. Some of the stations located within the shared use corridors will need to accommodate both conventional passenger and high-speed trains, which vary with regard to vehicle length, width, floor height, and location of train doors. These stations will need to achieve the design requirements for both dedicated high-speed and shared use train operations. This technical memorandum presents design guidance for the configuration of high-speed train station platforms in order to advance the design of alignment and stations, and promote efficient train operations, passenger safety, and meet applicable regulatory requirements. This document establishes station platform design requirements for geometric elements, clearance elements, and other design elements such as drainage provisions for platform facilities. High-speed train station facilities throughout the world were considered in the development of the platform design criteria for the CHST project. Where appropriate, this memorandum presents the current design practices in Europe and Asia for reference. The programmatic and functional requirements for station platforms such as the type and number of patron facilities to be provided on the platforms will be addressed in a separate document. Page: ii

6.0 DESIGN MANUAL CRITERIA 6.1 STATION PLATFORMS These design guidelines apply to station platforms for both shared and high-speed train corridors. 6.1.1 Platform Length The platform length will be fixed definitively when rolling stock criteria are known. The following is provided for insofar as it may affect the alignment design. Desirable: 1380 ft (420 m) Minimum: 1345 ft (410 m) Exceptional: 1315 ft (400 m) 6.1.2 Platform Width Center and side platform widths will be defined in accordance with the maximum number of passengers based on projected ridership at each station. The platform width shall also meet CPUC, FRA, NFPA 130, and ADA requirements, including requirements for vertical access and circulation. 1. Center platform Desirable: 30.0 ft (9.00 m) Minimum: 30.0 ft (9.00 m) Exceptional: 25.0 ft (7.50 m) 2. Side platform Desirable: 20.0 ft (6.00 m) Minimum: 18.0 ft (6.00 m) Exceptional: 18.0 ft (5.50 m) 6.1.3 Platform Curvature The platform maximum and exceptional curvature will be fixed definitively when rolling stock criteria are known. The following is provided for insofar as it may affect the alignment design. Desirable: none Minimum: none Exceptional: 0 d 05 m 09 s (radius 67,300 ft or 20,500 m) which correspond to 60 mm superelevation with 200 mph (320 kph ) speed 6.1.4 Platform Height Above Rail Since the type of equipment is unknown at this time, the platform height above rail us unknown at this time. The height of the platform above the top of the closest rail will be established when the rolling stock criteria are known. The following guidance on the platform height is provided insofar as it may help to design station facilities. Desirable: 3-0 (91.5 cm) Maximum: 4 5 (134.6 cm) Minimum: 2 0 (61.0 cm) Page: 14

6.1.5 Track Centerline to Platform Dimension The distance between the track center line and the platform edge will be established when rolling stock criteria are known. The following information may affect the alignment design prior to obtaining the vehicle information. Desirable: 5-9 (1.750 m) Minimum: 5-9 (1.750 m) Exceptional: 5-9 (1.750 m) 6.1.6 Platform Edge to Train Gap a) Horizontal Gap ADA requires a maximum horizontal gap, measured when the vehicle is at rest, of no greater than 3 inches (76.2 mm) between platform edge and train door sill. This dimension anticipates a sliding plug door design and requires 3 inches clearance between station platform edge and door threshold. Desirable: 3.0 in (7.62 cm) Minimum: 3.0 in (7.62 cm) Exceptional: 3.0 in (7.62 cm) b) Vertical Gap The vertical gap between the train door threshold and the platform edge will be established when rolling stock criteria are known. The following information is provided for use as it may affect the alignment design prior to obtaining the vehicle information. Desirable: 0 in (0.00 cm) Maximum: ±5/8 in (±1.60 cm) Exceptional: 1-1/2 in (3.80 cm) 6.1.7 Platform Cross Slope The platform cross slope shall be away from the tracks to provide for drainage for the track structure and to provide a rolling slope away from the track for safety purpose. In case of use of center island platforms, an under drain shall be provided at the center of the platform. Desirable: 1.0% Minimum: 1.0% Maximum: 2.0% Exceptional: 2.0% 6.1.8 Platform Longitudinal Slope The platform longitudinal slope must follow the longitudinal profile of the rail as drainage of the platform is provided by the cross slope of the platform. Page: 15