Like many others, Hazlett said she too was concerned about the potential taking of properties, which the city had to do in the 1950s when it constructed Oregon Expressway.

Others, like Barbara Hazlett, spoke to a different worry, namely that a proposal to widen Embarcadero Road in conjunction with closing the Churchill rail intersection to cars would worsen the traffic conditions outside their homes.

More than two dozen speakers addressed the council Tuesday night, many voicing concerns about the prospect of losing their properties near the crossings at Palo Alto Avenue, Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive and Charleston Road.

Their fears were confirmed Tuesday night, when city Assistant City Manager Ed Shikada noted that all 10 alternatives on the city's existing menu of options could require property purchases or the exercise of eminent domain, the government seizure of partial or whole properties to accommodate redesigned rail crossings.

As Palo Alto approaches a key decision point in selecting new designs for its four rail crossings, residents are increasingly waking up to the harsh trade-offs that the expensive, multiyear endeavor will entail.

"To lose your home for any reason is hideous," Schmarzo said. "But to watch it bulldozed against your will is a soul-bludgeoning experience and another reason for a lawsuit."

She is not alone. More than 450 residents signed a petition by Old Palo Alto resident David Shen urging the city not to seize properties as part of the effort to separate the railroad tracks from the roadways.

"This is the canary in the coal mine for our neighborhood," Hazlett said. "We definitely do not want Embarcadero Road, a residential arterial, to become Embarcadero Expressway."

Most of his colleagues supported his sentiment but not his motion, particularly after Shikada noted that he doesn't believe any of the 10 options would survive if eminent domain were taken off the table.

"I can imagine just how devastating it would be that your house is (taken through) eminent domain," Tanaka said.

The citizen appeals against eminent domain were enough to sway two council members. Councilman Greg Tanaka made a motion to take grade-separation options that require eminent domain completely off the table.

Parag Patkar, who lives in south Palo Alto between Charleston and East Meadow, handed out his own petition with signatures from about 300 people. Much like the Southgate-led petition, Patkar's states a strong opposition to eminent domain and a preference for an underground tunnel for the trains over alternatives that would elevate the railroad tracks.

Even if the city reaches its goal of choosing a preferred alternative by the end of this year, it will take at least another four years to perform the necessary environmental analysis and design work, as well as potentially acquire properties.

To catch up, Palo Alto is preparing to enhance its outreach to the community in the coming months. The city recently hired a new contractor, AECOM, to assist with this endeavor and it plans to appoint a stakeholder group in the coming months to help further winnow down the grade-separation options.

The council's discussion, which spilled into early Wednesday morning, keeps Palo Alto more or less on track to choose a grade-separation alternative for each intersection by the end of this year, the city's officially adopted goal. At the same time, the city remains behind Mountain View and Sunnyvale, two cities that are pursuing their own grade-separation strategies in preparation for more frequent Caltrain service and the possible launch of California's high-speed rail system.

"I know there are people in the community who think these should be removed tonight and I understand that," Fine said. "I think we have to do our due diligence on each of these."

The other four recommendations pertain to the two southernmost grade crossings, Meadow and Charleston. These include the "hybrid" and the "reverse hybrid" options for the two crossings; a trench or a tunnel that goes through both crossings; and a viaduct that would create an elevated rail line in south Palo Alto.

For Churchill, there are three solutions on the table: the closure of Churchill (again, with related improvements); the "hybrid" option with a slightly depressed road under a somewhat raised track; and the "reverse hybrid" featuring raised road and a lowered track.

At the northernmost rail crossing, Palo Alto Avenue, the council is exploring two options: closing Palo Alto Avenue to traffic in conjunction with yet-to-be-determined transportation improvements (these could include a widened University Avenue or a new bike tunnel at Everett); and a "hybrid" option that would slightly depress the road and partially elevate the tracks.

Each of the other nine options on the city's shrinking menu pertain to a particular crossing or, as in the case of Meadow and Charleston, two crossings.

Kou, who serves on the Rail Committee, urged reaching out to some local innovators, including Elon Musk, to see if there are any creative solutions to the tunneling dilemma. Tanaka called grade separation a "multigenerational problem" and said the city should consider selling development rights to the ground-level property along the corridor as a possible way to finance the project. Scharff was less optimistic.

Only one idea calls for a citywide solution -- a deep-bore tunnel that would start and end within city limits. While this option is seen as a long-shot because of high costs, the council agreed to keep it in the menu of alternatives.

The council did, however, eliminate dozens of other ideas from consideration and narrowed the prior list of 34 grade-separation concepts down to 10. By a 6-0 vote, with Mayor Liz Kniss, Vice Mayor Eric Filseth and Councilman Tom DuBois all recusing (each has property interests near the rail corridor), the council supported the list of 10 ideas that will further be screened in the coming months, with the goal of picking a design for each grade crossing by the end of this year.

Tanaka's proposal to take a widened Embarcadero Road off the table also faltered, with no support from any of his colleagues.

Councilwoman Karen Holman spoke for the majority when she argued that it would be premature to adopt a "sweeping statement" of the sort Tanaka had proposed at this point in time. Ultimately, only Councilwoman Lydia Kou went along with Tanaka's motion.

"If all (property owners) were willing to sell and one holds out, by taking (eminent domain) off the table as described we would put the project in the hands of a single property owner," Shikada said.

He also noted that taking eminent domain completely off the table would empower a single property owner on Alma Street to dictate the outcome of the entire project.

City: Rail redesign could require property seizures

As Palo Alto narrows down its grade-separation alternatives, residents call for elimination of eminent domain