Planning Commission Study Session Presentation Traffic Model Operation and Summary of the Rail Corridor Plan Traffic Study Results Traffic Model Background Examples of Analysis Techniques Traffic Study Main Conclusions Environmental Impact Report Answer Questions
Traffic Study Components Methodology Intersection LOS Impacts Freeway and Freeway Ramp Impacts Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
What Was Studied Background Assumptions JPB Rail Project Baseline ABAG 2020 Studied in EIR Corridor Plan: A and Z Scenarios Bay Meadows Proposal: Original and Revised Tonight s Presentation Focus on Corridor Plan Z
Corridor Plan Z Assumed Grade Separations: 25 th Ave. 28 th Ave. 31 st Ave.
San Mateo Traffic Model Consistent with MTC and C/CAG Models Focused subarea model of C/CAG county model 244 zones in San Mateo vs. 41 in C/CAG Adjusted based on actual traffic counts
San Mateo Model Zone Map
Model Steps Trip Generation Mode Split Trip Distribution Peak-Hour Factors Trip Assignment
Trip Distribution Example Existing Trip
Trip Distribution Example Future Trip = typical traffic study focus area Conclusion: New trip Citywide Focus Conclusion: Reoriented Trip
Project Land Use Comparison Corridor Plan Scenario "Z" Dwelling Units 4,031 Office Sq. Ft. 3.79 million Retail Sq. Ft. 706,000
San Mateo County Land Use Data ABAG 2020 vs. Corridor Plan 600,000 500,000 Households/Jobs 400,000 300,000 Corridor Plan Z Increment ABAG City of San Mateo 200,000 100,000 Households Corridor Plan Jobs Corridor Plan
Citywide Trip Generation PM Peak Hour 70,000 60,000 Vehicle Trips 50,000 40,000 30,000 Bay Meadows Increment Corridor Plan Increment ABAG 2020 Increment Existing 20,000 10,000 - Corridor Plan Bay Meadows
Traffic Volume (PM Peak 3 Hours) Corridor Plan Z Little traffic increase outside of Corridor Plan Area
Intersection LOS 2020 ABAG Future 2020 Scenario from San Mateo General Plan = LOS A, B, C = LOS D = LOS E = LOS F
Intersection Impacts Corridor Plan Z ECR/17 th +15 seconds delay ECR/Ralston +9 seconds delay
Freeway Volume PM Peak Hour 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 CPZ+BM if no Tod CP Z BM 2020 Existing 5,000 - US 101 SR 92 I-280
Summary of Impacts Significant Impacts Intersections El Camino Real/17th Avenue-Bovet Road El Camino Real/Ralston Avenue Ramps El Camino Real/SR-92 Interchange ABAG 2020 + Corridor Plan Z X X X Freeway Segments SR-92 west of El Camino Real Weaving section on SR-92 US 101 north and south of SR-92 X X X
Corridor Plan TDM Requirements Goal of 25% reduction corridor-wide Formation of Transportation Management Association (TMA) Trip reduction and parking management plans Short and long-term thresholds as condition of approval Monitoring and reporting Possibly more stringent measures, e.g. paid parking Traffic Model did not assume 25% reduction
Rail Corridor Environmental Impact Report The Rail Corridor Plan EIR incorporated traffic study results Final EIR was certified by the City Council on June 6, 2005 City Council also adopted a Statement Of Overriding Considerations
Statement of Overriding Considerations CEQA Guidelines Section 15093: If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable."
Rail Corridor Plan Benefits Increase housing opportunities while maintaining the character of existing single-family neighborhoods Concentration of major new development near transportation and transit corridors Development of a strategy to limit traffic congestion Establishing and maintaining San Mateo as a sustainable city Contributions to the Community s Economic Well-Being Increase in Amount and Variety of Community Housing Stock
Rail Corridor Plan EIR Findings Freeway and ramp improvements are not under the control of the City of San Mateo, and therefore its implementation cannot be assured. For example, for Highway 92 ramp and freeway impacts, it was noted that the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) plans to rebuild the SR 92/El Camino Real interchange
No Project Alternative Freeway ramp conditions would be worse under the No Project alternative than under Corridor Plan conditions Freeway segments (Highway 101 and State Route 92) which would operate as deficient under the Corridor Plan would similarly be deficient under the No Project alternative
Individual Development Projects Up to date traffic counts insure that Rail Corridor EIR traffic assumptions remain valid Individual traffic studies identify specific impacts on local roads and circulation systems City staff insures that cumulative development is within the Z scenario as analyzed in the Rail Corridor Plan EIR, and as outlined in the EIR
Cumulative Conditions Rail Corridor Plan EIR contained a traffic analysis that included all projected growth to the year 2020 The Rail Corridor Plan EIR was certified by the City Council on June 5, 2005 The Rail Corridor Plan EIR serves as the cumulative analysis for traffic impacts in the Corridor Plan area