SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
4.13 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
This chapter describes the regulatory framework and existing conditions in San Leandro related to transportation and traffic, and the potential impacts of the proposed General Plan update on circulation in the vicinity of the EIR Study Area. This chapter and the traffic analysis for this EIR were prepared by Kittelson & Associates, Inc. The analysis was conducted in accordance with the standards and methodologies set forth by the City of San Leandro and Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC). The technical appendices for the traffic analysis are included in Appendix H, Transportation and Traffic Data, of this Draft EIR.
4.13.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.13.1.1 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
This section describes federal, State, regional, and local environmental laws and policies that are relevant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process for transportation and circulation.
Federal Regulations
Americans with Disabilities Act
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides comprehensive rights and protections to individuals with disabilities. The goal of the ADA is to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency. To implement this goal, the United States Access Board has created accessibility guidelines for public rights-of-way. The guidelines address various issues, including roadway design practices, slope and terrain issues, pedestrian access to streets, sidewalks, curb ramps, street furnishings, pedestrian signals, parking, and other components of public rights-of-way.
The City of San Leandro works to ensure that people with disabilities have access to City programs, services, activities, and facilities. The ADA Coordinator for the City of San Leandro coordinates the City’s efforts to comply with all applicable federal, State, and local laws through implementation of its ADA Transition Plan. The City also has adopted a Reasonable Accommodation Policy. In all of its services, programs, events, activities, facilities, and public meetings, the City will strive to eliminate any barriers that prohibit people with disabilities from full access to facilities.
State Regulations
California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is responsible for planning, design, construction, and maintenance of all interstate freeways and State routes. The department sets design standards that are often used by local governments. Caltrans requirements are described in their Guide for Preparation
PLACEWORKS 4.13-1 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC of Traffic Impact Studies,1 which covers the information needed for Caltrans to review the impacts to State highway facilities, including freeway segments, on- and off-ramps, and signalized intersections.
Caltrans is the primary State agency responsible for transportation issues. One of its duties is the construction and maintenance of the State highway system. Caltrans has established standards for roadway traffic flow and developed procedures to determine if State-controlled facilities require improvements. For projects that may physically affect facilities or require access to the State highway, Caltrans requires encroachment permits before such activity may be undertaken. For projects that would not physically affect facilities, but may influence traffic flow and levels of services at such facilities, Caltrans may recommend measures to mitigate the traffic impacts of such projects.
Additionally, the following Caltrans procedures and directives are relevant to transportation improvements in San Leandro: . Level of Service Target. Caltrans maintains a target level of service at the transition between level of service (LOS) C and LOS D for all of its facilities.2 Where an existing facility is operating at less than the LOS C/D threshold, the existing measure of effectiveness should be maintained.3 . Caltrans Project Development Procedures Manual. This manual outlines pertinent statutory requirements, planning policies, and implementing procedures regarding transportation facilities. It is continually and incrementally updated to reflect changes in policy and procedures. For example, the most recent revision incorporates the “complete streets” policy from Deputy Directive 64-R1, which is detailed below. . Caltrans Deputy Directive 64. This directive requires Caltrans to consider the needs of non-motorized travelers, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons with disabilities, in all programming, planning, maintenance, construction, operations, and project development activities and products. This includes incorporation of the best available standards in all of the Department’s practices. . Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1. This directive requires Caltrans to provide for the needs of travelers of all ages and abilities in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities and products on the State highway system. Caltrans supports bicycle, pedestrian, and transit travel with a focus on complete streets that begins early in system planning and continues through project construction and maintenance and operations. . Caltrans Director’s Policy 22. This policy establishes support for balancing transportation needs with community goals. Caltrans seeks to involve and integrate community goals in the planning, design, construction, and maintenance and operations processes, including accommodating the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians. . Environmental Assessment Review and Comment. Caltrans, as a responsible agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, is available for early consultation on a project to provide guidance on applicable transportation analysis methodologies or other transportation related issues
1 California Department of Transportation, 2002, Guide for the preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. 2 Level of service is explained further in Section 4.13.1.2 within the Existing Traffic Conditions subsection. 3 California Department of Transportation, Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, December 2002.
4.13-2 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
and is responsible for reviewing the traffic impact study for errors and omissions pertaining to the State highway facilities. Caltrans published the Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (December 2002), which established the Measures of Effectiveness as described under “Level of Service Target” above. The Measures of Effectiveness is used to determine significant impacts on State facilities. The Guide also mandates that the traffic analysis include mitigation measures to lessen the potential project impacts on State facilities and the project’s fair share responsibility for the impacts. However, the ultimate mitigation measures and their implementations are to be determined upon consultation between Caltrans, the City, and the project proponent.
California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358)
Originally passed in 2008, California’s Complete Streets Act took effect in 2011 and requires local jurisdictions to plan for land use transportation policies that reflect a “complete streets” approach to mobility. “Complete streets” comprises a suite of policies and street design guidelines which provide for the needs of all road users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit operators and riders, children, the elderly, and the disabled. From 2011 onward, any local jurisdiction—county or city—that undertakes a substantive update of the circulation element of its general plan must consider “complete streets” and incorporate corresponding policies and programs.
Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, Senate Bill (SB) 743 was signed into law.4 The Legislature found that with the adoption of the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375), the State had signaled its commitment to encourage land use and transportation planning decisions and investments that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and thereby contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), as required by the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill [AB] 32). Additionally, the Complete Streets Act (AB 1358), requires local governments to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users. To further the State’s commitment to the goals of SB 375, AB 32 and AB 1358, Senate Bill 743 started a process that could fundamentally change transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. These changes will include the elimination of auto delay, level of service, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts. Further, parking impacts will not be considered significant impacts on the environment for select development projects within infill areas with nearby frequent transit service, such as San Leandro’s designated Priority Development Areas (PDAs). SB 743 includes amendments that revise the definition of “infill opportunity zones” to allow cities and counties to opt out of traditional LOS standards established by congestion management programs (CMPs) and require the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to update the CEQA Guidelines and establish “criteria for
4 An act to amend Sections 65088.1 and 65088.4 of the Government Code, and to amend Sections 21181, 21183, 21186, 21187, 21189.1, and 21189.3 of, to add Section 21155.4 to, to add Chapter 2.7 (commencing with Section 21099) to Division 13 of, to add and repeal Section 21168.6.6 of, and to repeal and add Section 21185 of, the Public Resources Code, relating to environmental quality.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-3 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas.5 As part of the new CEQA Guidelines, the new criteria “shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” OPR presented alternative metrics in a preliminary discussion draft in summer of 2014. OPR published the final draft of changes to the CEQA Guidelines, with an accompanying technical advisory document for public comment on January 20, 2016. The final guidelines will require certification and adoption by the Secretary for Resources before they go into effect after a two-year opt-in period.
Regional Regulations
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is the transportation planning, coordinating, and financing agency for the nine-county Bay Area, including Alameda County. It also functions as the federally mandated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the region. It is responsible for regularly updating the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), a comprehensive blueprint for the development of mass transit, highway, airport, seaport, railroad, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
As previously stated, with the passage of AB 32, the State of California committed itself to reducing statewide GHG emissions. Subsequent to the adoption of AB 32, the State adopted SB 375 as the means for achieving regional transportation-related GHG targets. Among the requirements of SB 375 is the creation of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for meeting regional targets. The SCS and the RTP must be consistent with one other, including action items and financing decisions. MPOs must use transportation and air emissions modeling techniques consistent with guidelines prepared by the California Transportation Commission.
The current RTP, Plan Bay Area: Strategy for a Sustainable Region, was adopted on July 18, 2013 and includes both the region’s SCS and the 2040 RTP. Plan Bay Area was prepared by MTC in partnership with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and cities and counties throughout the region. Plan Bay Area is an integrated long-range transportation and land-use/housing plan intended to support a growing economy, provide more housing and transportation choices, and reduce transportation-related pollution in the Bay Area. Through this initiative, local governments identified PDAs, which form the implementing framework for Plan Bay Area. The PDAs are areas along transportation corridors that are served by public transit that allow opportunities for development of transit-oriented, infill development within existing communities that are expected to host the majority of future development. As shown on Figure 4.11-1, in Chapter 4.11, Population and Housing, of this Draft EIR, the PDAs in San Leandro are located along East 14th Street between the city limits (i.e., between Bristol Boulevard and north of Bancroft Avenue), in Downtown and the Bay Fair BART station area.
5 A “transit priority area” is defined in as an area within one-half mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. A "major transit stop" is defined in Public Resources Code Section 21064.3 as a rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
4.13-4 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
ABAG/MTC has already designated Bay Fair BART Transit Village a potential PDA. Once the City adopts the Bay Fair TOD Specific Plan in 2017, then Bay Fair will achieve official PDA status.
MTC has established its policy on complete streets in the Bay Area. The policy states that projects funded all, or in part, with regional funds (e.g., federal, State Transportation Improvement Program, and bridge tolls) must consider the accommodation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as described in Caltrans Deputy Directive 64. These recommendations do not replace locally adopted policies regarding transportation planning, design, and construction. Instead, these recommendations facilitate the accommodation of pedestrians, including wheelchair users, and bicyclists into all projects where bicycle and pedestrian travel is consistent with current adopted regional and local plans.
Alameda County Transportation Commission
The Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) coordinates transportation planning efforts throughout Alameda County and programs local, regional, State, and federal funding for project implementation. Additionally, it prepares the Congestion Management Program (CMP), a plan mandated by California law to describe the strategies to address congestion problems on the CMP network, which includes State highways and principal arterials. The CMP requires analysis of Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roadway and transit system and uses LOS standards as a means to measure congestion and has established LOS standards to determine how local governments meet the standards of the CMP.
As the congestion management agency for Alameda County, Alameda CTC develops and updates the C M P. The program applies strategies to assess, monitor, and improve the performance of the county's multimodal transportation system; address congestion; and ultimately protect the environment with strategies to help reduce GHG emissions. Updated every two years, the CMP aligns with the long-range Countywide Transportation Plan (CWTP), the 2013 RTP and SCS, and other related efforts and legislative requirements.
The CMP consists of the following five main elements: . Setting level of service (LOS) standards for CMP-designated roadways and monitoring LOS trends. . Establishing and reporting on multimodal performance measures. . Exploring ways to manage travel demand. . Analyzing the impact of land development on transportation. . Developing a capital improvement program.
The Alameda CWTP is a long-range policy document that guides transportation funding decisions for Alameda County's transportation system over a 25-year horizon. It was approved by the Alameda CTC in June 2012. This plan lays out a strategy for meeting transportation needs for all users in Alameda County and includes projects and other improvements for new and existing freeways, local streets, and public transit (paratransit, buses, rails, ferries), as well as facilities and programs to support bicycling and walking. Additionally, the CWTP serves as Alameda County’s input to the MTC in its development of the RTP/SCS.
Alameda CTC has initiated several countywide planning efforts, including the Countywide Multimodal Arterial Plan, the Countywide Goods Movement Plan, and the Countywide Transit Plan.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-5 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Local Regulations
With the exception of State highways that are under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, streets in San Leandro are generally under the jurisdiction of the City of San Leandro.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
San Leandro’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (Bike and Ped Master Plan) was adopted in 2011. The plan contains an assessment of existing conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians and provides recommendations for biking and walking facilities, the interface between bicyclists and transit, and related programs. Table 4.13-1 contains the Bike and Ped Master Plan goals.
TABLE 4.13-1 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN GOALS
Goal Number Goal Support bicycling and walking and the development of a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian Goal 1 transportation system as a viable alternative to the automobile. Implement bicycle and pedestrian improvements maximizing the amount of funding for which San Leandro Goal 2 is eligible. Develop a bicycle system that meets the needs of utilitarian and recreation users, helps reduce vehicle trips, Goal 3 and links residential neighborhoods with local and regional destinations. Create a well-connected pedestrian environment by improving the walkability of all streets in San Leandro Goal 4 through the planning, implementing, and maintaining of pedestrian supportive infrastructure that meets the needs of all users. Goal 5 Maximize bicycle and pedestrian access to transit.
Goal 6 Improve bicycle and pedestrian safety.
Goal 7 Develop detailed and ranked bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Raise awareness of the benefits of walking and biking by developing a coordinated public outreach strategy Goal 8 to encourage bicycling and walking. Develop land use policies and development standards that promote bicycling and walking for utilitarian and Goal 9 recreation trips. Source: San Leandro Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, 2011.
Complete Streets Policies
In response to AB 1358, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, Alameda CTC required all local jurisdictions that receive direct program distributions of local Measure B sales tax revenues to adopt a complete streets policy by June 30, 2013. San Leandro adopted its complete streets policy on February 4, 2013 as a step toward fulfilling its desire that city streets form a comprehensive and integrated transportation network promoting safe and convenient travel for all users while preserving flexibility, recognizing community context, and using design guidelines and standards that support best practices.
The City is participating in the Central County Complete Streets Implementation Study with the adjacent city of Hayward and unincorporated areas of Alameda County. This study, funded by the Alameda CTC, will provide complete streets implementation work plans for these three central Alameda County jurisdictions and develop implementation tools, such as street typologies, design guidelines, and checklists.
4.13-6 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Downtown Transit-Oriented Development Strategy
In 2007, the City completed development of the Downtown San Leandro Transit-Oriented Development Strategy (TOD Strategy document). While not a regulating work, the TOD Strategy document was developed as a means to fulfill goals of the current general plan, to indicate the character of transit- oriented development that is appropriate for downtown, and to make recommendations for policies and practices that are necessary for implementing downtown transit-oriented development.
Recognizing that San Leandro is a built-out urban city with few opportunities for major public infrastructure changes, the TOD Strategy document contains elements that may be implemented incrementally with roadway rehabilitation and reconstruction projects or when new development creates opportunity for improvements. Within the strategy document are four street types for downtown: commercial main street, downtown neighborhood street, urban boulevard, and vehicular arterial. These street types were developed as a framework for classifying streets based not only on function but also on character and land use. The TOD Strategy document addresses pedestrian and bicycle circulation, primary vehicular circulation, and parking. It also includes policies to support transit, improve traffic flow, and protect residential neighborhoods from truck traffic.
Standard Plans
The City of San Leandro City Engineer has adopted Standard Plans containing engineering drawings that are used for road, bridge, and other municipal construction. The Standard Plans specify designs for curbs, driveway cuts, wheelchair ramps, street signs, storm drainage, street lighting, bike racks, landscaping, and other aspects of roadway construction, to ensure that new roadways and sidewalks are safe and accessible.
4.13.1.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section describes the existing transportation facilities in San Leandro, including the roadway network, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, public transit network, and current intersection and freeway operations.
Roadway Network
The roadway network is made up of the freeway system that serves Alameda County and an extensive street system made up of arterial, collector, and local roads, as shown on Figure 4.13-1.
Freeways
Freeways are distinguished from other types of roadways in that abutting lands have no right or easement of access to or from their abutting lands or, in some cases, such owners have only limited or restricted
PLACEWORKS 4.13-7 O v D E A a M d a h k t n a g 7 Av t e p D 9 In th e c v R 00 v w o C t 1 d A A a r A a S A n r a t e 02 v il t S 1 t t S h r S r h e t o t n t Av v u r t 5 a h d a 04t th A r D 8 1 7 B A S t 10 F C r a i l v n o o a v n o p W L A Av t w d a h h a e E 3r 9t e l 0 l 10 i te a 1 Av l ll E n S B oria l D d r t v v ct e A d A l t A W Vi v B ¯ s n A r t v r th ra ice v d A l l A v o 6 u a A D A S 0 Ma
1 r v c l R S v rl SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATEor EIR w l o a o B c l w r m A t A R r d i e e L r D a
P c l e s D 0 0.5 1 Miles a o k r h v s e e l i CITYl OF SAN LEANDROB k i
p h e
o c s e v f B r r C f t C p A v r w e e g a u i t i r ir A A i S l e A n v e D o R B e d h r M D v P s e t S L a r 8 o d v a t o A r b Tu 9 l m r A n d nis R v TRANSPORTATION ANDd DTRAFFIC tto y n d g e A oa w v Du L u r e gier Av e e e W e h B vi v A B E t o A v e e n D g m 8 W ll s Bl r G r D e s b l D e en a Dante Av A e Oakport St r e A Edgewater Dr 9 B k ak p M a O o w a h o t v i r D St 97th Av HInternational Bl r c t ary S r S C D Railroad Av C St 100th Av e a P v r 5 a D A 102nd Av rt r A r D v E S R h 0 k t D
r r t u A e a d r 1 S o s v lli G 85thAv 104th Av r S 107th Av Bl F o e e v A Co raf Capwell Dr h a o t L B s f a n o d A a A Walterr Av a a v t L t e t e B h l H R E 109th Av v i a a 103rd Av i A l g r Edes Av d n S g oria l e t r Lake d t Av g ic B v nt Warwick Av V Av P A r ra e ice v d u l l e o Access o A D A l 106th Av A Ma il l R S v rl v v l o d View Dr oor B B m l w A t A R P u d e n t Leet Dr r a Chabot
Pippin St l e o v D a r h v ll s v e
Breed Av h e E
c r a A B r v r C t Clara St v A e e C n g a i i i A i D e r ro R A Suffolk Dr A H qu L
d M D v Pardee Dr h s
e t s Lewis Av a a T d o
8 a M o r a J v k
b Tunis 9 l r A G
R D a g e y n d u a w m DuttonLee Av Av u y n L
u i W e D ie Begier Av B a B v v A M D d L C E o A a g s u v o
v g e d J l S n m W Broadmoorl Bls Bl r G r A r n b a
D A t e e es len D i h a e 98th Av B k d k w l d a Ma p a o l o a u r
r a O a v g w o a S i k h o t a n a t l i r A H r t A ary e S S C Dr i a s M n v e e P v n R 5 D n b a r s v o n e o r Dv A r t r Earhart Rd R 0 k t i v n A H r t y lo d i e o d 1 S o s v G o v o e g C p e oe e A ra i c o t s Collier Dr W ff D A D w i t L B R n w y a A e w r s v A a o a v s a Bigge Av i H t r v R
n e r n A A w P a a t l D W r d t a i B v Lake o w Peralta Avl u S v b D d A S i S B y
t r n s J tt A S v o View Dr i e r D Bergedo Dr t l o i d O Preda St t v Chabot r s f r
g l Estudillo Av l a W r El t Callan Av e D D a r
r Douglas Dr eHays St La P r T P
M r Joaquin Av kG
a G n e c A u r
i L D D a Billings Bl Bancroft Av M Donovan Dr d o L P C h S C d Juana Av r n a a
t w h a A Mar c v aily D
r a g Adams Av o r n ine k r a a c D r Ron Cowanr Pw a Maud Av v e i b r v i o Doolittle Dr h r i e i Hester St t d i v d
y v e e o r p i f t W Dolores Av i o n w w t y R e A r A K r n i d S E
i R o A w t D c W d a B v S D c d n A l
r tt Sybil Av v e e o r D o l o A d Orchard Av
g W Juanarr Av Elsie Av r L e A t t 1 S
e r Davis St a r r n Gardner Bl Pacific Av P l r S t a n e l v o 4 C P S y A B v n t A d c aily D h t r i D r o a S i e h T h v R o v l rl k A r Kelly Av r n E 14th St o n A d D c e l a o L e d S a t H o S v e n e E t v r F n A T S a e o Thornton St r b t A ir m v i a m Dr l n m d redo t a nn G Eden Rd T a Harlan St Fa t s h o e i r ir sm E t n l m d o m E a a n G n Estabrook St D o n 7 o D E t n C n n n t h h th v Castro St h t v 3 r A 580 o e r D U A 580 y 137th Av D U J o l l y e 1 v § Van Av r e ¨¦ J D t a S l l h v v V r r § a e v ¨¦ r D a n t A L L a S S d e a t A A a n v an to o dro Bl r r h a v n 140th Av142nd Av k Carmel Drr d Li S n h n S t Placer Dr t a A t L t 136th Av Sylvia Wy A L n S d e 0 a v n v a h 2 r A e A to o ndro Bl t 4 4 r D Teagarden St gu k r Williams St ta in 6 1 1 ce v C n 139th Av L S la Mo t S 3 t S P ar Neptune Dr s S t 1 v y m Wy v A lv e Aladdin Av 143rd Av m dney C A l Marina Bl ia C y a ia D N ll S r e h i r T lt u t o Windsor Dr e o g 9 W r Sitka St m W v s e n Menlo St Merced St 148th Av 150thFir Av AvA t A a e Washington Av t v A t 3 y Miller St s v a n v S 1 A v o 1 5 rd A t Fremont Av 1 3 g M v e
5 l 1 v a A N Castle St o Jen v i A n r l L r ife A o d e880 B Marcella St ib Saratoga St r n O d i r n e r § S Stanton AvD ¨¦ Carrillo Dr a r d D p o t 3 Barri Dr y Miramar Ave e dr y cyon Dr n Page St W Avenue 133rd Av Hal Plaza Dr i a ThrushAv
r M S l a 4 v Wy w b l v C W Avenue 134th Av ir t a Mateo St t n ey a u y A 1 n F Cedar Av Hollyhock Dr M A A yd a Elm St t D C n S N R S h h v S r o r v t t l e a l t A r t Nabor St a t se 8 0 A W e o A tk o Bayfair Dr r M C v i n e 4 r c D el W d m 5 i v s n o a A S arm m y o t a C 162ndM Av o S 1 1 i n a e Crosby St Violet St M E 14th St F A n t S c Anza Wy M A a l k r M A W e i i e a t v A a a r n r Esser Av o Ehle St v d c a n r e e M v v Juniper St 163rd Av Fiji Wy T a te l te s A v h S D r B s g eyS l P a 1 i Wiley St r a b S l n r John Dr B Pike Av t A i e d A o t u t c 5 a e v l s s r v r t Lloyd Av v l W l i F r y o 164th Av r mberland Av o Videll St e d 1 D Cu e h 3 e n A Los Banos St a e D rallon Dr r A D r Fa g d n l
d 5 R 165th Av r v r v Drew St n AshlandAv e i r S D
Avon Av Spr e t n 1 r o d 3in A J g r D e l Castle St h n a S m i 3 ke h t S Delano St S g A n 1 t 166th Av r D t r i 4 r DermodyAv a s L f Edgemoor St e E t 167th Av t nt Wy r o t e o Hubbard Av 3 l Tulsa v e 880 M i u S l g o z b S v Zelma St t 1 g e D u r A O Manor Bl n B in R n r A Wicks Bl i e e S 168th Avh r n r n a e a a D t t a S
n t v u r 0 § r m S C ¨¦ t l r r a KentAv
7 a o r r a i
A n D h c S t t i 1 B A y a M e a r e r v y a A cyon Dr e P
al P
Norton St Norton s v H n
W e A
a T t r M l l s A r v S o t p r v l b Dayton Av rw 238 a M a a o e
W s i d il t g n t n e a l y Fargo Av e a S g A r o Beatty St Beatty a
FS H C t e H v Foothill Bl o t e y D ll e D v E yh S R c d oc o v
n St Galt R D E Lewelling Bl k I Usher St a r D Embers l x r t r S r ise Bl to o e d m t A V V ra a Locust St S v L T a a w i M A Santa Teresa i a P t l t San Elvina Dr v a d t a e e e C Nabor St s o A B n r y a
r G S v yf L r a n n M C d ir D 2 v e
Francisco e S t r A r o v o mpton Rd B c m S a b Ha t el Wy 6 d t i m D r a r A o o r n a r A r a e c a e C S Bay r at h e 1 o m n Via Toledo Violet St d n a da S e C E Montgomeryc Av r t r A M v Sz a s Belleau StK R t k A a o y V l r M 1 3 a Missioni Bl s o n e i i Haviland Av a S a a A r Via Enrico A W a n in z 4 6 v E r o v v E s c av ji V A ie Cherry Wy n r J 1 Lewelling Bl i i r A a t l t a Via Segundoa r Medford Av b t v A r l l h h F T e e d h g o A e y S D rey B P y Meekland Av u y Via ConejoVia ParoD o v ik W W l h l i W e m A S J a a Via Alamitos e b S o l n t e r B P s n t S v n V l os y t e a Nielson Av l A 4 o u d m ia t S t B t a y A i S r i a l s i 6 e e o v Vining Dr r p Lloyd Av h H S Grant Av l l W 1 h i o d t a y e h i e T Western Bl Cumberland Av V t d V e n c D i t n 5 L o m Grove Wy o a e D rallon Dr y s v Fa R e r g 6 o r S A n
i s D R c 1 A Drew S n Via Chiquita S t v r a A m s Av rd v v S Sp e h t A r t V Av r r
a o Avon a A d d w in r B t g D i n A o t l 6 a Via Lacqua ie v l a e h Via Barrett Channel St ac il ke S Del 6 t v a M an Via Manzanas W m o St v r H t 1 7 s l D t A V D n igo e r 6
i A V d E E h
a S e o Wy
m ia Perkins Dr bard Av 1 t t i b n
y u l
H A a L Tu t e Worthley Dr V ucas A Sunset Bl lsa S l 8 v s g a e d i Shirley Av Z t g r Garden Av Laurel Av e
i n A a r r Bl B 6 ano n V R M i i Bockman Rd b W g n 1 S R H l Poplar Av h a Hathaway Av o S t e t
a e Hesperian Bl t Via Estrella
e t t n r t 0
V Bartlett Av r r i D i K
e i m 7 a
c S
a a Smalley Av t S i
Via Natal i o A St 1 Keller Av M k V r
o y
e W Sunset Bl
N d s s
B St t e
l R i
o
t n e t
s s
r p a u St B ton Av A r o W ay a D t 238 e S
C s lf l
o e S t
n S G e go Av r
Far
r
B
t t S
e H e l
h F y v a
s o
c d
n G R o Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015. D E Lewelling Bl 0 1 I E U a x th r ise Bl to e m d t V V ra a L il L b T a o l w i M S a e i a P c B San E v r a u l a e e s C l o s
Scale (Miles) n v r y G t n L r t in d S Francisco a e S t r
o o pton Rd B t a t S a Ham t b i D T S r r n r D e a c e u e r a Bay r a m V h e r e a n d ll r co a i M S Freeway s Be K nri z a R y o t a Bl E o V T a v W n M g a i A H ry lin i A a o in rd r t i el V V l fo he g s ew v A e ie ed a C o s L ia V rr d r M v m io ia o o A i y e n V D y M l W Arterial V S o v a ry B r i e e n m D a V a ia e so A l n V v l g e d os g a A N ia k l v in m ia nt C P S u B in r a i n l A V e r e A o a o a H S G d n v y l n r l o a s la d W Collector i e e o T ve W V c o m A ro o n jo im G e i v s A t R e t t a o i s e t u v s s c rn rre cq V na v ar A v Local a a i a A d v A B B L a nz V a o l a a d w a i C i n A o i M a e l V V C a ci v il h i a r h V M W i H D l s a q V s B o e n g n u i v t i i rk A e v San Leandro City Limits V d a e s A m ia n it P ey n l
i l y a u e
A L e a ir r W V ucas A h S v u ia l e S A a i S r G r L o a n Rd r la V R v r ckma i p t t Bo b t A a o h H l t P v l a le r H A l a a e H rt d San Leandro Sphere of e t V a a y r a v e le y r V B l t l N A D i e h a i r a B n t D e a i t a m i le a s e S S t V l ia s A w r e E p n A Influence K M V u v a s e S y t
e t d r W A S r B l R
e i v i
n e a
l s
l r a n a ou W A St C olf B G l
Figure 4.13-1 Street Classification Map (Roadway Facilities Map) SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC right or easement of access.6 On a daily basis, these freeways carry between 98,000 and 223,000 daily regional and local vehicles to and through San Leandro (see Table 4.13-2).
Interstate 238
Interstate 238 (I-238) is a four- to six-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour. This east-west freeway connects Interstate 880 (I-880) in San Leandro with Interstate 580 (I-580) in Ashland and Castro Valley. Westbound exits provide access to East 14th Street (on and off ramps) and Washington Avenue (off-ramp). Eastbound exits provide access to East Lewelling Boulevard (on and off ramps).
Interstate 580
Interstate 580 (I-580) is a six- to eight-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour. This freeway provides north-south access within and north of San Leandro and provides east-west access east of San Leandro. To the north, it is a connector to nearby cities, including Oakland and Emeryville, as well as regional destinations, such as Richmond and San Rafael. To the east, it is a connector to nearby communities, such as Castro Valley, as well as regional destinations, such as the cities of Dublin and Livermore. I-580 also provides access to the larger freeway and highway network in the region with direct connections to I-5, I-80, I-205, I-880, and I-980; US Highway 101; and State Routes (SR) 13, 24, 84, and 132. The city is served by interchanges along I-580 at 150th Avenue/Fairmont Drive7 and Estudillo Avenue/Grand Avenue.
Interstate 880
Interstate 880 (I-880) is an 8- to 10-lane freeway with a posted speed limit of 65 miles per hour. This north-south freeway connects San Leandro with nearby cities, including Hayward and Oakland, as well as regional destinations, such as Fremont and San Jose. I-880 also provides access to the larger freeway network in the region with direct connections to Interstates 80, 238, 580, and 980; U.S. Highway 101; and SR 17, 92, and 237. San Leandro is served by freeway interchanges along I-880 at Davis Street, Marina Boulevard, and Washington Avenue.
Arterials
Arterial roadways are the basis of a city’s circulation network. They connect freeways and major destinations in the city and are used primarily for cross-town travel, commercial vehicle travel, and access to collector streets and local streets. Arterials typically provide access to adjacent land uses, but access may be restricted by medians at some locations. Driveways are limited or consolidated to a few locations, and on-street parking may be limited or absent in order to provide the greatest travel capacity within the available right-of-way. Depending on the intensity of adjacent land uses, arterials may have two, four, or six lanes. Intersections with arterials may be signalized and may have dedicated left or right turn lanes.
6 California Department of Transportation, 2012, Highway Design Manual, Chapter 60 Nomenclature. 7 Fairmont Drive at I-580 is located just outside the San Leandro city limits.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-9 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-2 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ON SELECTED ARTERIAL STREETS
# Street Segment ADT Year 1 Thornton to Marina 7,200 2014 Alvarado Street 2 Marina Boulevard to Fremont Avenue 20,200 2014
3 Durant Avenue to Dutton Avenue 9,800 2014
4 Dutton Avenue to Estudillo Avenue 13,100 2014 Bancroft Avenue 5 Estudillo Avenue to 136th Avenue 9,200 2014
6 136th to East 14th 7,000 2014
7 Callan Avenue East 14th Street to Bancroft Avenue 9,800 2014
8 West of Doolittle Drive 7,100 2014
9 Davis Street Doolittle Drive to I-880 22,400 2014
10 I-880 to San Leandro Boulevard 33,000 2014
11 Adams Avenue to Davis Street 29,400 2014
12 Davis Street to Marina Boulevard 22,700 2014 Doolittle Drive 13 Marina Boulevard to Fairway Drive 17,700 2014
14 Fairway to Farallon 10,700 2014
15 Dutton Avenue East 14th to MacArthur 11,000 2014
16 Durant Avenue to Davis Street 23,000 2014
17 Davis Street to San Leandro Boulevard 16,600 2014 East 14th Street 18 San Leandro Boulevard to Hesperian Boulevard 24,600 2014
19 Hesperian Boulevard to Fairmont Drive 18,900 2014
20 East 14th to Bancroft 11,500 2014
21 Estudillo Avenue Bancroft Avenue to MacArthur Boulevard 15,100 2014
22 MacArthur to Lake Chabot 5,100 2014
23 Fairmont Drive Hesperian to East 14th 21,700 2012
24 Doolittle Drive to Merced Street 11,400 2014 Fairway Drive 25 Merced Street to I-880 12,800 2014
26 Farnsworth Street Lewelling to Manor Boulevard 8,800 2014
27 Corvallis to Fremont 11,100 2011 Floresta Boulevard 28 Fremont Avenue to Washington Avenue 21,700 2014
29 Halcyon Drive Washington to Hesperian 20,800 2012
30 East 14th Street to Halcyon Drive 20,800 2014
31 Hesperian Boulevard Halcyon Drive to Bayfair Drive 25,500 2014
32 Bayfair Drive to I-238 30,200 2014
4.13-10 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-2 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC ON SELECTED ARTERIAL STREETS
# Street Segment ADT Year 33 Wicks to Farnsworth 18,000 2014
34 Lewelling Boulevard Farnsworth Street to Washington Avenue 20,100 2014
35 Washington Avenue to Hesperian Drive 22,600 2014
36 Durant to Dutton 9,800 2013 MacArthur Boulevard 37 Dutton Avenue to Estudillo Avenue 10,500 2014
38 Manor Boulevard Wicks Boulevard to Kesterson Street 9,700 2014
39 Neptune Drive to Doolittle Avenue 7,000 2014
40 Doolittle Drive to Merced Street 17,900 2014
41 Marina Boulevard Merced to I-880 32,172 2013a
42 I-880 to Alvarado Avenue 21,900 2014
43 Alvarado Avenue to San Leandro Boulevard 18,900 2014
44 Park Street to Davis Street 22,100 2014
45 San Leandro Boulevard Davis Street to Washington Avenue 19,500 2014
46 Washington Avenue to East 14th Street 11,300 2014
47 Sybil Avenue Bancroft to Grand 7,300 2013
48 West Juana Avenue to San Leandro Boulevard 9,800 2014
49 Washington Avenue San Leandro Blvd. to Halcyon 20,200 2012
50 Halcyon to Lewelling 22,500 2012
51 Merced Street to Farallon Drive 10,700 2014
52 Wicks Boulevard Farallon Drive to Manor Boulevard 21,600 2014
53 Manor Boulevard to Lewelling Boulevard 13,700 2014
54 Merced Street Republic Avenue to Fairway Drive 19,200 2014
55 Doolittle Drive to Merced Street 10,800 2014
56 Williams Street Merced Street to San Leandro Boulevard 11,400 2014
57 San Leandro Boulevard to Washington Avenue 3,500 2014
58 143rd Avenue Washington Avenue to East 14th Street 7,700 2014
59 150th Avenue East 14th Street to I-580 16,600 2014
60 West Gate Parkway Timothy Drive and Shopping Center Driveway 13,300 2014 a, ADT count estimated from peak hour counts. Source: City of San Leandro, 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-11 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Arterials may pass through residential neighborhoods as well as commercial and industrial areas. Because residential neighborhoods tend to be more susceptible to the negative impacts of vehicular traffic than business districts, different design standards and traffic management strategies may apply to residential arterials.
Caltrans is responsible for the design, operation, and maintenance of three arterials in San Leandro: East 14th Street (Route 185), Doolittle Drive north of Davis Street (Route 61), and Davis Street from Doolittle to East 14th Street (Route 112). These are referred to by Caltrans as Tier 2 highways. The City of San Leandro is responsible for the other arterials in the city, including Bancroft Avenue, Hesperian Boulevard, Washington Avenue, San Leandro Boulevard, and Marina Boulevard.
The average daily vehicle volumes along selected arterial and collector roadways in the city are shown in Table 4.13-2.
Collectors
Collectors are designed to connect neighborhoods with arterials. They carry a moderate amount of traffic, typically less than 10,000 vehicles per day, although somewhat higher volumes are not unusual. Collectors may be subject to different design standards and traffic management strategies based on adjacent land uses to accommodate neighborhoods, commercial areas, and industrial areas. These streets typically have four lanes, may have curbed parking, and have traffic signals at major intersections. Intersections with relatively lower volume streets may be four-way or two-way stop controlled. Examples of collector streets include Springlake Drive, Teagarden Street, and Farnsworth Street.
Local Streets
Local streets provide immediate connections between parcels, whether in residential, commercial, or industrial areas. These are low-speed streets that typically have two lanes with curbed parking and may be four-way or two-way stop controlled. With the exception of a few private streets, the City of San Leandro is responsible for the design, operation, and maintenance of all local streets.
Planned Transportation Network Improvements
In October 2015, Caltrans opened the southbound I-880 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane, which spans the length of I-880 from Hegenberger Road in Oakland to just south of Marina Boulevard. Improvements associated with this project include widening the freeway to accommodate the HOV lane, widening of the 23-span bridge over the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and San Leandro Creek, reconstructing of the Davis Street and Marina Boulevard overcrossings to accommodate the new lane and to provide standard vertical clearance over the freeway, and constructing new soundwalls within the project limits.8
Other planned transportation network improvements are described as part of the description of the travel model assumptions in the methodology section below.
8 Alameda CTC, Capital Projects Program Project Fact Sheets: I-880 Southbound HOV Lane – North Segment and I-880 Southbound HOV Lane – South Segment, June 2015.
4.13-12 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Transit Facilities
San Leandro is served by several transit providers of varying service type, including Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), AC Transit, Amtrak, the FLEX Shuttle, and the LINKS program.
BART
BART provides heavy-rail, regional transit service to the Counties of Alameda, San Francisco, Contra Costa, and San Mateo. Two BART stations are located in San Leandro: one is located to the west of downtown and the other is adjacent to Bayfair Mall. Between 6,100 and 6,400 passengers per day arrive at and depart from each of these stations. Direct service is provided to San Francisco, Oakland, Fremont, Richmond, and Dublin/Pleasanton. Connecting service is provided to Concord/Pittsburg. BART operates with 15-minute headways during commute periods and provides service between 4:15 a.m. and 12:15 a.m. for East Bay and Transbay travel.
Future improvements to BART service include the extension into Santa Clara County as well as to Livermore. In addition, the Bayfair Connector project, which is funded by Alameda CTC through Measure BB funds, would provide for a smoother transfer at Bayfair, if traveling between Pleasanton and Fremont.
AC Transit
AC Transit provides bus service in Alameda County and the western portion of Contra Costa County, and it provides commuter, transbay service to San Francisco and the Peninsula. Its local buses connect San Leandro neighborhoods and business districts with desirable destinations, including the two local BART stations. AC Transit provides school bus and paratransit services, and it is a participating transit provider for the regional, All-Nighter bus system, providing “night owl” bus service when BART is not operating. AC Transit buses are equipped with front-loading racks that can hold up to two bicycles.
Some of AC Transit’s busiest service corridors pass through San Leandro. Daily ridership on the East 14th Street corridor was over 21,000 passengers per day in Fall 2014. The Bancroft Avenue corridor had daily ridership of 10,000 passengers per day in Fall 2014. Ridership along the MacArthur Boulevard corridor was 8,000 passengers per day in Fall 2014. Bus routes throughout the city are illustrated on Figure 4.13-2. Table 4.13-3 presents the ridership and maximum load factors for all AC Transit routes that originate or pass through San Leandro.
Although Rapid Bus service is currently in operation with the 1R line connecting Berkeley BART to San Leandro BART, AC Transit approved a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in the East Bay in 2012. According to the design workshop for the East Bay BRT Project conducted in November 2012, the proposed line would span 9.5 miles connecting downtown Oakland to downtown San Leandro. The system would include stops in downtown San Leandro and the San Leandro BART station. A dedicated bus lane is proposed for a majority of the corridor. However, the dedicated bus lane will only span a couple of blocks in San Leandro on East 14th Street from the northern city limit to just south of Broadmoor Boulevard. Other amenities would be provided including sheltered seating at bus stops, off-bus fare payment, real-time arrival signs,
PLACEWORKS 4.13-13 W O v E !1 a A d a E 0th ! l 0 57 g k !45 n 1 NX4 e p S D u ! v ! ! R v ! w o t C t d A 57 314 r A a S S n ! 2 ! a SAN LEANDROA GENERAL0 PLAN UPDATE! EIR ! t 40 i S 1 h l t ! t t !1R S r t ! e o t S Av !45 ! r t a 75 5 t CITY OFth SAN LEANDRO C D d 04 8 S 1 !45 a r A a !98 Av p v n 08th w 1 v e !356 LTRANSPORTATIONAv AND TRAFFICnt A NX3 l ! e v a ! !314 l d !45 A r ! ! a r th Du D n 03 09 r !98 Ed d 1 1 e W v v ¯ s ! A t 98 r e W ic d A A Oakport St l Edgewater Dr A v o a ! a A !1 S 356 E St ! l M l a ! 57 l n ! v ! c 100th Av 1R r ! R ! v r !45 NX4 S or B D St u ! o l w lo a ! ! m e c Railroad Av ! t 57 ! w C St d A !75 t A R S r a !314 ! v r i A St ! ! 40 h e L r 102nd Av v o c
!1R t P A D r l e s D 0 0.5 1 Miles a ! 45 ! c v s e e l !75 i th k B B k i
l h
A p t e Capwell Dr 85thAv 104th Av ! 7 r s S e C !45 v fo i r C p A ! 0 r w ! e !98 g f ! e a a 1 t 1 i n r ir A i u r e v A o n S M e L D R 108th Av v h D e 356 P d t A t D v NX3 v s L NX3 !314 ! e r e !45 uran 8 ! S ly d ! ! a l v a D a ! n 9 A ! t e A Edes Av b 109th Av l ! !98 r d 103rd Av Tun 45 rr A n i v ! ! s Warwick Av Av v ! o d!98 R e r a 1 tt r n ic g d d l A A u Access o A F v A e l M D 356 E E e a ! l !1R u a ! R ! v r a S e oor Bl t lo i Begier Av e m e r y d !75 w c t m a A R r l o b r r v ! h Leet Dr o SB
Pippin St r n l v e B ! D ! h g a c ! D B v s 75 e A Breed Av h
t e e o Dr L r A a W v p u i r G k C D n Clara St g a !1 e A e a e i l i r A r 107the Av c O r r r i A r o M tR h Suffolk Dr D r 801 !75 e G d t D a v Pardee Dr n s H Lewis Av NX3 ! e R 8 ly e h! ! l D a ! l e ! H e a b a 9 l ! r t Tunis R d 45 ar !1 Cary Dr g R n n d A P F 5 a Earhart Rd E Dutton Av r e w u Begier Av e A y m d l r r v r !SB o b 0 r k D ! v B ! g s !75 s A v r e o Dr S Lee Av v A W p A Garcia Av k v D n e e A c Oa le 1 S s li i 801 ! r G o A a l G n r a 75 D D o r Hunter Av ! a e h ! H la D e t a C f a R 356 t n P Cary Dr r t L s f 5 a H w ! r v A d e r v e ! ! r k o 0 ! s A ! v S A Av !1R 40 S B 1 D o as G D e B a ra a Collier Dr ! d t L ! ff t !356 314 r v iH ! 45 A l ! o ! A ! !40 v Best Av !1R g a ! e Bigge Av a r Lake ! d v !314 !45 alt g e A ! e r e Lake e g P o g l P A r l r ! v !NX4 View Dr v di NX4 View Dr e Preda St 75 ! ! ! Chabot! A P u e 75 ! Estudillo Av Scenicview Dr n t Chabot 805 B v Callan Av a s
! Douglas Dr L ll E v S
r a A B a T c 805 M A !1 Joaquin Av Benedict Dr k C n e r ! G D e e i n
u ! L u i L Billings Bl i Bancroft Av q v c
D M Donovan Dr d Dolores Av o L C v
d s Juana Av a A a T r n a d o i t w ! a MarM o h ! J v s B e a g k r o ! i k ! w Adams Av r 1 n ne a 1 A re G
!21 a Maud Av v e a b r v e o Doolittle Dr D u a o r m u l d i i v e Hester St t y i e e o n o r L p i B a B R W n D M D w w i t r a d e u D o L C ! A g ! R i v n
y 21 o d S R J n !89 ! A w A r a D n C d v a B ! 89 i D o A t d !1R w d d M h l a
W w r Sybil Av v l o a u a e r ! D ! a a r g d l r o a k n r ! i Hays St t n a
o P A (º l 1 a n e e w! Davis St i a r M v e ( n d g !21 Pacific Av n b r s v o Gardner Bl ( n r n D ( r ! d i i v a ! H t y o 89 o i e e ! A 801 aily D C !73 p o e ! i g D r c c ! D i
W n NX4 w t v R w r r sParrott St e i ! v ! Kelly Av A i E 14th St ! t ! R s
A y 21 o o t r v R e ! w n r A A a ! L 89 ! l C r d a v t i D D B !89 o l D A ! o e S !1R b d i !S B y
W w o t !75 r n s S v ! D a i r n t d l r n t v dH f r r l º e
D o 805 Eden Rd P a Orchardl Av Harlan St !75 aFairm ( t n e D ! m r ! w r D o n e n ( t g d a a le G t P ( Estabrook St S n r n A T D E 138th Av D ( G i D 136th Av r ! a t n y m v ! 89 r t a r A ! e ! 89 a o U n ! s o A 75 r ily ! V a l l c r 801 v D h ! 140th Av C 73 t e r v r ! D r h a a o a ! t d i NX4
r y h v n P S J i r f ! t a K E D A ! n i ! ! A S d 85 r c t A Castron St v 142nd Av D r ! !21 to o !1 e r v e Lin L ce A Carmel Dr 1 S ! la l r t t !85 ! ! e P l 4 !1 89 580 y B v ! S t v d Av §o !89 75 n S t ¨¦ h R e l a k v Teagardenn St u n A l A d r Williams St de tag ar oo A e D !75 E on 139th Av !1R a v O H r S th ! airm n !805 !S M ! b h v 75 F m ! r a t t o 8 n Neptune Dr ! d r t A n a le !S c Es 6 3 t Washington Av 3 n T D !NX4 E h y 1 h D ! W C t G ! i ey 1 ! n Aladdin Av 143rd Av !1 n ! m v d a 89 r a C A Sy r 0 r e r l v ! U n r to 4 ! ! o Windsor Dr e 75 ! Marina Bl L V 89 ib l n A h ! e l d s v 1 Menlo St Merced St !1R 150tht Av 89 r e t 147th Av h ty t A A d a o a Miller St S S t A v v 151st Av v y t h n n J !89 Lillian Av o r ! A r! Fremont Av !1 st!75 t v a 2 D A ! A e a S !85 4 r Castle St l C n d Jenn o v 1 D r i i ! o fe ! v ! o 1 ! r t r 21 ! n r e !SB D C Figueroa Dr !i S S Dr Carrillo Dr O L!48 Stanton Av c Barri Dr a Miramar SAve r a y on Dr Page St a W Avenue 133rd Av Halcy MonoAv l a ! ThrushAv t ! r l ! w ! 1 a b ! r !89 W Avenue 134th Av ir v !89 Begonia Dr !89 S Mateo St ! t 85 ! P m a A t 32 y v ! ! NX4 o ! 89 F Cedar Av a s ! 1 580 e g Elm St R D v A aw m a ! l t a ! !1R S o r A § !89 t i !89 ! v ¨¦ D h ll t l e t A O Nabori St T a u rse t r M C W gn e 9 A mel Wy e a d m o a v Car ! t So 3 t c Anza Wy Violet St ! !40 !32 n o n a A !801 NX4a S M ! ! a 75! ! o 1 ! A a ! !89 l e M !1R r e in c k a ! ! Esser Av o r º ! g M v v c i S a n Juniper St a t ( 163rd Av a Fiji Wy T a te l e ( h g r rey B ( ! a P i N l 93 v A ( John Dr a b S D l r B Pike Av S A ! e A t u ! t S r s d a e t v r e Lloyd Av d i n r y o berland Av di D Cum d n W D rallon Dr p e d e 3 NX4 r Fa !801 165th Av n
R ! ! y r t lDrew St ! la 4 v ! W C S !93 NXC t ! y
pr B n E a e d Avon Av i ! u 880 n A v 1 n g ! D 1 l v ! d ! ak a 166th Av h A y a 89 § e Delano St A l r s n ¨¦ A C Edgemoor St D n e S DermodyAv rri !32 th S Wy h r Hubbarde Av a Tulsa S 8 S gent h h t v r lt !Zelma St t 6 t t e t v 0 W e o i L Manor Bl ! M v A 89 ! 1 R Wicks Bl D !99 n 7 A 5 ib s n A t
t 4 !89 e i ! M M t g !1R 1 s r n t
S !S ! n ! t A n ! r 238 !99 !48 t 1 1 y d A
e
s e e M o ia 5 S v Norton St Norton
s l v Av K l s Dayton ! n r i 1 v t e !85 i n o
! t c n ! v 89 l l L ! ! Fargo Av F A r Beatty St Beatty ! ! r v l o S e e A 1 75 v e A d Foothill Bl A D y r v d d v r e e r v S c R n A l Galt St Galt D 3 A E Lewelling Bl r I Usher St a x ! Embers Je !75 ! S 801 m Castle St h n 3 !75 r S ise Bl ! to e d ! n h t t V 1 t V ra Ma Locust St o L T i s a i o a w 4 i f Santa Teresa e i a t Pt r e a o San Elvina Dr v 3 r e u C v e n n 1 o D u A r y n r r G ! i !93 !SB r a n e e r ! r D F ! S S d O r r o ! m S S v 48 Francisco e ! u r o pton Rd ! B C t ra 75 a am ! a i A n t D b H 93 i h t t i g M r D e S n v r B a e a r y a Mission cBl a A on Dr P ! v Halcy M n r W !S a A u Bay e a h ! T A r ! r l m d Meekland Av r r v ! 1 b t ! w Montgomery SAv e ! B ! a a o ! !89 a ! r a a v ! e 89 ! !S i Via Toledo i 89 g M 89 W r R d t r l on ! n a V A l ia t 32 y K a e o o Dr NX4 o g A F ia in C Haviland Av a ! Via Enrico a a v V ! e !89 A ie E Cherry Wy D t g D ! i r e R 85 a Via Segundor r Medford Av w D a o A y r y l a o r Via ParoD o v m t W r ! S S o Lewelling Bl Via Pinale t m ! !1R v a Via Alamitos e T o 89 S A n V ss t l t a l i o t i Nielson Av m Bl O Nabor t a e S St s rm a ! e S v r e o ! M Vining HDr S Grant Av C 85 s n e l A v ia e A t A Western Bl el Wy d m V c a v !32 r arm A o o o Grove Wy v C ! S t c e A Violet St !40 !32 d NX4 o n S a ! R A s n M !801 r !97 i a ! ! c ! ! A a ! yVia Chiquita a 3 89 l r v e s z M e i d A c a a ! W V 6 r i n V ov w k E o r º v c j A a i i n i i J o 1 a A ! a t ( Via Manzanas a l Via Lacqua a v !93 l W v Via Barrett ChannelF St T i a te l e ( h e r rey B P g u ! M A W ( ! i ik y l 93 v A ( J s b S r l r o a e D B r P n S
ig i A A e V d m i t u t b o a Perkins Dr y
i i y a s a t A L e r a Sunset Bl v h Worthley Dr V ucas p Lloyd Av t h ia e i iy o Shirley Av CLaurelum bAverland Av d 5 v d a Hathawaye Av n V ! R !93 D t Bockman n Rd 6 H o A e D l rallon!85Dr Poplar Av a a r 801 1 e F
r Via Estrella S ! h n D
r R ! V Bartlett Av Drew St t r D r S m ! i !93 S !93 t e i p 6 NXC r E a Smalley Av r r
a on Av a t i d Av 880 in g 6 D t ! A St Keller Av M l v e ! V !89 ake 1 h e D d W Sunset Bl m § elano St A l r B St ¨¦ E ! l D l R e
!37 D
i t !
n e ! r ! h s !97 32 t
r e y a W v d t ou W A St Hubba!rd A!83 8 S en C !37 S Tulsa S g
! Z t g
!83 6 t olf anor Bl e !S M v ! 1 R G W e
n !99
t A
t m o
i t t
c ! S r S !S
o ! n !
k !99 !48 o
y 238 o
e s s
Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015. t t r N
t s
0 1 K B ton Av Day a
t S ! e !85 S
l
e t
n S t go Av r
Far
r
B
S t
e
e l
h d F Scale (Miles) y v a
s o
c R n o G D E Lewelling Bl I !75 ! E U a 801 x th !75 r ise Bl ! to e m d ! t V V ra Ma L il L b T a o l w i S a e i a P c B San E v r a u l a e e s C l o s AC Transit Stops n v r y G ! t n r 93 t in d S Francisco a e S ! r o pton Rd ! B t 75 a am ! a t H 93 t b i T D S n r e D ! r a M c r !S a Bay r e i h e r m d M s !89 a co ! a M s S ! s r nri !S V R e y o io t (º a K E V ia a e v W n n ( a i A H ry ( BART Stations i a in k rd r t ( V T l o e g B V f h l !89 ! A o ie a ed a C o l ! i r n v m B 85 a V r le r M ng i o d i lli a d A l y e e V D y a W ew V S o o v A ry L r V i e n om D a i a e T v s A n V v a i d s g a A N i l g m lo v in m ia nt a P S u B in r a i P ! n e A e r e A o ! V a 85 AC Transit Lines H S G i d s v y l n r l o a s la A W i e a o ve W V c o m v !32 ro o n le G e i s A t s R t t a o na ! i e t u v s a 97 c rn rre cq V nz ar v BART Route a a i a d A B B L a M V V o l a a w a i C i i i A o i V a a ! l V V C v 93 il h r h M A W i D l s a q r s B go e r in t i n u i rk v e v San Leandro City Limits V d b e A s A
m ia n it P y n l i y a a le u e
A L e a r r W V ucas hi S v u ia l e A a i S S r L o a V n Rd H la ! R kma v p rt 93 t Boc t A o H l t a h !85 le t P Av l a e rt h V y San Leandro Sphere of e r v a a le y r V B l l A D i w a i r a B t ! D e i t m 93 le a e a S S t l ia s y r e E n A Influence K M V u A
s S t v S e t d W B r !
l R !37
e i
n e !97 l s
l r a a ou W A St !37 !83 lf C !83 Go !S Figure 4.13-2 Existing Transit Facilities SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-3 AC TRANSIT RIDERSHIP AND LOAD FACTORS
Average Maximum AC Transit Route Daily Ridership Load Factor Load Factor 1 10,270 0.41 0.73
1R 10,835 0.44 0.78
32 705 0.26 0.48
40 10,372 0.38 0.61
45 2,334 0.22 0.43
48 428 0.21 0.38
57 7,438 0.35 0.56
75 531 0.20 0.38
85 1,022 0.33 0.59
89 1,272 0.25 0.46
93 655 0.26 0.50
97 4,394 0.33 0.56
801 479 0.4 0.64
NX3 320 0.43 0.67
NX4 365 0.45 0.76
S 226 0.33 0.53
SB 449 0.58 0.82
Total 52,095 Source: AC Transit Staff Report 15-069 2104 Ridership and Route Performance, 2014. and traffic signal priority. The first two phases of construction started in March 2015 and were completed by November 2015. The third and last phase is expected to commence in early 2016. The BRT is expected to open for service in late 2017.9
AC Transit is undertaking Plan ACT to set a vision for improving bus service in the East Bay. Plan ACT is divided into three distinct planning efforts: Service Expansion Plan, Major Corridors Study, and Short Range Transportation Plan. Within San Leandro, the Service Expansion Plan proposes increased frequencies, expansion of night and weekend service, and elimination of loop routes.10
9 AC Transit. http://brt.actransit.org/, accessed on February 23, 2016. 10 ACTransit, http://www.actransit.org/overview-san-leandrohayward-proposed-improvements/, accessed on December 16, 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-15 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Amtrak
Amtrak operates intercity and interstate heavy rail service. Its Capital Corridor and Coast Starlight routes run through San Leandro, but currently no Amtrak stops are within the city. The Capital Corridor route is served by the Oakland Coliseum Station located about two miles northwest of the city limits and adjacent to a BART station. The Coast Starlight route is served by the Oakland Jack London Square Station, seven miles northwest of the San Leandro city limits. The current San Leandro General Plan calls for further exploration of an Amtrak station stop in San Leandro, possibly near the San Leandro BART station near downtown.
FLEX Shuttle
The City of San Leandro provides transportation for seniors and people with disabilities through the FLEX Shuttle service. Riders must be residents of San Leandro and must be 60 years of age or older, or at least 18 years of age and East Bay Paratransit certified.11 FLEX Shuttle requires an annual registration fee of $20 along with an application which must be renewed by June 30 of each year in order to continue using the shuttle; however, after the annual fee is paid, the shuttle can be used at no additional charge. The shuttle operates Monday through Friday between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. and operates two routes. The northern route operates in the northern portion of San Leandro and the southern route operates in the southern half of the city. Each route has ten stops at various locations.
LINKS
The LINKS program is a free shuttle that provides transportation between the San Leandro BART Station and major employment centers in west San Leandro. The program is funded by a Business Improvement District fee and various grants, including those from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD). It is managed by the San Leandro Transportation Management Organization (SLTMO) and operated by M.V. Transportation. On non-holiday weekdays, shuttles operate every 15 minutes along the north loop and every 20 minutes along the south loop from 5:45 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. and from 3:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities
San Leandro encourages bicycling and walking as a practical means of transportation and recreation, and it is making progress toward realizing the planned access and mobility improvements that were identified as part of the 2011 Bike and Ped Plan. Resulting from its geographic location, the city has several characteristics favorable to bicycling and walking, including flat terrain, temperate climate, and attractive scenery. Of course, obstacles to bicycling and walking continue to exist, such as heavy traffic; the absence of shade trees and sidewalks in some locations; and the lack of convenient, direct access routes between destinations. The City has made progress in recent years to address these obstacles, and continued
11 City of San Leandro, FLEX Shuttle Service, https://www.sanleandro.org/depts/rec/paratransit.asp#flexsvc, accessed on June 2, 2015.
4.13-16 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC planning, funding, and implementation efforts will further improve the facilities that contribute to making the community conducive to bicycling and walking.
Existing Bicycle Facilities
According to the Bike and Ped Plan, the City has approximately 25 miles of bikeway facilities consisting of: . 4.8 miles of Class I separated bike paths. . 21.55 miles of Class II marked bike lanes. . 12.65 miles of Class III signed bike routes.
A full inventory of the bikeway network (existing and proposed) is illustrated on Figure 4.13-3. The existing on-street bikeway network includes the following.
Class I Bike Paths . Bay Trail
Class II Bike Lanes . Adams Avenue between Bigge Street and Doolittle Drive . Aladdin Avenue between Teagarden Street and Alvarado Street . Alvarado Street between West Estudillo Avenue and Thornton Street . Alvarado Street between Marina Boulevard and Aladdin Avenue . Bancroft Avenue – Class II bike lanes and Class III bike route from Durant Avenue (Oakland city limits) to East 14th Street/Hesperian Boulevard . Davis Street between Gilmore Drive and the railroad tracks west of Alvarado Street . Doolittle Drive between the city limit to the north and Williams Street, and between Fairway Drive and Farallon Drive . Estudillo Avenue between MacArthur Boulevard and East 14th Street . Fairway Drive between Monarch Bay Drive and Miller Street . Farallon Drive between Doolittle Drive and Wicks Boulevard . Floresta Boulevard between Washington Avenue and Fremont Avenue . Fremont Street between Alvarado Street and Floresta Avenue . Halcyon Drive between Hesperian Boulevard and the BART tracks/future East Bay Greenway. . Hesperian Boulevard between East 14th Street and Springlake Drive. . Lewelling Boulevard – Class II bike lanes and Class III bike route from Washington Avenue to Bayfront Drive. . Merced Street between Marina Boulevard and Fairway Drive. . Monarch Bay Drive between Fairway Drive and south terminus.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-17 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Oakport St Dante Av Edgewater Dr M a D St 97th Av International Bl c Railroad Av C St 100th Av a A 102nd Av rt S h t ur 85thAv S 104th Av 107th Av B F D Capwell Dr a O l o v E n o A a M Walter Av a h d L th t n g e k E 7 v a a 103rd Av 109th Av Av il 9 I A t Edes Av e n p S oria l D n th e c d t v Av R ict B 00 v w o nt Warwick Av V Av C 1 A a r ra ice v t d A d A l l S n Access o r u a A A 2 r D A a t 106th Av Ma e 10 v t i l R S v t rl S h oor B l l o t S m l r w S r h t A R d e Leet Dr r e t a o t n
Pippin St l e v o D r h v A u e r t a t v
5 Breed Av h e h c B r t A v r C t a 4 r Clara St v e e h g a d i 0 D i t i A Suffolk Dr 8 1 r ro R A S A t 07 B F d M D v Pardee Dr h s A 1 e t r Lewis Av i l 8 C a a o b Tunis R 9 l Dr v o y n d g n a w DuttonLee Av Av v o e u e egier Av n W p vi v W A B A v E o g v le A L A t n m W Broadmoorl Bls Bl r G r d a h b D w A e e es len D r t h a e 98th Av B k ak a e 9 p a O o E 3 0 w e h to l 0 l 1 H ir t r ary a v i S e P S v t C Dr 1 A l l5 ar v A eD S B ia l Earhart Rd R 0 l k t n or d S A s E v r r v t 1 D o e dA d Gt ra v l A ic B t e s e A Collier Dr ff A t W V v ¯ L B a s A n A r a t v r v th ra ice v Bigge Av d H A l l A v o 6 u a A D A Peralta Av S 0 Lake Ma
1 r v c l R S v rl View Dr r w l o Bergedo Dr o a o B c Preda St l w r m Chabot A t A R r Estudillo Av d i e e L r Callan Av D a c
Douglas Dr Hays St P L l e s D 0 0.5 1 Miles
a o
a h T k r v M l i
r s e e Joaquin Av i l k k
G e B h e
u p o c
i L f B r D s e Billings Bl v M Bancroft Av r
Donovan Dr d C o fL C A t d C Juana Av p v r r w e e g n a i t w a M u h t a ar i
r e a A g o r ir A i in S k l a A Ron Cowan Pw Adams Av a o Maud Av n n e v e b v e r v o Doolittle Dr D B r R e t d i i v Hester St y o d h e e r M D v p P i s L W e t Dolores Av w i t n w y R S e r r o d A
i R w v a 8 a A o t D W d a B v A t D b S l d
A r r Tun 9tt Sybil Av v m r A n v D o i r l o d Orchard Av
d s R W Juanarr Av r d D tto
g Elsie g Av e y n Davis St d a r r a u L e Gardner Bl Pacific Av P A v D a n o w u P S r e gier Av C W e e i e Be A h c aily D B v A r i D r v
i e E o h v t A n g v o le e A D Kelly Av r E 14th St o W l s Bl r G r c m 8 l b D e s l D A e e en a L e S r e 9 k A e t B k a A p a O o w o Thornton St h o v t v r H n ir t d r ary D r e C D nn Eden RdS T a e Harlan St P S Fa v r e r 5 a ir m D l im d r m A a r D o v G E o E R Estabrook St 0 k t n D n r r n t D Castro St A n e h a h v d S t s v i r A 1 580 o ll G o r y e 137th Av o De A U o ra J h l l e v C f r f v § Van Av e ¨¦ t s D L B a t a S d A a A h r r r a a a v t a n e t St A B L L l H R n d ea a a to v i o ndro Bl g r r d n g 140th Av142nd Av k e Carmel Dr Li g r S v Lake e S t Sylvia Wy Placer Dr P A t 136th Av e lo Av v v dil View Dr A B A ue P n tu Chabot Williams St v Teagarden St ag lla Es v t r a A A on 139th Av C in
M D e H aqu L
Neptune Dr s a T M o d o
r a J Av G k
a e m u u a i y y n L
D B y W C a B a Aladdin Av 143rdM Av D d g s dne a u v o L C
Marina Bl d S C Sy J A r n a t r N d i w l l d Ma h l o r t a u a r
r a v g o a Windsor Dr S e o i k a o l t A a n Sitka St m A i a v s n s M n e v e R n n b Merced St r 148th Av s 150th Av v o Menlo St D n Fir AvA t e o r Washington Av t rA i n e H t y t v A lo d i e v o Miller St o s v v o v e g A C p o e i v c o S W D 1 A D w i t n A w y R d e w r s 5 v A r a t o Fremont Av s a i t 1 3 r v R e
n e r n A w l A a 5 P a v t l D W r d t a i B v o l 1 D w Castle St o u S Je v b d A S n B i i A y
S r n J t n A v
t s r L t i S i f e r D o t l o e i d O t 880 v o Marcella St ib Saratoga St r s f r l lr a O W r
g l n e E t
e D S D r § D a Stanton Av r r e ¨¦ Carrillo Dr r
D o r Barri Dr P ty P Miramar Ave r y cyon Dr G Page St a W Avenue 133rd Av n Hal Plaza Dr c A a ThrushAv
M S l irw D r P a Mateoh St b S C W Avenue 134th Av a a t y
A ily F Cedarr Av Hollyhock Dr c a v c Da D r i r D r i Elm St e d i R h v f r t r A K d o v o r n i S l t AE o Nabor St c c a se A Bayfair Dr n e n r l M C v L e A o e 1 c e t m el W A d S o a A arm y r n t o a l t C e 162nd Av r o S S 4 t n a e Crosby St Violet St l E 14thv St S c Anza Wy M y A B v o t a k M h n A t l d i e i a o S r n a a T Ehle St la h R r o v c a Esser Av n r v l r Juniper St 163rd Av k r Fiji Wy T a n te l te n A a d h S D r B D g e ey l P o e i d Wiley St v o John Dr a b S l a t H r S n B Pike AvE t v re F u T A a n t t S b a e v r s t A i m e r r l Lloyd iAvm W 164th Avo ta i m y o d a mberland Av Videll St r d D Cu t s h G n a Los Banos St o D arallon Dr g s E e t n
r F o E a n n R 165th Av n r D Drew St n AshlandAv 7
Avon Av Spr t e C t t n h d in h r v 3 gla r A D 580 o ke S Delanoe St D U y D t 166th Av r 1 J r DermodyAv l l Edgemoor St E v t Wy v § V r 167th Av n v Hubbard Av l e ¨¦ D Tulsa S l v ge Zelma St t g A S e B a Manor Bl i t R A A a Wicks Bl n 168th Avh r St h t a v
n r t d 0 n h n KentAv a 7
a t t S A L i S A 1 L n
r d e 0 2 a Norton St Norton A
s a e on v nd h 4 r r s o ro Bl t 4 D ton Av p t k r Day 238 1 e v e n s i 6 1 c C
t S a n Fargo Av e L S 3 Pl a
r Beatty St Beatty S t t H S r e S t Foothill Bl 1 m y v y v
s c d l e
n St Galt R D E Lewelling Bl v A v I m Embers Usher St a x l
a r ise Bl A to i e i d t l V V ra a Locust St h a D L l T a e t w i i u M Santa Teresa a i a T P r San Elvina Dr v W a g 9 W e C e o e ta 3
r y G y L r n n d a o 1 Francisco e S t r S o a o HampgtonMRd B t b i v D er r n a rc e a Bay N r m a v h A n d Via Toledo ra l a r A Montgomery SAv d e Belleau StK z B R d in t r o a V a d Mission Bl p i Haviland Av 3 A n a in e d Via Enrico i V a 4 v y t v r A ie l Cherry Wy v y W C u Lewelling Bl a i Via Segundor n A ne M a ro r Medford Av 1 A A d a t y A Meekland Av y C y n S N Via ConejoVia ParoD o v S W h h v S r a Via Alamitos e om t t l e a n V ss A r t k a Nielson Av l t lo 8 0 W e o t o i S B i rm a 4 5 ir n D S m e o v s Vining HDr S Grant Av M 1 1 i a M l F A n t r i e T Western Bl W A A V e c i t v d e v v o e M m Grove Wy s A s v S n r R e a 1 c ici s 5 d A o t v l Via Chiquita v allr A v F s r v r o e A ed v A h 1 3 r A V a o e r A D dd w l 5 d i A n r o i v v a e e r l D Via Barrett Via Lacqua Channel St S ci v il n 1 r 3 A o a Je Castle St h n 3 Via ManzanasM S W m i 1 s th t H S g A n r i V a s L o e e ig 4 t t r o t fe i o
3V d M a 880 i u m o z b S v 1 ia Perkins Dr D u r
O A i
n y A a i n r L n Worthleye Dr e uc s A Sunset Bl r n r a e a a D V a a S v uia e r Shirley Av § r m S r C Garden Av ¨¦ Laurel Av t l r r a
i a o r ir A a n V D r h c t t e R i v B A y a M e a r Bockman Rd b y a A cyon Dr e P W vH l A Poplar Av Hal P n a a Hathaway Av T t
A a r M l l e Hesperian Bl r S t Via Estrella r v v l o b r rw a M a a o V Bartlett Av r i D d il g n W i a l t y e i e a g A a F a Smalley oAv S a t Via Natal i C H t v A St t e Keller Av M V ol e D E D lyhoc o v S R e d W Sunset Bl r k D l r t r B St S l R m A o
i S n e v
rs l A a t t d t ou W A St Nabor St a se A B n C S v ayfa n er M C olf v A ir Dr 2 v G t c el W d m o a A r arm y 6 A o t a e C 1 o S n a e C Violet St E d c r t S s A M v a y l k r M 1 3 A e i i s o n a S r W n a a z A 4 6 v E r o v v c a ji E s n r J 1 i A a t l t a b t v A l l h h F T e e d Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015. h S D B g e rey P ik u y W l h l i W e
A S J a b S 0 1 l n t e r B P n t S y t v e A 4 o u d t t t a y A i S i l s a e i v 6 r p Lloyd Av h l W 1 h i o d t y e h Cumberland Av V t d e n
D t n 5 L o a e D rallon Dr y s v Fa r g 6 o r S A n
D R Scale (Miles) 1 A Drew S n S t v r m s S Sp e h t Av r t r r
Avon a A d in r B t g D t l 6 a e ke S Delan 6 th v a m o St v r t 1 7 Existing Class I Bike Trail l D t A r D 6 n A
E E h S e o Wy bbard Av 1 t nt u l
H Tulsa S l t 8 v s ge d Z t g e
n A r Bl B 6 Mano i n
g S R W n 1 h o S
t e t t
e t t n t 0 i r
K
m 7 a
Existing Class II Bike Lane c S
S i o
1 k r
o
y
N
s s t e
o t
t s B ton Av p r ay a D t 238 e S
s
l e
S t
n S e go Av r
Existing Class III Bike Far
r
B
t t S
e H e l
h F y v a
s o
c d
n G R o Route D E Lewelling Bl I E U a x th r ise Bl to e m d t V V ra a L il L b T a o l w i M S a e i a P c B San E v r a u l a e e s C l o s
n v r y G t n L r Proposed Class I Bike Trail t in d S Francisco a e S t r
o o pton Rd B t a t S a Ham t b i D T S r r n r D e a c e u e r a Bay r a m V h e r e a n d ll r co a i M S s Be K nri z a R y o t a Bl E o V T a v W n M g a i A H ry lin i A a o in rd r t i el V V l fo he g s ew v A e ie ed a C o s Proposed Class II Bike L ia V rr d r M v m io ia o o A i y e n V D y M l W V S o v a ry B r i e e n m D a V a ia e so A l Lane n V v l g e d os g a A N ia k l v in m ia nt C P S u B in r a i n l A V e r e A o a o a H S G d n v y l l n r l o W ia e s a o d e V o e T v W c m j i A ro Proposed Class III Bike o n o m G e i v s A t R e t t a o i s e t u v s s c rn rre cq V na v ar A v Route a a i a A d v A B B L a nz V a o l a a d w a i C i n A o i M a e l V V C a ci v il h i a r h V M W i H D l s a q V s B o e n g n u i v t i i rk A e v V d a e s A
San Leandro City Limits m ia n it P ey n l i l y a u e
A L e a ir r W V ucas A h S v u ia l e S A a i S r G r L o a n Rd r la V R v r ckma i p t t Bo b t A a o h H l t P v l a le r H A l a a e H rt d San Leandro Sphere of e t V a a ey r a v e l y r V B l t l N A D i e h a i r a B n t D e a i t a m i le a s e S S Figure 4.13-3t V l ia s A w r e E p n A Influence K M V u v a s e S y t
e t d r W A S r B l R
e i v i
n e a
l s
l r a n Bike Facilities Network (existing and proposed) a ou W A St C olf B G l SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Park Street between San Leandro Street and San Leandro Boulevard. . San Leandro Boulevard between San Leandro Creek and Washington Avenue. . Springlake Drive between Hesperian Boulevard and Washington Avenue. . Teagarden Street between Fairway Drive/Aladdin Street and Alvarado Street. . Washington Avenue between Caliente Drive and Anza Way. . Westgate Parkway between the southern Walmart driveway and Williams Street. . Wicks Boulevard between Burroughs Avenue and Lewelling Boulevard. . Williams Street between Neptune Drive and San Leandro Boulevard.
Class III Bike Routes . Alvarado Street between Teagarden Street and Fremont Avenue. . Bancroft Avenue – Class II bike lanes and Class III bike route from Durant Avenue (Oakland city limits) to East 14th Street/Hesperian Boulevard. . Fairway Drive/Aladdin Avenue between Miller Street and Teagarden Street. . Lewelling Boulevard – Class II bike lanes and Class III bike route from Washington Avenue to Bayfront Drive. . MacArthur Boulevard between Durant Avenue (Oakland city limits) and Estudillo Avenue. . Neptune Drive between Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline entrance and Marina Boulevard – This is part of the San Francisco Bay Trail.
Bay Trail
Segments of the Bay Trail are along the San Leandro waterfront between Oakland to the north and San Lorenzo to the south. The Bay Trail facilities are also included on the Alameda Countywide and Regional Bikeway networks. Most of the Bay Trail consists of Class I bike paths with the exception of a short segment of Class III bike route on Neptune Drive between the Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline and Marina Boulevard. Included in the Bay Trail network are path loops around Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline, Mulford Point, and the Small Boat Lagoon in Marina Park. Much of this alignment has paved or unimproved pathways, but most do not meet standards for Class I bike paths. The San Leandro Bay Trail Slough Bridge, completed in 2010, provides a connection for the Bay Trail between San Leandro and Oakland.
East Bay Greenway
The East Bay Greenway Concept Plan includes a combination of Class I, II, and III bike facilities extending from East 12th Street at 18th Avenue in Oakland to downtown Hayward. Through San Leandro, the desired alternative route of the proposed East Bay Greenway is the rail to trail conversion of the Oakland Subdivision through San Leandro and beyond.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-19 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Existing Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities exist adjacent to almost all roadways within the city. The condition of the existing pedestrian network varies throughout the city with regard to walkability and pedestrian friendliness of the environment. Some areas have short blocks, street trees, continuous sidewalks, and comfortable crossings. Other locations lack these features and are less than hospitable to pedestrians.
The Bike and Ped Plan identifies ten pedestrian improvement areas that were chosen for their proximity to desirable destinations, need for connectivity improvements, or potential for future development. They are: . San Leandro Marina/Marina Boulevard. . Westgate Center. . Kaiser Permanente Development Area. . Manor Boulevard/Washington Avenue. . Downtown San Leandro BART Station. . East 14th Street Corridor. . Bancroft Avenue/Dutton Avenue. . Bay Fair BART Station. . MacArthur Boulevard. . Estudillo Avenue/I-580 Underpass to Anthony Chabot Park. In addition, the Bike and Ped Plan identifies key pedestrian locations where improvements are suggested. These areas should be further analyzed and studied to determine a feasible and acceptable design. The following 20 locations were identified: . Garfield Elementary School. . Davis Street/I-880. . Cherry Grove Park. . Woodrow Wilson Elementary School/John Muir Middle School. . Wicks Boulevard at the Marina Community Center. . Bonaire Park. . Pacific Community Recreation Complex. . Washington Elementary School. . Corvallis Elementary School. . Floresta Boulevard/Monterey Boulevard/Monroe Elementary School. . San Leandro Boulevard/Washington Avenue Intersection. . McKinley Elementary School. . Bancroft Middle School. . East 14th Street/San Leandro Boulevard Intersection. . 136th Avenue/Bancroft Avenue. . Washington Avenue/Lewelling Boulevard Intersection. . Grand Avenue/Joaquin Avenue Intersection. . Jefferson Elementary School. . 150th Avenue/Hesperian Boulevard/Bancroft Avenue/East 14th Street Intersection. . Hesperian Boulevard/Lewelling Boulevard intersection.
4.13-20 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Many of these locations are near schools where Safe Routes to School programs could address walk and bike access by identifying capital improvements as well as educational and promotional programs.
Goods Movement
The abundance of industrial and commercial uses in the city has resulted in substantial infrastructure components related to goods movement.
Railroad Crossings
San Leandro is served by three major rail lines, linking local industrial areas with the Port of Oakland, other west coast markets, and the rest of the state and nation (see Figure 4.13-4). Following consolidation of ownership, the rail lines are under the ownership of UPRR. Spurs from each railroad provide service to industrial developments in central and west San Leandro.
Railroads cross arterial and collector streets at locations within the city, most of which are equipped with warning bells and crossing guards that activate while trains approach and pass the intersections. Vehicle and pedestrian safety is an ongoing issue for at-grade crossings, and continued driver, bicyclist, and pedestrian education can benefit the community. With increased freight activity expected along the UPRR corridor from the Port of Oakland to the south, circulation and access will be affected particularly at the at-grade crossings in San Leandro.
Two rail crossings in San Leandro are grade-separated: the Maltester-Polvorosa overpass on West Davis Street and the Washington Avenue underpass just south of San Leandro Boulevard. New grade-separated crossings at Davis, Marina, Hesperian, Washington, and other major thoroughfares are opportunities for future grade-separated crossings as design and funding constraints permit. Caltrans provides grants for such projects through its Section 190 Grade Separation Program,12 contingent on completion of a plan addressing the design of the project, acquisition of right-of-way, potential environmental impacts, and resolution of any related issues.
The consolidation of railroad ownership by Union Pacific raises the possibility that one of the city’s two main lines may be redundant and could be considered for conversion to a new use. Although UPRR has no plans to relinquish surplus right of way at this time, this possibility could create opportunities for the City to develop a linear park and rail to trail bikeway as identified by the East Bay Greenway.
Truck Routes
As part of the proposed Plan, the City is making minor revisions to the truck route map to bring it into consistency with updated land use designations and provide continuity with existing truck route designations in Alameda County. Specifically: . The City would eliminate the two-tier truck route system; all truck routes will be classified the same way.
12 Section 190 Grade Separation Program, http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/general.aspx?id=2891, accessed December 1, 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-21 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
A r ro w Oakland City Limits h e a d M a Sphere of M c a a r r B th s a u Influence h n r c B r o lv f d t Truck Routes A v e
L ak Alameda e San Le Ch Lake Chabot an ab d Ave ot ro S illo R a tud d k n Es Cree L e a n d 580 r %&'( o B E t P! lv 1 vis S d 4t Da h St ve A h 6t 13
D lvd o a B o in l r i a t M t l M e W e D r 880 a r c %&'( s e h d in S g t t o n A v H
e e
s
p
r e y D r a i rw Halcyon D a r n Fai
B
l
v
d P!
Manor Blvd ·|}þ238
W ic k s d lv B g B San Francisco Bay lv in d ll we Le
ek Cre zo ren Lo San Lorenzo San
0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles Source: City of San Leandro, 2014; Alameda County, 2013; PlaceWorks, 2014. Hayward
Figure 4.13-4 Truck Routes SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Removing the truck route designation on 150th Avenue between East 14th Street and I-580. . Removing the truck route designation on Alvarado Street between Williams Street and Davis Street. . Removing the truck route on Williams Street between Alvarado and San Leandro Boulevard. . Adding a truck route designation on Fairmont Avenue between Hesperian Boulevard and I-580.
For sites in San Leandro that are not on the local truck routes, trucks must access the designated truck routes as directly as possible to their origin or from their destination. Proposed truck routes are displayed on Figure 4.13-4.
Parking
The downtown San Leandro parking inventory is approximately 4,200 parking spaces, consisting of 2,780 on-street parking spaces and 1,420 off-street parking spaces in seven parking facilities, including the recently renovated downtown parking garage.13 Current parking controls and regulations are the result of uncoordinated efforts over time, and they have the potential to impede implementation of land use, economic development, and other community goals and objectives.
The City currently is developing a downtown parking management plan in order to optimize time restrictions for off-street shared parking in both BART areas and within downtown to meet customer and resident needs. Identifying and implementing appropriate parking strategies in the vicinity of the BART stations will balance needs for parking and maximizing station access and BART ridership. The systematic management of on- and off-street parking in downtown San Leandro will work to reduce traffic congestion and vehicle miles traveled (created by vehicles searching for available parking) by creating ideal occupancy rates and increase the vitality of downtown businesses.
Aviation Facilities
There are no airports or heliports located within the city of San Leandro listed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).14 The nearest airports are Oakland International Airport, located adjacent to the city to the northeast, and Hayward Executive Airport, located approximately 1.5 miles to the south of San Leandro. While there are no airports within the city limit, air traffic in the space over the city continues to be active as air travel to and from airports in the region increases. The major commercial airline approaches to the Oakland International Airport runways are located west of the San Leandro shoreline and non-scheduled general flights to the airport’s North Field fly over developed portions of San Leandro. The nearest heliport is located approximately two miles east in Castro Valley. No other heliports are within five miles of the city.
13 Alameda CTC RFP No.A14-0032, 2014, Cities of Albany and San Leandro Parking Management Plans. 14 Federal Aviation Administration, 2011, Airport Facilities Data, www.faa.gov/airports/airport_safety/airportdata_5010/, accessed December 1, 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-23 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Safety
Minimizing the occurrence of collisions in San Leandro continues to be an issue worthy of attention and resources. Based on reported collisions, the last five years (July 2009 through June 2014) have seen a downward trend in annual collisions in the city, from about 459 collisions in 2010 to about 280 in 2013.15 Across those five years, 77 collisions involved a person on a bicycle; 68 people on bicycles were injured and one person died as a result of these collisions. Additionally, there were 112 collisions involving people who were walking; 111 people walking were injured and four people died as a result of these collisions.
Existing Traffic Conditions
In order to ascertain the existing circulation conditions in the city, operations of the 36 study intersections were assessed, and information about freeway and highway segments available from the Alameda CTC biennial CMP monitoring effort and the Caltrans Performance Measurement System (PeMS) were compiled.16
Analysis Methodologies and Level of Service Standards
This section presents the methods used to determine the existing LOS for the study intersections and freeway segments. It includes descriptions of the data requirements, the analysis methodologies, and the applicable LOS standards.
Levels of service describe the operating conditions experienced by roadway users. Vehicular LOS is a qualitative measure of the effect of a number of factors, including speed, travel time, traffic interruptions, freedom to maneuver, driving comfort and convenience. LOSs are designated "A" through "F" from best to worst, which cover the range of traffic operations that might occur. LOS A through E generally represents traffic volumes at less than roadway capacity, while LOS F represents over capacity and/or forced flow conditions. The various analysis methods are described below.
Intersection Methodology
The City of San Leandro utilizes Synchro software and the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 methodology to evaluate signalized and unsignalized intersection operations. . Signalized Intersection. The HCM procedure calculates a weighted average stop delay in seconds per vehicle at a signalized intersection and assigns a LOS designation based upon the delay. . Unsignalized Intersection. The HCM methodology calculates a weighted average stop delay in seconds per vehicle for each controlled intersection leg and for the intersection as a whole. A LOS designation is assigned based upon the weighted average control delay per vehicle on the intersection leg with the worst delay at one- or two-way stop-controlled intersections. For all-way stop-controlled
15 SWITRS, July 2009 to June 2014. 16 2014 Level of Service Monitoring Report, Alameda CTC, November 2014
4.13-24 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
intersections, a LOS designation is based upon the weighted average control delay for all intersection legs, similar to the LOS designation for signalized intersections.
Table 4.13-4 presents the relationship of average delay to LOS for both signalized and stop controlled intersections.
TABLE 4.13-4 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITION FOR INTERSECTIONS
Signalized Unsignalized Intersection Intersection Average Delay Average Delay Per Vehicle Per Vehicle (Seconds) LOS Description of Traffic Conditions (Seconds) ≤10.0 A Free flowing. Most vehicles do not have to stop. ≤10.0
>10.0 and ≤ 20.0 B Minimal delays. Some vehicles have to stop, although waits are not >10.0 and ≤ 15.0 bothersome. >20.0 and ≤ 35.0 C Acceptable delays. Significant numbers of vehicles have to stop >15.0 and ≤ 25.0 because of steady, high traffic volumes. Still, many pass without stopping. >35.0 and ≤ 55.0 D Tolerable delays. Many vehicles have to stop. Drivers are aware of >25.0 and ≤ 35.0 heavier traffic. Cars may have to wait through more than one red light. Queues begin to form, often on more than one approach. >55.0 and ≤ 80.0 E Significant delays. Cars may have to wait through more than one red >35.0 and ≤ 50.0 light. Long queues form, sometimes on several approaches. >80.0 F Excessive delays. Intersection is jammed. Many cars have to wait >50.0 through more than one red light, or more than 60 seconds. Traffic may back up into “up-stream” intersections. Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual, Washington, D.C., 2000./
Freeway Mainline Segments Methodology
To assess freeway performance, the density thresholds in terms of passenger cars per mile per lane, as outlined in the HCM, was used to determine the level of service. Table 4.13-5 shows the relationship of freeway density to level of service.
TABLE 4.13-5 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITION FOR FREEWAY MAINLINE SEGMENT
Density (passenger vehicles LOS per mile per lane) A ≤11
B >11-18
C >18-26
D >26-35
E >35-45
F >45 Demand exceeds capacity Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual Washington, D.C., 2010, 11-7.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-25 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
CMP Freeway and Arterial Segment Analysis Methodology
For freeway segments on the designated MTS, determination of LOS for impact assessment was performed based on the density thresholds in terms of passenger cars per mile per lane, as outlined in the HCM. Then a volume to capacity ratio was calculated using the forecast volumes from the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model and impacts were identified when segments approached LOS F and more that 0.03 addition in v/c ratio threshold with the addition of the proposed Plan. Table 4.13-5 shows the relationship of freeway density to level of service.
For arterial segments on the designated MTS, impact assessment was performed based on the service volume table shown in Exhibit 10-7 of the HCM 2000. A volume to capacity ratio was calculated using the volumes from the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model and using the LOS F service volume and more that 0.03 addition in v/c ratio threshold shown in Exhibit 10-7 of the HCM 2000 as the estimate for roadway capacity.
Intersection Levels of Service
Intersection turning movement volumes, lane configurations, and traffic control conditions were used to calculate the LOS at the study intersections. The data required for the intersection analysis were obtained from new traffic counts, the City of San Leandro, recent Transportation Impact Analyses conducted for the City, and field observations. The following data were collected from these sources: . Existing traffic volumes. . Existing lane configurations. . Signal timing and phasing.
Intersection turning movement volumes were collected at the study intersections during typical weekday morning (AM) peak period (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) and afternoon (PM) peak period (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). Most counts were collected in September 2014, excepting those already collected in January 2013 for the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR. The location of the 32 study intersections are displayed on Figure 4.13-5.
In 2014, most intersections in San Leandro operated at LOS D or better during both the morning (AM) and the afternoon (PM) peak hours. Of the 36 intersections studied, one operated at LOS E during the PM peak hour (#25). Table 4.13-6 displays the average delay per vehicle in seconds and the LOS for AM and PM peak hours at each study intersection.
Freeway and Highway Operating Conditions
Freeway and highway volumes were compiled from Caltrans’ Performance Measurement System (PeMS) using October 2015 data, if available.17 The freeway volumes were converted to passenger car volumes by applying a truck percentage from the Caltrans’ 2014 Annual Average Daily Truck Traffic on California State
17 At some locations, the more recent Performance Measurement System (PeMS) data was missing for October 2015, so April and August 2015 data was used.
4.13-26 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE EIR
B
u C r S L Ettrick St CITY OF SAN LEANDRO
h r E o r n D e t tr c E M 86th Av87th Av 89th Av 96th Av S a a 88th Av r n h l o r t c v n y G St y Birch StOlive St n e a e R a e l r l Baldwin St B S d d s n 94th Av Plymouth St e s l
t a S S No. North-South Cross Street East-West Cross Street v v v u y a v C r v v A A W E V A A S L t A A h 93rd Av Holly St r E t S
h h t 91st Av A n TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
h h a o t h h t 0 t r n Voltaire Av Av t t u D 6 t t 9 e 9 6 Internationall Bl t tr lm t M S 7 n v o c E 8 8 8 8 9 S a a lc r 1 E 14th Street Durant Avenue 8 r u n a h i l o v r c M c v y G A y O 95th Av t t n e M a n B S k e Oakport St h 92nd Av 99th Av R a a e t l l r s l B 4 S i i t d c d S n 2 E 14th Street Dutton Avenue S v v 9 P r v e a s l a t A A t c D St r t v l e C St 97th Av S a S a No. North-South Cross Street East-West Cross Street ld A t rd RailroadW Avy h B St y t s 3 h t V w h 1 9 H m S t S 3 E 14th Street Davis Street (SR-112) t 9 S A u n i 0 o a V 101st Av r Av t u n 9 v I l o t t 103rd Av lm S v A85thAv n l n u o v lco B S A h ly l a l 1 E 14th Street Durant Avenue t d 5t t u t v t M107th Av 4 E 14th Street San Leandro Boulevard n 9 e S t h A a M F 2 th i 104th Av v d 9 O 9 v r t S S 9 r a nt A o A n t t 100th Av e c ra o 5 Hesperian Blvd/ Bancroft Ave E 14th Street R u a S t 102nd Av D 2 E 14th Street Dutton Avenue v th a a A a 108th Av t r r h k D 7 a t r A C 9 tl 98th Av v v i p e E A B S t ia l R S Ci r v h tor l 6 MacArthur Boulevard Estudillo Avenue o g o A S Kenilworth Av c h a S S le t v Vi B r v 3 E 14th Street Davis Street (SR-112) r t t y 1s A t u A t i t n T 0 d lice l e 1 l 5 r t Edes Av 3r r A S o a 10Pippin St 106th Av Breed Av 7 Bancroft Avenue Dutton Avenue 8 b v B t a l A v d n th l Broadmoor Bl r R B v 7 A 4 E 14th Street San Leandro Boulevard l A e Av v th A 10 1 D e 8 Bancroft Avenue Estudillo Avenue h v v v g C h A l 04 R F e 1 v e a t w d e d v Suffolk Dr Lewis Av iro 0 n u v t A o i re A R s A n Mitchell Av o 0 d 2 A l A t H 1 s th ra o D v 59H Hesperianesperia Boulevardn Blvd/ Bancrof 150tht Ave AvenueE 14th Street 0 r R e 8 u S h 1 e 0 D 98th Av l a t Tunis R 1tt Lexington Av t a a r r 8 d S h M a t E 7 l 9 H Acalanes Dr t Garcia Av v i Begier Av e v 0 0.5 1 Miles 10 Hesperian Boulevard Halcyon Drive/ Fairmont Drive S mE Bernhardt Dr A ia ADuttonl AvBl C r v l s tor l es G r 6 MacArthur Boulevard Estudillo Avenue g p e K k len D S v A ic a A e HunterAv B k O B l i A a V Lee Av r r r Av y te h to e r 11 Hesperian Boulevard Springlake Drive h e v T t t o S lic b Cary Dr e P o l E R 6 a n v 5 A o r d 0 mr 2 A D P d 0 B k r e 1 d i r ie 7 Bancroft Avenue Dutton Avenue A ll b s S l l o i 1 a v r l w D C p A v Gr
A e ro t Leo Av s aff 12 Washington Avenue Lewelling Boulevard s v p r r R A n r B o v a e i i D e Best AvA a A 6 v n a H h l e Bigge Av k d t r Bridge RdD e l l w 8 Bancroft Avenue Estudillo Avenue o a t v 1 c 13 Washington Avenue Springlake Drive S f r h v g f h e C R A A e t v t u P i e a n Lorraine Bl e w S L e i v v i ro A u to A re View Dr Preda St R Bergedo Dr M d v A s g o 14 Washington Avenue Floresta Blvd/ Halcyon Dr h v 8 l A Dr H t s in CallanD Av Estudillo Av v Regent 9 Hesperian Boulevard 150th Avenue A x v r 8 e e A Arthur Av
9 l e Douglas Dr T a
Tunis R r tt L ia 3 a u W c v d e S r Martin Bl A M G L 15 Washington Avenue San Leandro Boulevard Whitney St Billings Bl 7 t a Joaquin JuanaAv AvBancroft Av L
E d a n o H A t G tto Begier Av r Ma n a n r v a r g 10 Hesperian Boulevard Halcyon Drive/ Fairmont Drive o l in k m B Adams Av d Du B Maud Av n e v c A e u v e v i e r s s i e 16 San Leandro Boulevard Marina Boulevard a Hester St n ke 17 G r d e v p e len D w A a A l R Dolores Av w i r H a kA O e
i a L n w
r n D e h d to v 18 r Martinez St A D e 11 Hesperian Boulevard Springlake Drive
h t e b Sybil Av r 17 San Leandro Boulevard Davis Street (SR-112) Ca r
s P S t ry Dr v D R a e W JuanaHays Av St
a 5 S o Elsier Av r v a Davis St D r Ew r 2 i d D k n Gardner Bl r i r 0 A i Pacific Av n g r ie g d r S o v Vir P A oll 1 D v 18 Alvarado Street Davis Street (SR-112)R e A D C Ai Gr t v 12 Washington Avenue Lewelling Boulevard L e Parrott St a d t st s d ff D o l r A e v a r R B A B22 aKelly Av c ge E 14th6 St v r d e L H e W id 19 Alvarado Street Williams Street B ta T e Br G e l 23 iin A ista ra ig a a m o a V nd 13 Washington Avenue Springlake Drive r v g g 29 r o n y v e 28e r n D r v o t a Harlan St A P h e A Wake Av r 20 Alvarado Street Marina Boulevard A Eden Rd L r v Orchard Av h F e y o a
v d A Castro St ll View Drt ir P An 19 i 7 m r roctor P D a d Rd B D ll v uEstabrook St 3 o v 30 r Ca 8 st 1 ent Dr n 14 Washington Avenue D Floresta Blvd/ Halcyon Dr r g A r E E Re t 21 Wayne Ave/ Teagarden St Marina Boulevard e D v 580 n A v
s D d e A 16 r a d T v Van Av l in i
r ue A R d
o a D 3 4 v 22 I-880 NB Ramps Unnamed Davis CStreet (SR-112) m q a d u t W M a t n G 15 Washington Avenue San Lt eandro Boulevard
h o h a A R
L a Dr Knight u a W B u o J t Ju B v t L a S
d S o n a u A A s c r l h a o n 20 n d g r a d d i i to d 1 Ma r l a u w r l a a r L g t o r t n v v i R a n k 23 I-880 SB Ramps Davis Street (SR-112)n n d r l i 4 A A l l L A M n 142nd Av ea v e i a i s 15 1 e S y W t n e n vr o y r e n A t r k i Placer Dr Carmel Dr J e a Carlton Av Lawrence Dr i 16 San Leandro Boulevard Marina Boulevard H s t lo i v n o S n n 17 v o d e S t o e g v l c w u s m R A D w i t e t r D l s s A D 21 v R e n 24 I-880 NB Ramps Marina Boulevard s a D m t B A v r e
r o r A
e n v w A D d v D 18 M e l A D a p
r r t a 24 uo bi A s u v e L
S l B S g y h
r J Ata S h r 17 San Leandro Boulevard Davis Street (SR-112) r s t D t i a ie n f v D 25 I-880 SB Ramps Marina Boulevard D l t v H ls o 9
S a Williams Str W t E M t r r ia D t S 25 3 r Rd Ew in G P i tt a 1 Seven Hills in rg N n o A g Vi P a rr y e a e a s 35 1826A Washingtonlvarado S Avenuetreet I-880 NB RampsDavis Street (SR-1R 12) p i c 32 v Washington Av e r 34 P Alvarado St d t z Merced St u r d i S Halsey Av Sydney Wy f S 143rd Av 22 n K c n Nome St ic t E 27 WashingtonC Avenue I-880 SB Ramps/ Beatrice St L e e Windsor SDre r Wilson Av e e W Marina tBl t 19 Alvlab rado Se treet Williams Street T e D Sitka St A 1 148th Av 150th Av o s l A r S ta G r 23 i l a Menlo St n 4 is ra Fir Av n t Keith Av m o r y v t V n e Christensen Ln Aurorav DrB la t t d v 28 Phillips Lane A Davis Street (SR-112) d y S r v 29 o n Miller StS h v 147th Av 5 A v D v R A l n o a k D 151st Av 28 A en th a 31 tr H o AW r rd A 20 Alvaradr o Street Marina Boulevard d v e s o S 9 E O r h 3 F n y r a MargeryG rAvace St e a
d b t a 5 l i 29 Warden Ave/ Timothy Dr Davisd Street (SR-112) h
C t r r P A 19 a 1 m J r rocto t 7 o r D r r k e e v R
g d c 33s D3 i o n e r D v E D
a L A r l n n D r u
30 h 880 to 1 r A Dillo ib im D S a O E r t 2130W DoolittleayneSaratoga ADrivev Ste/ (SR-61) Teagarden S Davisf t Streetw Ma (SR-112)rina Bt oulevard r D Marcella St a a o ri v t e a e rlo r FigueroaP Dr r D a L V ri r n v a 580 rt Y B h Mabel Av r D Plaza Dr Miramar Av B y n D a y a e Page St u Halcyon Dr ThrushAv
d 16 r g a a d v MonoAv S n r k V m i
W Avenue 134thl Av rw Begonia Dr 31 Doolittle Drive (SR-61)C Marinai Boulevard
M e i v 14 10 t e d D Aa A Mateo St C R A 4 v a 22 I-880 NB Ramps a U Davis Stren et (SR-112) t F Cedar Av v o d t
a Selby Dr C a v A d w R W Avenue 135thh Av n A S t o Elm St w t Hollyhock Dr a v a K u t Florestan Bl h S a th 32 Merced Street e t MarinaA Boulevard n t s ct r o n A 20 t 2 A e a l d 9 l s a d oW Avenue 136th Av O 1 l er r l a Lorena Av t 4 b Stanton Av Wisteria St w v L Nabor St r 5 Anita Av
n m S R v n l i Spruce St A 4M BayfairD Dr 23 I-880 SB Ramps S o A Davis Street (SR-112) L C v 1 a er 1 S o i M 15 1 S c t y W c el W r a t n t a v A o Carm y k Pl 33 Merced Street FairwayC Drive o J S a C L a a o R n w t t A r n Violet S a o rence D n e a e t t E 14th162nd St Av r o c Crosby St t S Martell Av u R r s l e e d m a a s a m e li i k r t r D l s r 21 n a s R e n 24 I-880 NB Ramps o Marina Boulevard g v a Ehle St y D 34163rd Av Doolittle Drive (SR-61) Williamsr e Street m t c Fiji Wy a A Juniper St r E o r l A e a T v a l l r h S B S e a D 24 i D s l P t D p t b u A n s Wiley St S o
e Pike Av t J r L B g e Av MiguelSan u e d r h
r m t a h D o a a t s n D 35 Alvarado Street Fairway Dr/ Aladdin Ave d li r n t D Anza Wy Lloyd Av o o h D
l y e 164th Av i i W Videll St 25 I-880 SB Ramps Marina Boulevard o d 9 berland Av r Cum v v A n n r r A R W D M lon Dr 3 r a Los Banos St e al m 25 r A v
Fa A g n B R Rd D n Hills AshlandAv 165th Av Seve r 1 v n v r l 36 Hesperian Boulevard Lewelling Boulevard d t a
N S y o B d e pr r A ing a r D y k e o la d le 13 s e k S l e v 26 Washington Avenue I-880 NB Ramps 35 Hesperian Bl Devonshired Av s e Delano St r a y 32 l t 166th Av o s y p W r v D W V r A a r v A yey o 34 a W 3 A t n r l 167th Av nd t R t M A 26 ey w B l Hubbard Av A s gS s 4 l v e u a Zelma St H V v v a 11 l R d
t d a i A
h Av Nunes n S n e a Manors Bl 1 t th Elgin St 168th Av C C N i S Wicks Bl v h r v 27 Washingtton Avenue I-880 SB Ramps/ Beae trice St
e a r r h h 8 0 M S 0 Norbridge Av k a t A v W e r v W o A Av Wilbeam t c a i 4 v 5 KentAv l 7 e ils i M n i r A b 1 A R on
D S m e n S h 1 A 1 i o h Av d i t St Norton t i r s it n g 238F s n n t e
d s 7 y K r e M o g r 27 1 d e A Strobridge Av Christen A ts 4 v 28 Phillips Lane Davis Street (SRs-e1n 1L2n) S Dayton Av o e 5 s v e S M S 1 5 v D S e v t 1 A Ano Av Vegas Av u a n g o
n t t n r r A t i t Fargo Av d A r r r r St Beatty 31 l r v l r a S
o l A St Edgemoor 9 o G e L e 3 D n Grace S e Farley St A Foothill Bl
M t y r l 29 Warden Ave/ Timothy Dr Davis Street (SR-112) n v 5 v v D v
a S r r ny a h
c o A n St Galt 1 rm Dr d J Trojan Av o a r E Lewellin R v I g B er D h l
h g i H S a x t A D a t E o y D r 33 n t 4 12 36 r ise B tt Lessley Av s d l A a e m L 3 v t l v a u L A z a n r t T V Oak St r r S r 1 o a a illo b o i Locust St D D A 880 t r kh w D M v
v r Ruggles St u i b a i S a r Bu e O a 30 DoolittlSe Drive (SR-61) A Davis Swtreet (SR-112) e a f h SantaD Teresa e M P r a r n o t o r a r e l s u i l e Elvina Dr i 5 r r e t s C a m r n r F P r n Via Granada a a L V e o a r r r BG r Mabel Av 3 h i y e a o Y v e t r r 1 D i P M v A v g B i r r y a D a a y r d a D P A cyon c u o l T e S Ha A D n i h a u t o t l l u t r l S a M e HamptSon Rd o m r k W w e b D N 5th St n 6 B t C Study Intersections o r a r B l 31 Doolittle Drive (Sa R-61) Marina Boulevard i v 14 e r g P M ve 13 a ed r ta goeniae 10 M a la t g r e A o r D g a D A e F C a es m B r a v a a o a r s Via Toledo S Meekland Av S C a u a V e w W r A t t n E t o S MontgomeryMission BlAv S v e S w D l HK ia e ia e t e v St
F Belleau St olly R h x N 6th St 6th N v a V hock o h o t A o n l S e t A e t r Dr t A a 3v2 Merced Street l Martina Boulen vard A m c t e
r Haviland Av b Ka Via Enrico a u L 9 r S inA Medford Av l rs l W San Leandro City Limitsr O o t l e Lorena Av y b C V a t i Grove Wy S W
p Nabor St 5 y e A e
d m S S S A M B S aVia Paroi r o Cherry Wy y Via1 Segundo r o o a faa D t C g n n v ir D A v S u M Lewelling Bl r a i t l t c el W a 2 t o g r y D 33v Merced Street Fairway Drive s A Anchorage Dr m A i a v Ca r g S Via Media n a v t
6 i o v R A r n a Via Pinale e t t ViolAet S d a t i t E 1 Western Bl e n e r V Via Alamitos l s r P t e a c C t t R y M n v e e y Nielson Av Blossom Wy o d
a S r M a a s ia r t 3 o r l San Leandro Sphere of i 1 A r a W k r l G V i i a s o a o 6 s n S S o ji e Vining Dr A 4 r g n Times Av v E a i v a S p 34 Doolittle Drive (SR-61) Williams Street
i s n y l 1 v c J r r E Channel St B a t 4 t F a A l l e b e t h A a M a T l h A h e S B e d c t u l Via Hermana A P S h a t i Influenceik D y c h l n t a A St
l e S b n S W o n t e v 2 n l e P t r r J S i S B S n S
u A r t v v e d Russelln Wy 3rd Stt D R 4 d a t i a A o t d t i t i i b A S S a l i 6 w s D v d p c i 35 Alvarado Street Fairway Dr/ Aladdin Ave r A v llo o nz Lloyd A r a a h S o l a i t
y Wy e 1 h t Sunseti Bl h W V r e W d e berland Av t r Cum v d A t n e n
t o R r 5 Via Rancho s e D y a L lon Dr r A v
l m
6 v a p r A v B a g v n
F S R v A o D Via Manzanas A 1 r S Via Barrett S s n Hacienda Av r l d 36 Hesperianv Boulevard t Lewelling Boulevard A s a
h A
o
S B d p e r t
a r e t A i a D t ng r B y k o
6 s la d h le 13 s
k S l e t 6 v v H t a r m v m Devonshire A e Delano S a e y t v 1 o
l t s 7 D A n V r
A a S r 6 y o n
A e a W A h o t r R Av 1 t n t rd e bba e w Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.,u 2016. 26 u
H s t g
t s n s l 8 v e Z v V a l 11 R d b
6 d i A
n l
l N r B S Mano o El S C
g 1 i i S W t n S h
t e t e r
r t M
h t 0 N t orbr id W
K o g
i o 7 e Av i R
n c S 1
S
o in k N 238
s y
s t Figure 4.13-5
g m Strobridge Av
t 27
s
0 1 S B e Av t
Dayton a
e
g A Vegas Av t l n e o a S
t A
n d
Fargo Av v B
r r t
l
S E
L e G
a F Farley St n v v y Study Intersections Scale (Miles) n A ny o a
c o G ja Dr d n Tro E Lewellin arm R o I g B r D l H a x t E o h y 12 36 r dise Bl tt t Lessley Av L Av e m a a il t T V l O a ar b r L D S h w M v rk R i a B a S e Bu e a P o l E r c k r s u e C a rn s V u o S G e l g y s n v e ia r t t a r t i g i d t S S o n D n i a t o l l G pton Rd l
m S a e S a Ha t b D N
t
Study Intersections o r t T r g P r s S a r e D e e a h
u D r a y t r a n 5 r S m B V e e o s M 6 ll a c V a v W t r i M t a r e i A M h s Be K i n ia d a e rd e St a E R i x V o a o o s v o N A f S ia r T a e ed Wy n s o n V L o i k H i r K l r n M y t o t San Leandro City Limits B V o l la rr g g C a y e ie a e o n G llin d n h e V i r V o r v C m B w a a d Le i g i o A i y e l l a l a a v a W A g D A r S y r v V v n m a P e v o n a A V e s A D n t i i d s W r V V a l s g o P c g a n i a l v y n N a u B r y i i ra i r S t A e San Leandro Sphere of h m a o n r a a i e G i M o V n s W S V P o s o e d t H S A T v e p ll C l e l ia o t 4 r t ia e s in im rn l e M e S a l d t V h o a B c s h Influence c a i A e B t a s A g m a t o o a n l r s l e S i u2 S e e n h n r R v s R n 3 c A it s i A A n t d r t t n n o a b i w S d D a n c v o u t e v a a v a ll S re R s z A r Wi S t S r r l n d t a ia a da o t B V S M en a t ia ci A Vi V Ha v SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-6 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE DELAY – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing AM Existing PM
# North-South Cross Street East-West Cross Street Control Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 E 14th Street Durant Avenue Signalized 9.2 A 12.7 B
2 E 14th Street Dutton Avenue Signalized 22.3 C 18.3 B
3 E 14th Street Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 25.2 C 24.8 C
4 E 14th Street San Leandro Boulevard Signalized 27.6 C 22.0 C Hesperian Boulevard/ 5 E 14th Street Signalized 22.8 C 21.8 C Bancroft Avenue 6 MacArthur Boulevard Estudillo Avenue Signalized 19.9 B 18.8 B
7 Bancroft Avenue Dutton Avenue Signalized 21.4 C 23.2 C
8 Bancroft Avenue Estudillo Avenue Signalized 26.2 C 25.8 C
9 Hesperian Boulevard 150th Avenue Signalized 16.3 B 17.2 B
10 Hesperian Boulevard Halcyon Drive/ Fairmont Drive Signalized 38.2 D 43.1 D
11 Hesperian Boulevard Springlake Drive Signalized 16.4 B 16.1 B
12 Washington Avenue Lewelling Boulevard Signalized 44.0 D 33.5 C
13 Washington Avenue Springlake Drive Signalized 26.0 C 19.7 B
14 Washington Avenue Floresta Blvd/ Halcyon Drive Signalized 40.9 D 37.0 D
15 Washington Avenue San Leandro Boulevard Signalized 29.8 C 25.4 C
16 San Leandro Boulevard Marina Boulevard Signalized 46.3 D 29.8 C
17 San Leandro Boulevard Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 34.0 C 33.9 C
18 Alvarado Street Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 21.0 C 18.1 B
19 Alvarado Street Williams Street Signalized 16.4 B 15.3 B
20 Alvarado Street Marina Boulevard Signalized 25.7 C 20.1 C Wayne Avenue/ 21 Marina Boulevard Signalized 23.9 C 31.7 C Teagarden Street 22 I-880 NB Ramps Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 13.6 B 16.4 B
23 I-880 SB Ramps Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 11.9 B 16.1 B
24 I-880 NB Ramps Marina Boulevard TWSCa 34.6 D 18.4 C
25 I-880 SB Ramps Marina Boulevard TWSCa 28.9 D 42.7 E
26 Washington Avenue I-880 NB Ramps Signalized 21.5 C 22.9 C
27 Washington Avenue I-880 SB Ramps/ Beatrice St Signalized 20.1 C 22.4 C
28 Phillips Lane Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 24.1 C 30.9 C Warden Avenue/ 29 Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 23.6 C 27.3 C Timothy Drive 30 Doolittle Drive (SR-61) Davis Street (SR-112) Signalized 24.8 C 20.1 C
31 Doolittle Drive (SR-61) Marina Boulevard Signalized 34.4 C 36.1 D
4.13-28 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-6 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE AND AVERAGE DELAY – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing AM Existing PM
# North-South Cross Street East-West Cross Street Control Delay LOS Delay LOS 32 Merced Street Marina Boulevard Signalized 33.9 C 35.7 D
33 Merced Street Fairway Drive Signalized 42.9 D 34.4 C
34 Doolittle Drive (SR-61) Williams Street Signalized 28.2 C 22.2 C
35 Alvarado Street Fairway Dr/ Aladdin Ave Signalized 51.2 D 24.3 C
36 Hesperian Boulevard Lewelling Boulevard Signalized 45.6 D 38.9 D a. Two Way Stop Controlled Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
Highways using the available data from the locations nearest the freeway locations. Corresponding speeds from PeMS were used to calculate densities, as passenger cars per mile per lane. Existing freeway volumes, densities, and LOS are presented in Table 4.13-7.18
Table 4.13-7 presents the LOS on the study freeway segments under existing conditions. Freeway segments experience LOS D or better conditions, with the exception of the following: . I-880 northbound segments between Washington Avenue and 98th Avenue. This mainline segment experiences LOS F conditions during the AM peak hour. . I-238 Eastbound segment between Hesperian Boulevard and SR 185, which is at LOS E during the AM peak hour. . I-238 Westbound segment between SR 185 and Hesperian Boulevard, which is at LOS F and E during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. . I-580 Northbound segment between 150th Avenue and Benedict Drive, which is at LOS F during the AM peak hour. . I-580 Northbound segment between Foothill Boulevard and 106th Avenue, which is at LOS E during the AM peak hour.
Existing Vehicle Miles Traveled
As noted above, in passing SB 743, the California Legislature has indicated that the State’s goal is to reduce VMT, and the State is currently in the process of developing new guidelines and metrics to replace traditional LOS analyses, particularly in areas that are likely to see future infill transit-oriented development, such as San Leandro’s PDAs. VMT is one metric under consideration. Although new guidelines have not yet been adopted by the State, this EIR includes a discussion of VMT in keeping with the Legislature’s intent.
18 2013 Traffic Volumes, California Department of Transportation, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/saferesr/trafdata/ index.htm, accessed April 9, 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-29 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-7 FREEWAY VOLUMES AND LEVEL OF SERVICE – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Location AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
From To Volume Density LOS Volume Density LOS I-880 Northbound
Washington Avenue Marina Boulevard 6,556 64.7 F 7,826 29.8 D
Marina Boulevard Davis Street 5,464 61.2 F 7,255 27.2 D
Davis Street 98th Avenue 4,455 66.3 F 5,926 24.2 C
I-880 Southbound
98th Avenue Davis Street 4,947 19.8 C 5,527 33.2 D
Davis Street Marina Boulevard 5,780 21.1 C 6,842 24.0 C
Marina Boulevard Washington Avenue 6,107 22.3 C 7,797 34.7 D
I-238 Eastbound
Hesperian Boulevard SR-185 4,651 37.5 E 5,161 33.9 D
I-238 Westbound
SR-185 Hesperian Boulevard 4,533 51.9 F 5,304 37.9 E
I-580 Northbound
I-238 Liberty Street/164th Avenue 6,527 24.3 C 6,374 23.8 C
150th Avenue Benedict Drive 6,779 48.0 F 6,963 26.8 D
Foothill Boulevard 106th Avenue 4,034 43.6 E 6,084 21.7 C
I-580 Southbound
106th Avenue Foothill Boulevard 5,838 21.6 C 6,359 25.9 C
Benedict Drive 150th Avenue 6,782 25.6 C 7,179 29.2 D
Liberty Street/164th Avenue I-238 5,389 25.7 C 5,283 25.3 C Notes: Volumes and density derived from PeMS volume and speed measurements. Volume = vehicles per hour (vph); Density = passenger car per mile per lane (pc/m/ln) LOS = Level of Service Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc, 2015.
VMT refers to trips generated or attracted by land uses within the City of San Leandro boundaries multiplied by the trip distances. These trips are defined as trips with one or both "trip ends" in San Leandro. Generally, trips have two ends, in that every trip has an origin and a destination. The Alameda CTC countywide travel demand model (Countywide Model) is used to help evaluate cumulative transportation impacts of local land use decisions on the CMP system. The VMT estimates in the Alameda CTC model are sensitive to changes in land use. Generally, land uses that reflect a more balanced jobs- housing ratio in the Alameda CTC model result in lower per capita VMT. VMT is also a statistic that is also used in noise and air quality analyses because it provides an indication of the overall performance of the automobile and truck transportation system within the city. A higher VMT means more noise and more air pollution. For a discussion of VMT as it relates to air quality and noise, see Chapter 4.2, Air Quality, and Chapter 4.10, Noise, of this Draft EIR.
4.13-30 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
The daily (24-hour) VMT were tabulated for existing (2015) conditions using the Alameda Countywide Model and for purposes of looking at additional characteristics of trip making, VMT per capita and VMT by trip orientation were analyzed.
VMT per Capita
VMT per capita (miles per service population per day) is a TABLE 4.13-8 VMT PER CAPITA commonly used metric. It is represented by VMT, divided by the Existing 2015 population, which is a combination of residential and working Conditions population. The existing VMT and VMT per capita are presented Daily VMT 3,425,390 in Table 4.13-8. Households 31,320 Total Population 86,615 VMT by Trip Orientation Total Jobs 42,870 VMT Per Capita 26.5 Some trips are made to San Leandro from outside the city, and Source: Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) conversely some trips are made from San Leandro to outside Projections 2013. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2015. the city. Trip-making is also made within the city. These trip orientations can be broadly classified as: . Internal-External: when a trip is made from San Leandro to outside the city, . External-Internal: when a trip is made from outside the city to San Leandro, and . Internal-internal: when a trip is made within the city of San Leandro.
Citywide VMT can be divided into these trip orientation categories by tabulating estimates from the Alameda Countywide Model. The VMT by trip orientation is presented in Table 4.13-9. As shown in the table, the VMT is generally balanced with slightly more external-internal than internal-external. As shown in Table 4.13-9 the internal trip-making generates a low proportion of VMT because San Leandro is geographically compact and internal trips are short. The proportion of VMT does not translate directly into the proportion of trips—so while 24.7 percent of trips are internal-internal, this only translated to 4.5 percent of VMT as internal-internal VMT because trips that both begin and end in San Leandro are shorter trips of fewer miles.
TABLE 4.13-9 DAILY TRIPS AND VMT BY TRIP ORIENTATION – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Existing Trips Existing 2015 Existing VMT Trip Orientation Existing 2015 Trips Proportions VMT Proportions Total San Leandro VMTa 323,642 100% 3,425,390 100%
Internal-External VMTb 121,835 37.6% 1,625,513 47.4%
External-Internal VMTc 121,879 37.7% 1,646,233 48.1%
Internal-Internal VMTd 79,928 24.7% 150,745 4.5% Notes: Estimate of 2010 VMT is based on the current Alameda CTC Countywide Model and on ABAG Projection 2013 land use projections. a. Trips with one trip end outside San Leandro were counted as one trip-end, whereas trips with both ends in San Leandro were counted as two trip-ends. b. “Internal-External” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination outside San Leandro. c. “External-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base outside San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. d. “Internal-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-31 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
4.13.2 STANDARDS OF SIGNIFICANCE
The proposed Plan would result in a significant impact if it would: 1. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation, including mass transit, non-motorized travel, and relevant components of the circulation system, including, but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit. 2. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. 3. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. 4. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). 5. Result in inadequate emergency access. 6. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
Intersection Impact Criteria
Significance criteria are used to establish what constitutes a significant impact by a project. In addition to the above Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, State CEQA Guidelines, the following significance criteria for the city and surrounding jurisdictions were used to evaluate the effects of the proposed Plan.
City of San Leandro, Alameda CTC, and Caltrans
The LOS standard for signalized intersections in the City of San Leandro is LOS D or better at City- controlled intersections. For those intersections that are located on the CMP network, the LOS standard is LOS D. The LOS standard for signalized intersections within Caltrans’ jurisdiction is LOS C or better. The LOS standard for each study intersection is indicated in Table 4.13-10.
For intersections within the PDA defined areas, the City is proposing to adopt an LOS of E. This is based on the desire to relax the LOS standard within TODs (transit-oriented districts) or PDAs (Priority Development Areas) to encourage less automobile use in favor of walking, biking and transit use in areas where alternative transportation facilities are present and accessible. In addition, this revised standard will minimize the need for making improvements to impacted locations solely for impacts associated with automobile use, or in locations where improvements may be constrained by existing right-of-way and buildings.
An impact would be potentially significant if it exceeded the proposed LOS standard.
4.13-32 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-10 STUDY INTERSECTION LOS STANDARDS
Study LOS Intersection Intersection Jurisdiction CMP Standard 1 E 14th Street & Durant Avenue Caltrans CMP C
2 E 14th Street & Dutton Avenue Caltrans CMP C
3 E 14th Street & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
4 E 14th Street & San Leandro Boulevard Caltrans CMP C
5 Hesperian Blvd/Bancroft Ave & E 14th Street Caltrans CMP C
6 MacArthur Boulevard & Estudillo Avenue San Leandro D
7 Bancroft Avenue & Dutton Avenue San Leandro D
8 Bancroft Avenue & Estudillo Avenue San Leandro D
9 Hesperian Boulevard & 150th Avenue San Leandro CMP D
10 Hesperian Boulevard & Halcyon Drive/Fairmont Drive San Leandro CMP D
11 Hesperian Boulevard & Springlake Drive San Leandro CMP D
12 Washington Avenue & Lewelling Boulevard San Leandro D
13 Washington Avenue & Springlake Drive San Leandro D
14 Washington Avenue & Floresta Boulevard/ Halcyon Drive San Leandro D
15 Washington Avenue & San Leandro Boulevard San Leandro D 16 San Leandro Boulevard & Marina Boulevard San Leandro D
17 San Leandro Boulevard & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
18 Alvarado Street & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
19 Alvarado Street & Williams Street San Leandro D
20 Alvarado Street & Marina Boulevard San Leandro D
21 Wayne Avenue/Teagarden Street & Marina Boulevard San Leandro D
22 I-880 NB Ramps & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
23 I-880 SB Ramps & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
24 I-880 NB Ramps & Marina Boulevard Caltrans CMP C
25 I-880 SB Ramps & Marina Boulevard Caltrans CMP C
26 Washington Avenue & I-880 NB Ramps Caltrans CMP C
27 Washington Avenue & I-880 SB Ramps/Beatrice St Caltrans CMP C
28 Phillips Lane & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
29 Warden Ave/Timothy Dr & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
30 Doolittle Drive (SR-61) & Davis Street (SR-112) Caltrans CMP C
31 Doolittle Drive & Marina Boulevard San Leandro D
PLACEWORKS 4.13-33 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-10 STUDY INTERSECTION LOS STANDARDS
Study Intersection Jurisdiction CMP LOS 32 Merced Street & Marina Boulevard San Leandro D
33 Merced Street & Fairway Drive San Leandro D
34 Doolittle Drive & Williams Street San Leandro D
35 Alvarado Street & Fairway Drive/Aladdin Ave San Leandro D
36 Hesperian Boulevard & Lewelling Boulevard San Leandro CMP D Notes: NB = northbound; SB = southbound Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015
Freeway Impact Criteria
As stated in the Caltrans Traffic Impact Study Guide,19 “Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS C and LOS D on State highway facilities; however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not always be feasible. If an existing State highway facility is operating at less than the appropriate target LOS, the existing Measure of Effectiveness (MOE) should be maintained.” While the Caltrans Guide sets a LOS C standard, given the traffic volumes and the congestion levels of San Francisco Bay Area freeways, for the purposes of this analysis, the City has determined, in its discretion, to use LOS D as the LOS standard. For those locations where the existing condition is already below the LOS D standard, the impact would be considered significant when: . The new trips added by the Proposed Plan increases the density by more than 5 passenger cars/mile/lane.
CMP Analysis Impact Criteria
The LOS standard for CMP is LOS E. If the CMP segment operates worse than LOS E then traffic impacts on the MTS would occur when the addition of traffic associated with implementation of the Proposed Plan causes: . The V/C ratio to increase by 0.03 or more at a freeway segment or arterial segment with unacceptable operations (LOS F). . Increase in passengers by 01 percent or more on buses or trains already at maximum load capacity.
19 Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies State of California Department of Transportation, December 2002.
4.13-34 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
4.13.3 IMPACT DISCUSSION
This section analyzes potential impacts of the proposed Plan on transportation and traffic.
4.13.3.1 MODEL METHODOLOGY
This section documents the assumptions and approach used for the traffic forecast modeling as part of the transportation impact analysis.
The Alameda CTC Countywide Model was updated in 2014 with more recent network and land use assumptions based on the CWTP and ABAG Projections 2013 Plan Bay Area. The new model has a 2010 base year and a 2040 horizon year. A revision to the model was provided by the Alameda CTC on May 28, 2015 that was used for this analysis. It is important to understand that the model includes forecasted development for the entire Bay Area region, not only for San Leandro. As demonstrated by the analysis of the 2040 No Project scenario under Impact TRAF-2, below, even without the adoption of the proposed Plan, traffic on roadway and freeway segments in San Leandro would increase substantially due to regional growth.
Approach
This transportation analysis and the related analyses in Chapter 4.2, Air Quality are based on the most recent version of the Alameda Countywide Model with Plan Bay Area Projections, dated May 28, 2015. The recently updated Countywide Model includes network changes and regional improvements outside the city of San Leandro. The zonal detail, street network and land uses are based on the Countywide Model and some modification were made to better represent actual 2010 conditions as well as the General Plan Buildout within San Leandro. Traffic analysis zones (TAZ) boundaries were not adjusted.
The travel demand model was used to generate, distribute, apply mode splits and fleet mix, and assign traffic to develop the traffic forecasts for the analysis of the effects of the proposed General Plan on traffic operations in the EIR Study Area and compare those operations to baseline existing conditions (e.g., Table 4.13-6) using the City’s current and proposed significance criteria to identify impacts. This approach captures not only the increased traffic associated with the Proposed Plan land uses, but also the diversion of existing and future background traffic as a result of future growth in the region.
Truck trips are accounted for in the traffic analysis for the proposed Plan. Land use assumptions in the traffic model include truck trips in the fleet mix and the model distributes those truck trips on regional and local roadways according to the land uses and accounts for truck route changes identified in the Project Description. Therefore, the traffic analysis reflects projected future truck trips based on land use changes for the proposed Plan.
Transportation-related project impacts were analyzed for the following scenario for AM and PM peak hour conditions: . Cumulative with Proposed Plan – Cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions are assumed to be represent a 2035 horizon year for consistency with the other topic areas in the EIR. In this scenario, growth within San Leandro, consistent with the proposed Plan, was added to projected growth
PLACEWORKS 4.13-35 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
outside of San Leandro in the larger Bay Area region, which is based on ABAG projections used for the RTP/SCS.
The Cumulative 2035 traffic volumes were developed using the most recent version of the Countywide Model to estimate the increment of growth over the 20-year period, both in San Leandro and in the region as a whole, to add to the existing volumes. Given that the base year (2010) and horizon year (2040) of the model differ from the EIR analysis years, the following approach was used:
Land Use . The Countywide Model was updated with adjusted 2010 land uses for TAZs within the City of San Leandro boundaries. Adjusted 2010 housing and employment numbers that better represent existing uses in 2010 were used. No changes were made to 2010 land uses for TAZs outside of San Leandro, including the unincorporated sphere of influence. . The General Plan buildout land use increment for the Year 2040 was added for TAZs within the city boundaries so that the Cumulative year forecast is consistent with the Alameda CTC horizon year and the necessary 2040 Congestion Management Program (CMP) compliance.
Roadway Network . Roadway network assumptions were based on the recent CWTP and recent citywide projects, including: . Marina Boulevard and I-880 ramp improvements (per recent construction). . Davis Street and I-880 ramp improvements. . I-880 northbound HOV lane extension from Marina Boulevard to Hegenberger Road. . I-880 Southbound HOV lane. . No Aladdin Avenue extension across the railroad track to Washington Road. . No Polvorosa Avenue extension. . Local road improvements as part of the Kaiser and Shoreline project mitigations. . To the extent relevant, enhancements made for the Shoreline Project to better represent the common study intersections were incorporated.
Model Forecasts . The model was run and traffic outputs extracted at the study locations for 2010 and 2040. These forecasts were used to develop a growth increment that was added to the 2014 counts to represent the cumulative plus project (2035) conditions for transportation analyses. . Adjustments for land use growth between 2010 and 2015 were considered. While there was little land use growth within San Leandro between 2010 and 2015, and similar limited job and housing growth has been observed in surrounding jurisdictions, like Hayward, there has been growth in regional traffic, so a straight line interpolation from 2010 to 2015 was done. . Adjustments were made to the model forecasts to account for General Plan horizon year. The model forecasts were scaled back from 2040 to 2035 to reflect the horizon year for the General Plan. An interpolation based on land use projections was used to scale back the 2040 results to 2035.
4.13-36 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. The growth increment from 2015 to 2035 from the model forecasts were added to the existing counts to represent the cumulative plus project scenario. . Suitable incremental adjustments were made at the intersection level per National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 25520 methods to reduce any model error at study intersections or segments between the existing year model and the counts, consistent with the methodology used for other San Leandro studies, such as the Kaiser and Shoreline studies.
TRAF-1 Implementation of the proposed Plan would conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.
This impact discussion focuses on vehicular transportation and covers intersection operations and freeway operations. Impacts related to other modes of transportation are discussed under Impact TRAF-5 below.
Proposed General Plan Update
Intersection Levels of Service
This section describes the traffic conditions that would result with the addition of the trips generated by the development under the Cumulative with Proposed Plan on the local roadway network, compared to traffic under Existing Conditions.
The results of the LOS analysis under the Cumulative with Proposed Plan scenario compared to the Existing Conditions scenario are presented in Table 4.13-14. The results show that, of the 36 study intersections, 24 intersections would operate at an acceptable LOS under the proposed Plan, and 12 intersections would operate at an unacceptable LOS during the AM peak hour, the PM peak hour, or both peak hours.
The intersections that would operate at an unacceptable LOS are bolded and gray-shaded in Table 4.13-11. All other study intersections would operate at acceptable levels of service under the Cumulative with Proposed Plan conditions. Operations at the I-880 SB Ramps/Marina Boulevard intersection would improve in the PM peak hour to an acceptable LOS with the change from unsignalized control under Existing Conditions to signalized control under the Cumulative with proposed Plan. The LOS calculation sheets are included in Appendix H, Transportation and Traffic Data, of this Draft EIR.
20 Highway Traffic Data for Urbanized Area Project Planning and Design, Transportation Research Board, 1992.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-37 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-11 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROPOSED PLAN INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Existing Cumulative plus Conditions Proposed Plan LOS Peak Average Average Change in # Intersection Standard Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Critical Delay AM 9.2 A 9.0 A -0.2 1 E 14th Street and Durant Avenue E PM 12.7 B 12.4 B -0.3 AM 22.3 C 29.1 C 6.8 2 E 14th Street and Dutton Avenue E PM 18.3 B 30.1 C 11.8
E 14th Street and Davis Street AM 25.2 C 144.4 F 119.2 3 E (SR-112) PM 24.8 C 41.9 D 17.1
E 14th Street and AM 27.6 C 71.6 E 44.0 4 E San Leandro Boulevard PM 22.0 C 27.9 C 5.9
Hesperian Boulevard/Bancroft Ave, AM 22.8 C 69.6 E 46.8 5 th E and E 14 Street PM 21.8 C 37.3 D 15.5
MacArthur Boulevard and AM 19.9 B 23.6 C 3.7 6 D Estudillo Avenue PM 18.8 B 22.5 C 3.7
Bancroft Avenue and AM 21.4 C 25.5 C 4.1 7 D Dutton Avenue PM 23.2 C 27.8 C 4.6
Bancroft Avenue and AM 26.2 C 31.3 C 5.1 8 D Estudillo Avenue PM 25.8 C 31.8 C 6.0
Hesperian Boulevard and AM 16.3 B 18.7 B 2.4 9 th E 150 Avenue PM 17.2 B 23.5 C 6.3
Hesperian Boulevard and AM 38.2 D 89.2 F 51.0 10 E Halcyon Drive/Fairmont Drive PM 43.1 D 75.0 E 31.9
Hesperian Boulevard and AM 16.4 B 21.1 C 4.7 11 E Springlake Drive PM 16.1 B 32.1 C 16.0
Washington Avenue and AM 44.0 D 54.4 D 10.4 12 D Lewelling Boulevard PM 33.5 C 37.5 D 4.0
Washington Avenue and AM 26.0 C 47.4 D 21.4 13 D Springlake Drive PM 19.7 B 28.1 C 8.4
Washington Avenue and AM 40.9 D 54.6 D 13.7 14 D Floresta Boulevard/ Halcyon Drive PM 37.0 D 41.5 D 4.5
Washington Avenue and AM 29.8 C 82.3 F 52.5 15 D San Leandro Boulevard PM 25.4 C 29.1 C 3.7
San Leandro Boulevard and AM 46.3 D 100.9 F 54.6 16 D Marina Boulevard PM 29.8 C 222.4 F 192.6
San Leandro Boulevard and AM 34.0 C 87.9 F 53.9 17 E Davis Street (SR-112) PM 33.9 C 57.0 E 23.1
4.13-38 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-11 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROPOSED PLAN INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Existing Cumulative plus Conditions Proposed Plan LOS Peak Average Average Change in # Intersection Standard Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Critical Delay Alvarado Street and Davis Street AM 21.0 C 22.3 C 1.3 18 E (SR-112) PM 18.1 B 22.1 C 4.0 AM 16.4 B 22.2 C 5.8 19 Alvarado Street and Williams Street D PM 15.3 B 22.2 C 6.9
Alvarado Street and AM 25.7 C 30.4 C 4.7 20 D Marina Boulevard PM 20.1 C 23.1 C 3.0
Wayne Avenue/Teagarden Street AM 23.9 C 25.8 C 1.9 21 D and Marina Boulevard PM 31.7 C 33.3 C 1.6
I-880 NB Ramps and Davis Street AM 13.6 B 14.7 B 1.1 22 D (SR-112) PM 16.4 B 50.5 D 34.1
I-880 SB Ramps and Davis Street AM 11.9 B 15.0 B 3.1 23 D (SR-112) PM 16.1 B 42.3 D 26.2
I-880 NB Ramps and AM 34.6 D 10.7 B -23.9 24 a D Marina Boulevard PM 18.4 C 14.7 B -3.7
I-880 SB Ramps and AM 28.9 D 37.8 D 8.9 25 a D Marina Boulevard PM 42.7 E 46.5 D 3.8
Washington Avenue and AM 21.5 C 22.7 C 1.2 26 D I-880 NB Ramps PM 22.9 C 25.1 C 2.2
Washington Avenue and AM 20.1 C 20.6 C 0.5 27 D I-880 SB Ramps/Beatrice St PM 22.4 C 24.3 C 1.9
Phillips Lane and Davis Street AM 24.1 C 32.0 C 7.9 28 D (SR-112) PM 30.9 C 134.4 F 103.5
Warden Avenue/Timothy Drive AM 23.6 C 29.8 C 6.2 29 D and Davis Street (SR-112) PM 27.3 C 67.0 E 39.7
Doolittle Drive (SR-61) and AM 24.8 C 40.8 D 16.0 30 D Davis Street (SR-112) PM 20.1 C 182.7 F 162.6
Doolittle Drive and AM 34.4 C 93.7 F 59.3 31 D Marina Boulevard PM 36.1 D 67.1 E 31.0
Merced Street and AM 33.9 C 42.6 D 8.7 32 D Marina Boulevard PM 35.7 D 40.9 D 5.2 AM 42.9 D 48.5 D 5.6 33 Merced Street and Fairway Drive D PM 34.4 C 48.9 D 14.5 AM 28.2 C 23.8 C -4.4 34 Doolittle Drive and Williams Street D PM 22.2 C 21.0 C -1.2
PLACEWORKS 4.13-39 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-11 CUMULATIVE PLUS PROPOSED PLAN INTERSECTION LEVELS OF SERVICE
Existing Cumulative plus Conditions Proposed Plan LOS Peak Average Average Change in # Intersection Standard Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS Critical Delay Alvarado Street and AM 51.2 D 242.5 F 191.3 35 D Fairway Drive/Aladdin Avenue PM 24.3 C 32.1 C 7.8
Hesperian Boulevard and AM 45.6 D 53.8 D 8.2 36 E Lewelling Boulevard PM 38.9 D 53.3 D 14.4 Notes: Notes: NB = northbound; SB = southbound; EB = eastbound; WB = westbound. Bold and shaded in gray indicates a significant project impact. a. These intersections are unsignalized under Existing Conditions. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
As shown in Table 4.13-11, the addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would result in significant impacts to 12 intersections during at least one of the peak hours. 3. E. 14th Street and Davis Street (SR-112): LOS F – AM Peak Hour 4. E. 14th Street and San Leandro Boulevard: LOS E – AM Peak Hour 5. Hesperian Boulevard/Bancroft Avenue and E 14th Street: LOS E – AM Peak Hour 10. Hesperian Boulevard and Halcyon Drive/Fairmont Drive: LOS F – AM Peak Hour; LOS E – PM Peak Hour 15. Washington Avenue and San Leandro Boulevard: LOS F – AM Peak Hour 16. San Leandro Boulevard and Marina Boulevard: LOS F – AM and PM Peak Hours 17. San Leandro Boulevard and Davis Street (SR-112): LOS F – AM Peak Hour; LOS E – PM Peak Hour 28. Phillips Lane and Davis Street (SR-112): LOS F – PM Peak Hour 29. Warden Avenue/Timothy Drive and Davis Street (SR-112): LOS E – PM Peak Hour 30. Doolittle Drive (SR-61) and Davis Street (SR-112): LOS F – PM Peak Hour 31. Doolittle Drive and Marina Boulevard: LOS F – AM and PM Peak Hours 35, Alvarado Street and Fairway Drive/Aladdin Avenue: LOS F – AM Peak Hour
The cumulative with Proposed Plan analysis accounts not only for growth in San Leandro traffic, but also the effects of regional traffic growth, including the expansion of the Oakland Airport. Regional growth and airport expansion would add a large amount of traffic to local streets such as Doolittle Drive and Davis Street. The effects of outside growth can be observed in the 2040 No Project condition, presented below under Impact TRAF-2. That scenario includes the same amount of growth outside of San Leandro, as well as growth associated with the existing San Leandro General Plan rather than the proposed Plan, and the 2040 No Project condition results in substantially similar roadway segments and freeway segments operating at LOS F as are predicted under the 2040 Plus Project condition (which does include the proposed Plan). Therefore, significant impacts to intersection operations shown are not solely the result
4.13-40 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC of the Proposed Plan but are also associated with increased regional traffic demand, especially along Doolittle Drive and Davis Street, which are directly affected by the airport expansion.
Freeway Levels of Service
This section describes the traffic conditions that would result with the addition of the trips generated by the Proposed Plan and regional growth under the Cumulative conditions on the freeway, compared to traffic conditions under the Existing Conditions. To calculate the future volumes, the volume increment of growth between 2015 and 2035 from the model was added to the existing peak hour volumes. Since the freeway speeds were assumed to be unchanged from existing conditions to calculate the density using the cumulative volume and existing speed.
The results of the LOS analysis under the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan scenario compared to the Existing Conditions scenario are presented in Table 4.13-12 for AM peak hour and Table 4.13-13 for PM peak hour. The freeway segments that would operate at an unacceptable LOS are bolded and shaded in Tables 4.13-12 and 4.13-13. The results show that, of the 14 freeway mainline segments, seven segments would exceed the level of service threshold (shown bolded) and operate at LOS E or F during the AM peak hour. Of those, five segments are significant impacts (shown bolded and shaded), because the density of traffic would increase by more than five passenger cars per mile per lane. During the PM peak hour, three segments would exceed the level of service threshold (shown bolded) and operate at LOS E or F. Of those, two segments are significant impacts (shown bolded and shaded) due to traffic density increase. All other freeway segments would operate at LOS D or better under the Cumulative with Proposed Plan conditions.
As discussed later in the Congestion Management Program Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) Freeway Segments section of TRAF-2, the relative difference between the 2040 No-Project and 2040 Plus Proposed Plan conditions demonstrate that a substantial amount of the traffic on the freeway segments analyzed is from trips that are passing through San Leandro. The proposed Plan would neither increase nor decrease these freeway trips, and the proposed Plan does not substantively contribute to cumulative impacts on freeway segments. Several of the freeway segments would operate at unacceptable levels under the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan condition. Similar to existing conditions, the following freeway segments would experience LOS E or F conditions under Cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions in the AM peak hour: . I-880 northbound segments between Washington Avenue and 98th Avenue. These three mainline segments experience LOS F conditions during the AM peak hour under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The increased volume results in an increased density of more than five passenger cars per mile per lane, which is considered to be significant. . I-238 Eastbound segment between Hesperian Boulevard and SR 185, which is at LOS E during the AM peak hour under both existing and Cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The increased volume results in an increased density of less than 5 pc/mi/ln and therefore, this is considered to be less than significant. . I-238 Westbound segment between SR 185 and Hesperian Boulevard, which is at LOS F during the AM peak hour, under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The AM peak volume decreases with the Propose Plan and results in an increased density of less than 5 pc/mi/ln and therefore, this is considered to be less than significant.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-41 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-12 FREEWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY – CUMULATIVE PLUS PROPOSED PLAN AM PEAK HOUR
Location Existing Cumulative + Project
From To Volume Density LOS Volume Density LOS I-880 Northbound
Washington Avenue Marina Boulevard 6,556 64.7 F 7,324 72.3 F
Marina Boulevard Davis Street 5,464 61.2 F 6,356 71.1 F
Davis Street 98th Avenue 4,455 66.3 F 5,410 80.5 F
I-880 Southbound
98th Avenue Davis Street 4,947 19.8 C 5,395 17.3 B
Davis Street Marina Boulevard 5,780 21.1 C 6,196 22.7 C
Marina Boulevard Washington Avenue 6,107 22.3 C 6,838 31.2 D
I-238 Eastbound
Hesperian Boulevard SR-185 4,651 37.5 E 4,668 37.6 E
I-238 Westbound
SR-185 Hesperian Boulevard 4,533 51.9 F 4,494 51.5 F
I-580 Northbound
I-238 Liberty Street/164th Avenue 6,527 24.3 C 7,477 27.9 D
150th Avenue Benedict Drive 6,779 48.0 F 7,949 56.2 F
Foothill Boulevard 106th Avenue 4,034 43.6 E 5,073 54.8 F
I-580 Southbound
106th Avenue Foothill Boulevard 5,838 21.6 C 7,164 26.5 D
Benedict Drive 150th Avenue 6,782 25.6 C 7,974 30.1 D
Liberty Street/164th Avenue I-238 5,389 25.7 C 6,413 30.6 D Notes: Volumes and density derived from PeMS volume and speed measurements. Bold indicates that the LOS threshold has been exceeded. Bold and shaded indicates a significant impact. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc, 2015.
. I-580 Northbound segment between 150th Avenue and Benedict Drive, which is at LOS F during the AM peak hour under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The increase in volumes results in an increased density of more than 5 pc/mi/ln, which is considered to be significant. . I-580 Northbound segment between Foothill Boulevard and 106th Avenue is at LOS E during the AM peak hour under existing and LOS F under cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The increase in volumes results in an increased density of more than 5 pc/mi/ln, which is considered to be significant.
4.13-42 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-13 FREEWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY – CUMULATIVE WITH PROPOSED PLAN PM PEAK HOUR
Location Existing Cumulative + Project
From To Volume Density LOS Volume Density LOS I-880 Northbound
Washington Avenue Marina Boulevard 7,826 29.8 D 8,704 33.1 D
Marina Boulevard Davis Street 7,255 27.2 D 8,246 30.9 D
Davis Street 98th Avenue 5,926 24.2 C 6,304 25.7 C
I-880 Southbound
98th Avenue Davis Street 5,527 33.2 D 5,935 28.5 D
Davis Street Marina Boulevard 6,842 24.0 C 6,967 24.5 C
Marina Boulevard Washington Avenue 7,797 34.7 D 8,572 47.7 F
I-238 Eastbound
Hesperian Boulevard SR-185 5,161 33.9 D 5,425 35.6 E
I-238 Westbound
SR-185 Hesperian Boulevard 5,304 37.9 E 5,484 39.2 E
I-580 Northbound
I-238 Liberty Street/164th Avenue 6,374 23.8 C 7,463 27.8 D
150th Avenue Benedict Drive 6,963 26.8 D 8,539 32.8 D
Foothill Boulevard 106th Avenue 6,084 21.7 C 7,659 27.3 D
I-580 Southbound
106th Avenue Foothill Boulevard 6,359 25.9 C 7,302 29.7 D
Benedict Drive 150th Avenue 7,179 29.2 D 8,207 33.4 D
Liberty Street/164th Ave I-238 5,283 25.3 C 6,200 29.7 D Notes: Volumes and density derived from PeMS volume and speed measurements. Bold indicates that the LOS threshold has been exceeded. Bold and shaded indicates a significant impact. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc, 2015.
In addition to those freeway locations that experienced unacceptable LOS under existing conditions, the additional traffic volumes under cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions results in three mainline segments operating at below the standard during the PM peak hour: . I-880 Southbound segment between Marina Boulevard and Washington Avenue would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour under cumulative plus Proposed Plan condition, which is considered to be significant. . I-238 Eastbound segment between Hesperian Boulevard and SR 185 would operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour under cumulative plus Proposed Plan condition, which is considered to be significant.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-43 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. I-238 Westbound segment between SR 185 and Hesperian Boulevard, which is at LOS E during the PM peak hour under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions. The increased volume results in an increased density of less than 5 pc/mi/ln and therefore, this is considered to be less than significant.
Summary
Implementation of the Proposed Plan, in combination with regional growth outside of San Leandro, would result in increased vehicle traffic, which would affect the operations of local intersections and freeway segments. . As shown in Table 4.13-11, the addition of proposed Plan traffic would result in significant impacts to 12 intersections during at least one of the peak hours. . As shown in Table 4.13-12 and Table 4.13-13, the addition of proposed Plan traffic would result in significant impacts to seven freeway segments during at least one of the peak hours.
The proposed Plan includes Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts, which incorporates Action T-5.2.A: New Evaluation Methodologies, to establish, among other discrete LOS standards, the standard of LOS E for intersections within PDAs until the City adopts new transportation impact standards based on vehicle miles traveled. Consequently, this section includes measures to mitigate impacts associated with the proposed Plan to the existing standard LOS D at all intersections as well as measures to mitigate impacts associated with the proposed Plan to LOS E at intersections within PDAs.
Significance before Mitigation: Significant.
Impact TRAF-1: Implementation of the Proposed Plan, in combination with regional growth outside of San Leandro, would result in increased vehicle traffic, which would affect the operations of local intersections and freeway segments. . As shown in Table 4.13-11, the addition of Proposed Plan traffic would result in significant impacts to 12 intersections during at least one of the peak hours (intersection mitigations are described under TRAF-1A). . As shown in Table 4.13-12 and Table 4.13-13, the addition of Proposed Plan traffic would result in significant impacts to seven freeway segments during at least one of the peak hours (freeway mitigations are described under TRAF-1B).
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1A: Intersections: The City of San Leandro should implement the following traffic improvements and facilities to reduce impacts to standard: . E. 14th Street and Davis Street (SR-112) (#3): The addition of Cumulative with proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the AM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D:
4.13-44 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Add an additional northbound left-turn lane on E. 14th Street. This would result in the northbound approach having two exclusive left-turn lanes, an exclusive through lane, and a shared through/right-turn lane. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Because this intersection is within the East 14th Street PDA, implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS E: . Implement proposed Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
This mitigation is considered feasible if the intersection was under City control. However, this intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, so the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures remain uncertain since the intersection is not under the City’s control. Consequently, the Cumulative with proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . E. 14th Street and San Leandro Boulevard (#4): The addition of Cumulative with proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS E in the AM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measure would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D: . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
This intersection is within the Bay Fair BART Transit Village PDA and ABAG/MTC has already designated Bay Fair BART Transit Village a potential PDA. Upon adoption of the Bay Fair TOD Specific Plan, currently anticipated in 2017, Bay Fair will achieve official PDA status. Since this intersection is currently in a potential PDA area the degradation of intersection operations from LOS C to LOS E in the AM peak hour due to the addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would not be considered a significant impact under proposed Plan Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts.
Upon implementation of this measure, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM peak hour. This mitigation is considered feasible if the intersection was under City control. However, this intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, so the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures remain uncertain since the intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction. Consequently, the Cumulative with proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . E. 14th Street and Hesperian Boulevard/Bancroft Avenue (#5): The addition of Cumulative with proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS E in the AM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-45 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Implementation of the following measure would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour: . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
This intersection is within the Bay Fair BART Transit Village PDA and ABAG/MTC has already designated Bay Fair BART Transit Village a potential PDA. Upon adoption of the Bay Fair TOD Specific Plan, currently anticipated in 2017, Bay Fair will achieve official PDA status. Since this intersection is currently in a potential PDA area, the degradation of intersection operations from LOS C to LOS E in the AM peak hour due to the addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would not be considered an impact under proposed Plan Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts.
Upon implementation of this measure, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM peak hour. This mitigation is considered feasible if the intersection was under City control. However, this intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, so the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures remain uncertain since the intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Hesperian Boulevard and Halcyon Drive/Fairmont Drive (#10): The addition of Cumulative with proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS D to LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS D to LOS E in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM and PM peak hours to LOS D: . Widen the south leg of the intersection in order to add a second northbound left-turn lane. This would result in the northbound approach having two exclusive left-turn lanes, two exclusive through lanes, and an exclusive right-turn lane. . Provide an overlap signal phase for the northbound right turns. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
This intersection is within the Bay Fair BART Transit Village PDA and ABAG/MTC has already designated Bay Fair BART Transit Village a potential PDA. Upon adoption of the Bay Fair TOD Specific Plan, currently anticipated in 2017, Bay Fair will achieve official PDA status.Since this intersection is currently in a potential PDA area, the degradation of intersection operations from LOS D to LOS E in the PM peak hour due to the addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would not be considered an impact under proposed Plan Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts. Implementation of the following measures, which do not involve evaluation or acquisition of right-of-way, would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS E: . Implement proposed Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts. . Provide an overlap signal phase for the northbound right turns.
4.13-46 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of the first three measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM and PM peak hours. The availability of right-of-way for the required widening on the south leg of the intersection is uncertain; therefore, the measures may be infeasible. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Washington Avenue and San Leandro Boulevard (#15): The addition of Cumulative with proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the AM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measure would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D: . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of this measure, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM peak hour and lessen the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact to less than significant. . San Leandro Boulevard and Marina Boulevard (#16): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS D to LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS C to LOS F in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM and PM peak hours: . Add a northbound left-turn lane on San Leandro Boulevard to provide two exclusive left-turn lanes, one exclusive through lane and one shared through/right-turn lane. (Consistent with the findings of the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR) . Restripe lanes on the west leg to provide two corresponding receiving lanes. (Consistent with the findings of the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR) . Provide an exclusive southbound right-turn lane to feed the existing channelized right-turn lane from San Leandro Boulevard southbound to Marina Boulevard westbound so that southbound through traffic does not block access to the channelized southbound right-turn lane. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of these measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM and PM peak hours. The availability of right-of-way for the required widening on the south and north legs of the intersection is uncertain; therefore, the measure may be infeasible. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-47 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. San Leandro Boulevard and Davis Street (#17): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the AM peak hour and LOS C to LOS E in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM and PM peak hours to LOS D: . Add a northbound right-turn lane on San Leandro Boulevard to provide two exclusive left-turn lanes, two exclusive through lanes and one exclusive right-turn lane. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Because this intersection is within the Downtown Transit Oriented Development PDA, the degradation of intersection operations from LOS C to LOS E in the PM peak hour due to the addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would not be considered an impact under Proposed Plan Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts. Implementation of the following measures, which do not involve evaluation or acquisition of right-of-way, would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS E: . Implement proposed Policy T-5.2: Evaluating Development Impacts. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of the first two measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the AM and PM peak hours. The availability of right-of-way for the required widening on the south leg of the intersection is uncertain; therefore, the measure may be infeasible. This intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures are not under the City’s control. Consequently, the Cumulative with proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Philips Lane and Davis Street (#28): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the PM peak hour: . Convert the existing shared through/right-turn lane on the westbound approach to an exclusive through lane to provide an exclusive left-turn lane, two exclusive through lanes and an exclusive right-turn lane. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of these measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the PM peak hour. This intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and the implementation and
4.13-48 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
timing of the mitigation measures are not under the City’s control. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Warden Avenue/Timothy Drive and Davis Street (#29): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS E in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the PM peak hour: . Restripe the three northbound lanes from Timothy Drive to provide an exclusive left-turn lane, a shared left-turn/through/right-turn lane and an exclusive right-turn lane. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits in conjunction with adaptive traffic control technology.
Upon implementation of these measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the PM peak hour. This intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures are not under the City’s control. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Doolittle Drive and Davis Street (#30): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the PM peak hour: . Restripe the four westbound lanes from Davis Street to provide one exclusive left-turn lane, one exclusive through lane and two exclusive right-turn lanes. . Restrict westbound right turns on red to reduce conflict between right-turning vehicles in the two exclusive right-turn lanes as well as between right-turning vehicles and movements with the right-of-way. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits.
Upon implementation of these measures, intersection operations would improve to LOS D during the PM peak hour. Even if this intersection was under City control, the availability of right-of-way for the required widening on the east leg of the intersection is uncertain; therefore, the measure may be infeasible. This intersection is under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures are not under the City’s control. Consequently, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . Doolittle Drive and Marina Boulevard (#31): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS C to LOS F in the AM peak hour and from LOS D to LOS E in the PM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-49 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM and PM peak hours to LOS D and lessen the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Restripe the eastbound approach on Marina Boulevard to provide an exclusive left-turn lane, an exclusive through lane and a shared through/right-turn lane. (Consistent with the findings of the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR). . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits. (Consistent with the findings of the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR). . Implement a right-turn overlap signal phase for the northbound and westbound approaches. (A new mitigation not called for in the San Leandro Shoreline Development Project EIR). . Alvarado Street and Aladdin Avenue (#35): The addition of Cumulative with Proposed Plan traffic would cause the intersection level of service to degrade from LOS D to LOS F in the AM peak hour. Therefore, the Cumulative with Proposed Plan impact is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measures would improve intersection operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D and lessen the proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Convert the left-turn signal phasing for the eastbound and westbound approaches on Aladdin Avenue from protected left-turn signal phasing to permitted left-turn signal phasing with flashing yellow arrows. . Convert the northbound left-turn signal phasing on Alvarado Avenue from protected left-turn signal phasing to protected/permitted left-turn signal phasing with flashing yellow arrows. . Convert the southbound left-turn signal phasing on Alvarado Avenue from protected left-turn signal phasing to permitted left-turn signal phasing with flashing yellow arrows. . Optimize the traffic signal cycle length and splits.
While implementation of Mitigation Measure TRAF-1A would secure future roadway and infrastructure improvements that are necessary to mitigate impacts from future development in the city based on current standards, some impacts would remain significant and unavoidable because the City cannot guarantee improvements at all of the impacted intersections.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1B: Freeway Segments: The City of San Leandro shall initiate efforts to coordinate with Caltrans and Alameda CTC to identify potential traffic improvements to reduce impacts to acceptable levels on the regional freeways. . I-880 northbound segments between Washington Avenue and 98th Avenue. These three mainline segments experience LOS F conditions during the AM peak hour under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions.
Implementation of the following measure would improve freeway segment operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D or better and lessen the proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Add additional capacity to the freeway segment by increasing the number of travel lanes in the northbound direction.
4.13-50 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
However, the implementation and timing of the Mitigation Measure is not under the City’s control and widening I-880 is not considered to be feasible due to cost and freeway right-of-way constraints. . Consequently, the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . I-580 Northbound segment between 150th Avenue and Benedict Drive, which is at LOS F during the AM peak hour under both existing and cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions.
Implementation of the following measure would improve freeway segment operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D or better and lessen the proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Add additional capacity to the freeway segment by increasing the number of travel lanes in the northbound direction.
However, the implementation and timing of the Mitigation Measure is not under the City’s control and widening I-880 is not considered to be feasible due to cost and freeway right-of-way constraints. . Consequently, the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . I-580 Northbound segment between Foothill Boulevard and 106th Avenue, is at LOS E during the AM peak hour under existing and LOS F under cumulative plus Proposed Plan conditions.
Implementation of the following measure would improve freeway segment operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D or better and lessen the proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Add additional capacity to the freeway segment by increasing the number of travel lanes in the northbound direction.
However, the implementation and timing of the Mitigation Measure is not under the City’s control and widening I-880 is not considered to be feasible due to cost and freeway right-of-way constraints. . Consequently, the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable. . I-880 Southbound segment between Marina Boulevard and Washington Avenue would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour under cumulative plus Proposed Plan condition, which is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measure would improve freeway segment operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D or better and lessen the Proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Add additional capacity to the freeway segment by increasing the number of travel lanes in the southbound direction.
However, the implementation and timing of the Mitigation Measure is not under the City’s control and widening I-880 is not considered to be feasible due to cost and freeway right-of-way constraints. . Consequently, the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-51 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. I-238 Eastbound segment between Hesperian Boulevard and SR 185 would operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour under cumulative plus Proposed Plan condition, which is considered to be significant.
Implementation of the following measure would improve freeway segment operations during the AM peak hour to LOS D or better and lessen the proposed Plan impact to less than significant: . Add additional capacity to the freeway segment by increasing the number of travel lanes in the eastbound direction.
However, the implementation and timing of the Mitigation Measure is not under the City’s control and widening I-880 is not considered to be feasible due to cost and freeway right-of-way constraints. . Consequently, the Cumulative plus Proposed Plan impact remains significant and unavoidable.
All impacted freeway sections would require additional capacity or widening to mitigate the impacts to less than significant. If the widenings are feasible, then future development implementing the Proposed Plan would contribute its fair share through development fees for street improvements. To this end, the City shall coordinate with Caltrans and the Alameda CTC to develop a co-operative agreement to fund these improvements and determine the fair share contribution. Since these mitigations are not certain, the findings remain as significant and unavoidable.
Significance after Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable.
Proposed Zoning Code Amendments
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the proposed Plan. The proposed Zoning Code would implement the proposed Plan and would help to guide development in key areas of the city. Proposed Zoning Code amendments that would allow increased growth include increased building density, intensity (FAR), and height limits in commercial districts. The potential increase in growth allowed by these Zoning Code amendments is captured in the buildout of the proposed Plan that is analyzed above. Future growth under the proposed Zoning Code amendments would not have any separate or additional impacts that would affect the operations of local intersections and freeway segments. Therefore, impacts from the proposed Zoning Code amendments would be less than significant.
TRAF-2 Implementation of the proposed Plan would conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to, level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.
As explained in Section 4.13.1.1 above, the Alameda CTC coordinates transportation planning efforts throughout Alameda County and prepares the CMP to address congestion problems on the CMP network, which includes State highways and principal arterials. The CMP requires analysis of Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roadway and transit system and uses LOS standards as a means to measure
4.13-52 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC congestion; it has established LOS standards to determine how local governments meet the standards of the CMP. Impact TRAF-2 evaluates the proposed Plan’s impacts on CMP roadways. It is required to follow specific methodology established by the Alameda CTC.
Proposed General Plan Update
CMP Land Use Analysis was performed to identify any potentially significant impacts of the proposed Plan on the MTS roadway network and the MTS transit operators. The potential impacts of the proposed Plan to bicyclists and pedestrians are discussed under the later Pedestrian Impacts and Bicycle Impacts sections under Impact TRAF-6. MTS roadways in the study area include I-880, I-238, I-580, East 14th Street, Mission Boulevard, Doolittle Drive, Davis Street, Washington, 150th Avenue, Hesperian, Lewelling Boulevard, and Mattox Road.
Based on the methodology established by the Alameda County CTC, CMP cumulative impacts are assessed by comparing the 2040 Plus Proposed Plan condition to the 2040 No-Project condition, not to the existing condition. The 2040 No Project condition reflects the existing general plan with no new development per the proposed Plan within San Leandro; growth and change outside of San Leandro is presumed to continue according to regional projections.
Vehicle impacts were assessed at selected roadway locations, including segments of I-880, I-238 and I- 580, and 12 arterial segments on East 14th Street, Mission Boulevard, Doolittle Drive, Davis Street, Washington, 150th Avenue, Hesperian, Llewellyn and Mattox Avenue. Transit impacts were addressed for AC Transit bus routes servicing the EIR Study Area. The BART system was also investigated for impacts to the San Leandro and Bay Fair BART stations.
MTS Roadway Segments
Traffic forecasts were extracted from the most current version of the Alameda CTC Countywide Model (dated May 28, 2015) at the selected MTS roadway segments. The Countywide Model specifies forecasts for 2020 and 2040 horizon years. By 2020, the proposed Plan is not expected to differ significantly compared to the No Project condition, so the proposed Plan was not assessed for 2020 conditions. By 2040, the proposed Plan is expected to differ more significantly compared to the No-Project, so the MTS Roadways and transit routes were assessed for 2040 conditions. The forecasts prepared for the CMP analysis under TRAF-2 differ from those applied to the analyses under all other impact discussions in this chapter, which are based on the model methodology discussed above under Section 4.13.3.1. Under TRAF-2,in accordance with Alameda CTC’s CMP methodology, the land use adjustments and roadway network changes were not made to the CTC Model. The 2040 Plus Project (Proposed Plan) forecasts for roadway segments were derived by changing the land use assumptions in the 2040 model for San Leandro TAZs and generating Proposed Plan condition forecasts, which are then compared to 2040 No-Project conditions to determine impacts attributable to the proposed Plan.
The LOS results along with peak hour volumes and density on the freeway analysis segments for 2040 with and without Proposed Plan conditions are provided in Table 4.13-14 and Table 4.13-15 and on the MTS arterial segments in Table 4.13-16 and Table 4.13-17.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-53 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-14 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FREEWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 AM PEAK HOUR
Location 2040 No-Project 2040 Plus Proposed Plan V/C Significant From To Volume Density LOS Volume Density LOS > 0.03 Impact?
I-880 Northbound Washington Avenue Marina Boulevard 9,250 69.6 F 9,269 70.2 F 0.002 No
Marina Boulevard Davis Street 9,223 51.1 F 9,205 50.8 F (0.002) No
Davis Street 98th Avenue 8,717 104.6 F 8,634 100.1 F (0.010) No
I-880 Southbound
98th Avenue Davis Street 6,012 21.4 C 6,023 21.4 C 0.002 No
Davis Street Marina Boulevard 5,845 21.6 C 5,804 21.3 C (0.007) No
Marina Boulevard Washington Avenue 5,259 27.8 D 5,267 27.9 D 0.001 No
I-238 Eastbound
Hesperian Boulevard SR-185 2,049 11.4 B 2,008 11.4 B (0.020) No
I-238 Westbound
SR-185 Hesperian Boulevard 5,119 40.9 E 5,103 40.9 E (0.003) No
I-580 Northbound
I-238 Liberty Street/164th Avenue 7,437 41.0 E 7,446 41.2 E 0.001 No
150th Avenue Benedict Drive 8,824 74.3 F 8,823 74.2 F (0.000) No
Foothill Boulevard 106th Avenue 8,378 59.2 F 8,388 59.4 F 0.001 No
I-580 Southbound
106th Avenue Foothill Boulevard 5,670 23.6 C 5,684 23.6 C 0.002 No
Benedict Drive 150th Avenue 5,553 22.9 C 5,505 22.6 C (0.009) No
Liberty Street/164th Avenue I-238 4,583 18.0 C 4,567 18.0 B (0.004) No Notes: Bold font indicates exceedance of standard. Shaded cells indicates significant impact; there are no impacted segments in this table. Volume Source: Alameda CTC Countywide P2013 Model, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
4.13-54 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-15 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM FREEWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 PM PEAK HOUR
Location 2040 No-Project 2040 Plus Proposed Plan V/C Significant From To Volume Density LOS Volume Density LOS > 0.03 Impact? I-880 Northbound
Washington Avenue Marina Boulevard 7,177 32.6 D 7,192 32.8 D 0.002 No
Marina Boulevard Davis Street 7,394 30.2 D 7,347 29.9 D (0.006) No
Davis Street 98th Avenue 6,740 42.9 E 6,737 42.9 E (0.000) No
I-880 Southbound
98th Avenue Davis Street 7,630 31.9 D 7,622 31.8 D (0.001) No
Davis Street Marina Boulevard 7,801 39.7 E 7,804 39.7 E 0.000 No
Marina Boulevard Washington Avenue 7,740 104.9 F 7,725 103.8 F (0.002) No
I-238 Eastbound
Hesperian Boulevard SR-185 4,689 33.3 D 4,689 33.3 D 0.000 No
I-238 Westbound
SR-185 Hesperian Boulevard 3,544 21.1 C 3,587 21.5 C 0.012 No
I-580 Northbound
I-238 Liberty Street/164th Avenue 5,192 21.0 C 5,203 21.0 C 0.002 No
150th Avenue Benedict Drive 6,784 32.5 D 6,812 32.8 D 0.004 No
Foothill Boulevard 106th Avenue 6,964 34.2 D 7,008 34.7 D 0.006 No
I-580 Southbound
106th Avenue Foothill Boulevard 8,329 57.9 F 8,318 57.6 F (0.001) No
Benedict Drive 150th Avenue 8,676 69.3 F 8,679 69.4 F 0.000 No
Liberty Street/164th Avenue I-238 7,958 50.5 F 7,969 50.7 F 0.001 No Note: Bold font indicates exceedance of standard. Shaded cells indicates significant impact; there are no impacted segments in this table. Volume Source: Alameda CTC Countywide P2013 Model, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-55 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-16 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 AM PEAK
2040 2040 2040 Change 2040 Plus Change in No-Project Plus Proposed in v/c Change in No-Project Proposed v/c ratio > Significant Segment Volume Plan Volume Ratio Volume LOS Plan LOS 0.03? Impact? Northbound/ Eastbound AM Peak Hour
E 14th – North of Dutton 687 656 -0.04 -31 (-4.5%) D C No No
E 14th – South of Estudillo 1,324 1,376 0.03 52 (3.9%) C C No No
E 14th – South of Fairmont 1,820 1,867 0.03 47 (2.6%) F F No No
Mission Boulevard – North of Mattox 557 556 0.00 -1 (-0.2%) C C No No
Doolittle – North of Davis 2,219 2,297 0.04 78 (3.5%) F F Yes Yes
Doolittle – North of Marina 542 660 0.07 118 (21.8%) C C Yes No
Davis Street – West of I-880 2,039 2,076 0.02 37 (1.8%) F F No No
Davis Street – East of I-880 1,130 1,136 0.00 6 (0.5%) C C No No
Washington – South of San Leandro Boulevard 975 983 0.01 8 (0.8%) F F No No
150th Avenue – East of E 14th Street 1,948 1,918 -0.02 -30 (-1.5%) F F No No
Hesperian – South of E 14th Street 2,000 1,995 0.00 -5 (-0.3%) C C No No
Hesperian – South of I-880 2,383 2,365 -0.01 -18 (-0.8%) D D No No
Llewelling – East of Washington 1,398 1,299 -0.06 -99 (-7.1%) C C No No
Mattox – east of Mission 601 634 0.02 33 (5.5%) C C No No Southbound/ Westbound AM Peak Hour
E 14th – North of Dutton 532 512 -0.02 -20 (-3.8%) C C No No
E 14th – South of Estudillo 403 418 0.01 15 (3.7%) C C No No
4.13-56 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-16 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 AM PEAK
2040 2040 2040 Change 2040 Plus Change in No-Project Plus Proposed in v/c Change in No-Project Proposed v/c ratio > Significant Segment Volume Plan Volume Ratio Volume LOS Plan LOS 0.03? Impact? E 14th – South of Fairmont 327 338 0.01 11 (3.4%) C C No No
Mission Boulevard – North of Mattox 369 360 -0.01 -9 (-2.4%) C C No No
Doolittle – North of Davis 694 721 0.02 27 (3.9%) C C No No
Doolittle – North of Marina 68 72 0.00 4 (5.9%) B B No No
Davis Street – West of I-880 848 870 0.01 22 (2.6%) C C No No
Davis Street – East of I-880 499 506 0.00 7 (1.4%) C C No No
Washington – South of San Leandro Boulevard 563 527 -0.04 -36 (-6.4%) C C No No
150th Avenue East of E 14th Street 1,667 1,652 -0.01 -15 (-0.9%) D D No No
Hesperian – South of E 14th Street 1,612 1,562 -0.02 -50 (-3.1%) C C No No
Hesperian – South of I-880 2,260 2,226 -0.01 -34 (-1.5%) C C No No -65 (- Llewelling – East of Washington 618 553 -0.04 C C No No 10.5%) Mattox – East of Mission 224 224 0.00 0 (0.0%) B B No No Note: Bold font indicates exceedance of standard. Shaded cells indicates significant impact. Volume Source: Alameda CTC Countywide P2013 Model, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-57 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-17 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 PM PEAK
2040 2040 2040 2040 Change in No-Project Plus Proposed Change in Change in No-Project Plus Proposed v/c ratio Significant Segment Volume Plan Volume v/c ratio Volume LOS Plan LOS > 0.03? Impact? Northbound/ Eastbound AM Peak Hour
E 14th – North of Dutton 710 698 -0.04 -12 (-1.7%) D D No No
E 14th – South of Estudillo 481 522 0.03 41 (8.5%) C C No No
E 14th – South of Fairmont 484 505 0.03 21 (4.3%) C C No No
Mission Boulevard – North of Mattox 714 659 0.00 -55 (-7.7%) C C No No
Doolittle – North of Davis 1,980 1,966 0.04 -14 (-0.7%) F F No No
Doolittle – North of Marina 279 298 0.07 19 (6.8%) B B No No
Davis Street – Wwest of I-880 1,867 1,852 0.02 -15 (-0.8%) F F No No
Davis Street – East of I-880 767 794 0.00 27 (3.5%) C C No No Washington – South of San Leandro 707 703 0.01 -4 (-0.6%) D D No No Boulevard 150th Avenue – East of E 14th Street 1,627 1,605 -0.02 -22 (-1.4%) D D No No
Hesperian – South of E 14th Street 2,128 2,158 0.00 30 (1.4%) C C No No
Hesperian – South of I-880 2,666 2,664 -0.01 -2 (-0.1%) E E No No
Llewelling – East of Washington 1,389 1,270 -0.06 -119 (-8.6%) C C No No
Mattox – East of Mission 467 422 0.02 -45 (-9.6%) C C No No Southbound/ Westbound AM Peak Hour
E 14th – North of Dutton 710 691 -0.02 -19 (-2.7%) D D No No
E 14th – South of Estudillo 1,411 1,485 0.01 74 (5.2%) C D Yes No
4.13-58 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
TABLE 4.13-17 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ARTERIAL LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS FOR 2040 PM PEAK
2040 2040 2040 2040 Change in No-Project Plus Proposed Change in Change in No-Project Plus Proposed v/c ratio Significant Segment Volume Plan Volume v/c ratio Volume LOS Plan LOS > 0.03? Impact? E 14th – South of Fairmont 1,728 1,773 0.01 45 (2.6%) E E No No
Mission Boulevard – North of Mattox 988 976 -0.01 -12 (-1.2%) C C No No
Doolittle – North of Davis 2,247 2,251 0.02 4 (0.2%) F F No No
Doolittle – North of Marina 405 575 0.00 170 (42.0%) C C Yes No
Davis Street – West of I-880 2,104 2,078 0.01 -26 (-1.2%) F F No No
Davis Street – East of I-880 1,596 1,613 0.00 17 (1.1%) D D No No
Washington – Suth of San Leandro Boulevard 982 981 -0.04 -1 (-0.1%) F F No No
150th Avenue – East of E 14th Street 1,917 1,968 -0.01 51 (2.7%) F F No No
Hesperian – South of E 14th 1,816 1,834 -0.02 18 (1.0%) C C No No
Hesperian – South of I-880 3,249 3,273 -0.01 24 (0.7%) F F No No
Llewelling – East of Washington 1,012 892 -0.04 -120 (-11.9%) C C No No
Mattox – East of Mission 820 852 0.00 32 (3.9%) C C No No Note: Bold font indicates exceedance of standard. Shaded cells indicates significant impact; there are no impacted segments in this table. Volume Source: Alameda CTC Countywide P2013 Model, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-59 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
MTS Freeway Segments
The 2040 No Project results, presented in Tables 4.13-14 and 4.13-15, indicate a number of segments would operate at LOS F before the addition of Proposed Plan traffic in the AM and PM peak hours. However, the Proposed Plan would not cause v/c ratios to increase on any freeway segment by more than the established threshold for significance of 0.03 when compared to 2040 No Project conditions.
These segments are: . I-880 northbound during the AM peak within the following extents: Washington Avenue to 98th Avenue. . I-880 southbound during the PM peak within the following extents: Marina Boulevard to Washington Avenue. . I-580 northbound during the AM Peak within the following extents: 150th Avenue to Benedict Drive, and Foothill Boulevard to 106th Avenue. . I-580 southbound during the PM Peak within the following extents: 106th Avenue to Foothill Boulevard, Benedict Drive to 150th Avenue, and 164th Avenue to I-580.
As discussed above, the LOS on the freeway segments analyzed is primarily the result of trips that pass through San Leandro on regional freeways and neither begin nor end in San Leandro. The addition of traffic associated with implementation of the proposed Plan would not cause any freeway segments to be impacted. Therefore, the impacts to MTS freeway segments would be considered less than significant.
MTS Arterial Segments
The MTS arterial segment analysis utilized a LOS methodology based on capacities from the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual. The analysis used the same modeling methodology as the freeway segments for 2040. Multiple segments are forecast to operate at LOS F under both 2040 No-Project and 2040 Plus Proposed Plan conditions, as shown in Tables 4.13-16 and 4.12-17. However, except for one segment, the increase in v/c ratio resulting from the Proposed Plan traffic would be less than the significance threshold of 0.03. Because CMP cumulative impacts are assessed based on the relative difference between the 2040 No- Project and 2040 Plus Proposed Plan condition, the relatively small effect of the Proposed Plan on arterials implies the Proposed Plan would have relatively small effects on operations at intersections. Instead, the majority of the operations on these arterials comes from regional growth that would not be affected by the Proposed Plan.
The northbound Doolittle Drive segment north of Davis Street would be at LOS F before the addition of Proposed Plan traffic in both AM and PM peak hours. The Proposed Plan would cause the v/c ratio to increase by more than the 0.03 threshold in the AM peak hour (0.04 with the addition of 78 Proposed Plan vehicles). The southbound Doolittle Drive segment north of Davis Street would also be at LOS F in the PM peak hour; but the increase in v/c ratio resulting from the Proposed Plan traffic would be less than 0.03. The northbound segment impact is associated with the addition of the recently approved Shoreline Development Plan project and mitigations have been previously identified under that EIR. The Proposed Plan would cause the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio on the northbound segment of Doolittle Drive, which
4.13-60 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
would operate at LOS F, to increase by 0.04 under Year 2040 conditions in the AM peak hour. Therefore, this is considered a significant impact on this segment.
MTS Transit Operations
The two primary transit agencies serving San Leandro are AC Transit and BART. Amtrak service via the Capitol Corridor passes through the city but the nearest station is at the Coliseum. AC Transit has numerous routes serving or passing through the San Leandro study area, including; 1, 1R, 32, 40, 45, 48, 57, 75, 85, 89, 93, 97, 801, NX3, NX4, S, and SB; while the San Leandro and the Bay Fair BART stations directly serve San Leandro. Future service includes the AC Transit BRT along International Boulevard/ E. 14th Street from Oakland to the San Leandro BART station, and the BART extension to San Jose.
Effects of Vehicle Traffic on Mixed Flow Transit Operations
An assessment was made to determine if vehicle trips generated by the Proposed Plan would cause congestion that reduces transit vehicle operations. AC Transit currently operates 18 bus lines in the area that include 1, 1R, 32, 40, 45, 48, 57, 75, 85, 89, 93, 97, 801, NX3, NX4, S, and SB. While the General Plan traffic is dispersed throughout the city, traffic increases do occur along East 14th Street, Marina Boulevard and Doolittle Drive, and around the opportunity sites adjacent to the two BART stations. Generally, traffic increases between the 2040 No-Project to the 2040 Plus Proposed Plan range from 0 percent to 3.5 percent on arterial segments already at LOS F. As discussed above, the Project would cause increases in delays associated with impacted intersections identified under TRAF-1. In the absence of applying the recommended mitigations, this could impact mixed flow transit operations. If the mitigations are implemented, then the impacts to transit will be less than significant. Because some intersections are under Caltrans’ jurisdiction, and the implementation and timing of the mitigation measures are not under the City’s control, it is possible that certain mitigation measures may not be implemented on the City’s preferred schedule. As such, the impact of vehicle traffic on mixed flow transit operations may require further review in the future. Based on applying the recommended mitigations, the impact of vehicle traffic on mixed flow transit operations would be significant and unavoidable.
Transit Capacity
In addition to the impact of vehicles on transit operations, the CMP guidelines require a determination for whether a Proposed Plan would cause the existing transit service to exceed its available capacity. All combined AC Transit routes and were considered for these purposes.
As shown in Table 4.13-18, the Proposed Plan is TABLE 4.13-18 AC TRANSIT PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRIPS estimated to generate 500 new AC Transit bus trips per day compared to the 2040 NoProject AC Additional condition, with approximately 50 trips occurring Project Transit Passengers/ Period Trips Buses Bus in the AM and PM peak hours. These trips would be spread throughout the city on 17 different Daily 500 360 1.4 routes, each operating at an average headway of AM 50 36 1.4 30 minutes in the peak hour and 15 minutes for PM 50 36 1.4 the BRT. The Proposed Plan is likely to contribute Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2015. an average of under 2.0 additional passengers
PLACEWORKS 4.13-61 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
per bus. Based on existing data from AC Transit indicating that none of the routes in San Leandro currently reach maximum load factors, the Proposed Plan is not expected to exceed the AC Transit’s capacity within San Leandro.
The San Leandro and Bay Fair BART stations are TABLE 4.13-19 BART PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRIPS located within the study area. As shown in Table 4.13-19, the Proposed Plan is expected to increase Additional Project BART Passengers/ daily BART ridership by 2,240 new riders at the Period Trips Trains Train two stations, with approximately 10 percent or Daily 2,240 240 9.3 224 occurring during the AM and PM peak hours. Table 4.13-19 shows the distribution of Proposed AM 224 24 9.3 Plan trips for each peak hour on BART. BART PM 224 24 9.3 service would be fully operational to San Jose in Source: Kittelson & Associates, 2015. 2040, so based on 4 future routes that will pass through San Leandro, and assuming 12 trains per hour in each direction, the Proposed Plan is likely to contribute about 9.3 additional passengers per train. Currently, Per BART’s 2008 Station Profile Study, the maximum load factors during the peak hours on BART are at 100 percent, so assuming this remains the same under future expanded service, then based on the peak hour projected ridership increase 9.3 passengers per train the Proposed Plan would add less than 1 percent new passengers to each train operating at maximum load and this is not expected to exceed BART’s maximum load capacity by more than the established threshold of 1 percent.
Based on this assessment, the Proposed Plan would not cause the transit ridership to exceed the significance threshold on either AC Transit or BART and this impact would be less than significant.
Transit Access and Egress
Since the Proposed Plan is not making changes to connections to transit, the Proposed Plan would provide the same adequate pedestrian connection between the Proposed Plan land use sites and transit stops and a less-than-significant impact would result in this respect.
Future Transit Service
Future transit service to San Leandro would include the BART extension to San Jose, and the AC Transit BRT route from Oakland to the San Leandro BART along East 14th Street. Proposed Plan improvements along this route would not preclude future transit service. Therefore, given the Proposed Plan would not preclude future transit service from being added, a less-than-significant impact would occur.
Consistency with Adopted Plans
The Proposed Plan’s consistency with transit operators’ adopted plans was assessed. The Proposed Plan is not expected to generate additional BART trips to a point that would exceed the current maximum load capacity of the BART trains by more than 1 percent. Construction of the Proposed Plan would also not affect any future plans established by BART. AC Transit’s future plans are accounted for and represented in the Alameda CTC CMP model and are not expected to be inhibited by the Proposed Plan. A less-than- significant impact would result in this respect.
4.13-62 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Significance before Mitigation: Significant.
Impact TRAF-2A: The Proposed Plan would cause the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio on the northbound segment of Doolittle Drive, which would operate at Level of Service (LOS) F, to increase by 0.04 under Year 2040 conditions in the AM peak hour. Therefore, this is considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2A: Implementation of the following improvement would reduce the impact to acceptable levels: . Widen Doolittle Drive to provide an additional travel lane in the northbound direction; or . Provide transit or shuttle service that operates between the Proposed Plan site and key locations such as San Leandro and Coliseum BART stations and Oakland International Airport.
Widening Doolittle Drive to provide an additional travel lane in the northbound direction would improve the level of service to LOS D in Year 2040 and would mitigate the Proposed Plan impact to less than significant. However, the feasibility of this measure is uncertain due to right of way constraints along this mostly developed corridor.
Alternatively, provision of a shuttle service that operates between the City site and key locations, such as San Leandro and Coliseum BART stations and Oakland International Airport, during the AM and PM peak hour would likely lessen the Proposed Plan’s impact on the segment. However, the effectiveness of the shuttle service in reducing the number of Proposed Plan trips on Doolittle Drive cannot be adequately quantified.
As discussed above, the ongoing I-880 Integrated Corridor Management effort led by the MTC that aims to optimize freeway, arterial signal, rail, and bus systems and incorporate Intelligent Transportation System would also help enhance efficiency on the freeway. However, for the reasons listed above this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Significance after Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable.
Impact TRAF-2B: The effect of an increase of Proposed Plan vehicle traffic would cause mixed flow transit operations to be significantly impacted. Since impacts identified under TRAF-1 and their recommended mitigations are uncertain, this could impact mixed flow transit operations in San Leandro and therefore, this is considered a significant impact.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2B: Implementation of the mitigation measures unidentified Under TRAF-1A would reduce the impact to transit operations to acceptable levels. However, for the reasons listed above this impact would remain significant and unavoidable.
Significance after Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable.
Proposed Zoning Code Amendments
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the Proposed Plan. The proposed Zoning Code would implement the Proposed Plan and would help to guide development in key areas of the city. Proposed Zoning Code amendments that would allow increased
PLACEWORKS 4.13-63 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
growth, consistent with the Proposed Plan, include increased building density, intensity (FAR), and height limits in commercial districts. The potential increase in growth allowed by these Zoning Code amendments is captured in the buildout of the Proposed Plan that is analyzed above. Future growth under the proposed Zoning Code amendments would not have any separate or additional impacts that would conflict with an applicable congestion management program. Therefore, impacts from the proposed Zoning Code amendments would be less than significant.
TRAF-3 The proposed Plan would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
The EIR Study Area is not located near any airports approach or departure zones, and development within the city boundary would not be expected to have a potentially significant impact to air traffic. Therefore, the proposed General Plan Update and proposed Zoning Code amendments would have no impact to aviation facilities.
Significance before Mitigation: No impact.
TRAF-4 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment).
Proposed General Plan Update
Because the proposed Plan is a program-level planning effort, it does not directly address project-level design features or building specifications. However, the proposed Plan includes policies that, once adopted, would reduce hazards to the public from a design feature or incompatible uses. . Policy T-2.1: Complete Streets Serving All Users and Modes. Create and maintain "complete” streets that provide safe, comfortable, and convenient travel through a comprehensive, integrated transportation network that serves all users. . Policy T-6.1: Traffic Calming Strategies. Use a variety of approaches to slow down or “calm” traffic on San Leandro streets, based on the specific conditions on each street. Emphasize approaches that improve conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists and enhance neighborhood aesthetics. . Policy T-6.4: Coordination with Urban Design Improvements. Integrate traffic calming objectives into major urban design projects and streetscape improvement plans. . Policy T-7.6: Safe Visibility. Maintain site design, engineering, and zoning standards which ensure that adequate visibility is maintained along streets and driveways.
Future development under the proposed Plan would increase in both residential and commercial land uses. As these land uses develop, construction and modifications of new and existing roadways would be necessary to support the growth. As with current practice, the improvements would be designed and reviewed in accordance to the City of San Leandro Standard Plans, which are promulgated and
4.13-64 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
administered by the City Engineering & Transportation Department. Therefore, the impact of the proposed Plan would be less than significant.
Significance before Mitigation: Less than significant.
Proposed Zoning Code Amendments
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the proposed Plan. The proposed Zoning Code would implement the proposed Plan and would help to guide development in key areas of the city. Future development allowed under the proposed Zoning Code amendments would not have any separate or additional impacts that would increase hazards, and all roadway improvements necessary to serve development under the Zoning Code amendments would be required to be consistent with the State regulations, San Leandro Standard Plans, and other regulations. Therefore, impacts from the proposed Zoning Code amendments would be less than significant.
TRAF-5 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not result in inadequate emergency access.
Proposed General Plan Update
Because the proposed Plan is a program-level planning effort, it does not directly address project-level design features or building specifications; however, the General Plan includes polices that once adopted would ensure efficient circulation and adequate access are provided in the city, which would help facilitate emergency response.
. Action T-2.1.C: Narrower Streets. Where aesthetic, safety and emergency access considerations can be adequately addressed, allow narrower streets in new development to create a more intimately-scaled street environment. . Policy T-6.3: Neighborhood-wide Approach. Wherever practical, require traffic calming projects to be done at a neighborhood level, rather than on a piecemeal basis. Street alterations that cause traffic to be displaced from one residential street to another should generally be discouraged. Street alterations that impede access by emergency vehicles should be prohibited. . Action T-6.3.A: Traffic Study Requirements for Road Changes. Require a study of traffic impacts and a plan for accommodating displaced traffic before making major changes to street design or circulation patterns
Any new streets or developments that would result from implementation of the proposed Plan would be subject to City engineering standards and the proposed Plan policies described above.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-65 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
In compliance with the State of California Emergency Services Act, Chapter 7 of Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code, the City of San Leandro has an emergency plan that is based on the State Emergency Management System and addresses all of the requirements of the law to safely respond to emergencies and to protect life, property and the environment.21 Ongoing implementation of the General Plan policies and the City’s engineering standards would ensure that adequate emergency access is provided in San Leandro. Therefore, impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed Plan would be less than significant.
Significance before Mitigation: Less than significant.
Proposed Zoning Code Amendments
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the proposed Plan. The proposed Zoning Code would implement the proposed Plan and would help to guide development in key areas of the city. Future development allowed under the proposed Zoning Code amendments would not have any separate or additional impacts that would affect emergency access, and all roadway improvements necessary to serve development under the Zoning Code amendments would be required to be consistent with the proposed General Plan policies listed above, and would be reviewed by appropriate City staff (such as Fire, Police and/or Building) prior to approval. Therefore, impacts from the proposed Zoning Code amendments would be less than significant.
TRAF-6 Implementation of the proposed Plan would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities.
Proposed General Plan Update
The Alameda Countywide Pedestrian Plan and Countywide Bicycle Plan, both enacted by the Alameda CTC, the Countywide Transit Plan, which is under development by the Alameda CTC, as well as Plan Bay Area: Strategy for a Sustainable Region, the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan enacted by the MTC in 2013, contain strategies designed to support alternative modes of transportation, including walking, bicycling, and public transit. The City of San Leandro’s Bike and Ped Master Plan identifies and prioritizes improvements to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle environment. However, in order to provide a conservative analysis, the traffic modeling completed for this Draft EIR does not assume extreme increases in biking, walking, or transit use in San Leandro, although that is an important goal of the proposed Plan.
21 City of San Leandro, Draft 2015 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan December 2015. Page 22. Accessed online athttp://www.sanleandro.org/services/emergency/lhmp/default.asp, May 27, 2016.
4.13-66 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
The proposed Plan includes policies and strategies that, once adopted, would ensure adequate public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities are available to the residents of San Leandro.
. Policy T-1.4: Transit Oriented Development. Ensure that properties adjacent to the City’s BART stations and along heavily used public transit routes are developed in a way that maximizes the potential for transit use and reduces dependence on single-occupancy vehicles. Such development should be of particularly high quality, include open space and other amenities, and respect the scale and character of nearby neighborhoods. . Action T-1.4.C: Evaluation of Transit Needs in New Development. Evaluate the need for public transit as part of the development review process, both for new projects and for re-use or redevelopment projects. . Policy T-2.1: Complete Streets Serving All Users and Modes. Create and maintain "complete” streets that provide safe, comfortable, and convenient travel through a comprehensive, integrated transportation network that serves all users. . Action T-2.1.A: Design Standards and Maintenance. Implement the design standards and maintenance practices outlined in the San Leandro Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, transit oriented development plans, and other documents that focus on balancing different transportation modes. . Policy T-2.3: Complete Streets Operating Procedures. Incorporate "Complete Streets" practices as a routine part of everyday operations, and a factor to be considered in every project, program, and practice relating to the transportation network. The concept of Complete Streets should be incorporated into the planning, funding, design, approval, and implementation processes for any construction, reconstruction, retrofit, maintenance, operations, alteration, or repair of streets, except where consistent with a formally adopted policy indicating where exceptions may apply. . Action T-2.3.A: Maintenance, Planning, and Design Practices. Continue to implement maintenance, planning, and design practices that are consistent with the desire to promote bicycling, walking, and public transit. . Action 2.3.C: Performance Measures. Collect and analyze baseline data that enables periodic evaluations of how well the transportation network of San Leandro is serving each category of users. . Policy T-2.6: Building Design and Site Planning. Ensure that the site planning and design of new development promotes the use of non-auto modes of transportation by including amenities such as sidewalks, bike lockers, and bus shelters. . Action T-2.6A: Design Guidelines. Update design guidelines and standards for the design of pedestrian and bicycle facilities to ensure compliance with state and federal (including American Disability Act) standards and best practices. . Policy T-2.7: Special Transportation Needs. Incorporate the special mobility needs of seniors, children, and persons with disabilities in planning for complete streets. The City recognizes that not all segments of the population can easily walk or bicycle to their destinations and will strive to reduce barriers to mobility through provisions such as disabled parking, larger street sign lettering, accessible pedestrian signals (APS), well-illuminated streets and well-maintained sidewalks, wheelchair ramps, improved para-transit, and other amenities to accommodate those who are less mobile.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-67 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Policy T-2.8: Car-Sharing and Bike-Sharing. Encourage car-sharing, bike-sharing and other programs that reduce the need for individual car ownership. Such programs should be focused in the Downtown area and near the city’s two BART stations. . Policy T-3.1: Citywide Bikeway System. Develop and maintain a bikeway system that meets the needs of both utilitarian and recreational users, reduces vehicle trips, and connects residential neighborhoods to employment and shopping areas, BART stations, schools, recreational facilities and other destinations throughout San Leandro and nearby communities. . Action T-3.1.A: Bikeway Plan Implementation. Maintain a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and update that Plan every five years to identify existing and future needs and provide specific recommendations for facility and program improvements and phasing. The Plan Map should be formatted for broad public distribution and should show key bicycle facilities, destinations, connections to nearby communities, and safety information. Any changes to the Plan should maintain consistency with city, county, regional, state, and federal policy documents. . Action T-3.1.B: Capital Improvement Scheduling. Include a prioritized list of bicycle and pedestrian improvements, along with cost estimates, in the City's Capital Improvements Program. The City should develop and apply ranking criteria for bicycle and pedestrian projects such as number of activity centers served, closure of critical gaps, elimination of safety hazards, level of existing use, and input from the public. Typical projects could include bikeway and bicycle parking installations and sidewalk and crosswalk improvements, as well as education programs and public awareness campaigns. . Policy T-3.2: Funding. Maximize the City’s eligibility for funding for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and aggressively pursue such funding to complete desired projects. . Policy T-3.5: Accommodation of Bicycles and Pedestrians. Require new development to incorporate design features that make walking, bicycling, and other forms of non-motorized transportation more convenient and attractive. Facilities for bicycles and pedestrians, including secured bicycle parking, clearly marked crosswalks, well-lit streets and sidewalks, landscaping, and street furniture should be provided within new employment areas, shopping destinations, multi-modal transportation facilities, and community facilities. . Action T-3.5.A: Removing Obstacles to Bicycle Travel. Address barriers to bicycling, such as lack of secure bicycle parking, signals which do not detect bicycles, difficulty of carrying significant baggage by bicycle, and limitations for bicycles on public transit. . Action T-3.5.B: Bicycles and Public Transit. Work with local and regional transit agencies to install bike racks and lockers (or expand existing installations) at transit stations and to expand opportunities to carry bicycles on buses and BART trains. Bicycle parking facilities should meet current best practices standards. . Policy T-3.6: Pedestrian Environment. Improve the walkability of all streets in San Leandro through the planning, implementing, and maintaining of pedestrian supportive infrastructure. . Policy T-3.7: Removing Barriers to Active Transportation. Reduce barriers to walking and other forms of active transportation such as incomplete or uneven sidewalks, lack of wheelchair ramps and curb cuts, sidewalk obstructions including cars parked on sidewalks, trail gaps, wide intersections, and poor sidewalk connections to transit stops.
4.13-68 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
. Action T-3.7.A: Wayfinding. Develop a citywide bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding (directional signage) system. . Action T-3.7.B: Priority Pedestrian Improvements. Maintain and periodically update a list of priority areas for pedestrian improvements in the city, emphasizing those areas where existing and planned uses will support the highest volumes of pedestrian travel and those areas where safety improvements are needed to ensure safe pedestrian passage. . Action T-3.7.C: Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossing Improvements. Improve crossings for pedestrians and cyclists at intersections in the City through the use of variable pavement materials, small curb radii, bulb outs, street trees and landscaping near corners, and other measures which shorten pedestrian crossings or increase driver awareness of non-vehicle traffic. Continue to ensure that sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities meet the principles of universal design and meet legally mandated and best practices requirements for accessibility. . Policy T-4.1: Coordination with Service Providers. Work collaboratively with AC Transit and BART to ensure that public transit service remains safe, reliable, and affordable, and to improve service frequency and coverage within San Leandro neighborhoods and employment centers. . Action T-4.3.A: Public/Private Partnerships for Shuttle Service. Continue to support LINKS shuttle bus service between BART and major workplaces in West San Leandro and pursue grants to sustain and expand this service as employment grows. Financial support for shuttle operations should continue to be provided through a special purpose business fee on benefitting properties. . Policy T-4.4: Coordination of Shuttle Services. Promote the consolidation of private shuttle services to provide more efficient and comprehensive service between the City’s employment centers and major public transit facilities, and to make the expansion of such service more viable. Where shuttle service is provided, it should supplement rather than compete with conventional public transit service. . Action T-4.4.A: Coordination of LINKS Scheduling and Routing. Work with AC Transit and BART to synchronize LINKS shuttle service with BART and bus service. This should include routing of AC Transit bus lines to avoid redundancy with LINKS lines and minimize the number of transfers, and the timing of LINKS arrivals and departures to coincide with BART schedules. . Policy T-4.6: Barrier Free Transit. Work with local public transit providers and social service agencies to eliminate barriers to personal mobility and more completely meet the transportation needs of persons with disabilities. . Policy T-4.7: Allocation of Regional Funds. Ensure that the City receives its fair share of the public funds allocated for transit services within the region. . Action T-4.8.A: Employee Transit Incentives. Promote the use of transit vouchers, transit passes, and other financial incentives by local businesses to encourage their employees to use public transportation when traveling to and from work. Promote similar incentives by local businesses to encourage their customers to use public transportation when shopping for goods and services. Such incentives may be required as part of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs, development agreements, or other appropriate mechanisms. . Policy T-4.9: BART Station Provisions for Bicycles and Pedestrians. Ensure that all BART stations and major bus routes are served by the bicycle and pedestrian systems. Bicycle and pedestrian
PLACEWORKS 4.13-69 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
connections between the Downtown San Leandro and Bay Fair BART stations and the surrounding neighborhoods, business districts, and community institutions should be improved, with special attention to the at-grade railroad crossings and connections through the parking lots. new, from Bike Ped Plan 5.1, also replaces 14.05 . Action T-4.9.A: Bike Sharing at BART. Include the city's two BART stations in future phases of regional bike-sharing programs. . Policy T-7.2: Capital Improvements. Identify capital improvements and other measures which improve the safety of bicyclists, pedestrians, and motor vehicles on San Leandro streets. . Action T-7.2.B: Pedestrian Safety Improvements. Develop programs to improve pedestrian safety at both controlled and uncontrolled intersections throughout the City. Programs that use features such as countdown crosswalks, lighted crosswalks, rectangular rapidly flashing beacons, accessible pedestrian signals, and similar features should be explored.
Implementation of the proposed Plan would therefore support and would not conflict with plans, programs and policies regarding bicycle or pedestrian facilities, or decrease the performance and safety of such facilities. Therefore, related impacts from implementation of the proposed Plan would be less than significant.
Significance before Mitigation: Less than significant.
Proposed Zoning Code Amendments
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Code would bring the Zoning Code into conformance with the proposed Plan. The proposed Zoning Code would implement the proposed Plan and would help to guide development in key areas of the city. Future development allowed under the proposed Zoning Code amendments would not have any separate or additional impacts that would affect public transit, bicycle facilities, or pedestrian facilities, and all improvements necessary to serve development under the Zoning Code amendments would be required to be consistent with the local and Countywide plans supporting alternative transportation described above. Therefore, impacts from the proposed Zoning Code amendments would be less than significant.
4.13.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The analysis of the proposed Plan, above, addresses cumulative impacts to the transportation network in the city and its surroundings; accordingly, cumulative impacts would be the same as proposed Plan- impacts.
Additional Information on Vehicle Miles Traveled
As discussed in Section 4.13.1.1, Regulatory Framework, SB 743 will eventually require impacts to transportation network performance to be viewed through a filter that promotes the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. SB 743 identified possible alternative metrics, including VMT and VMT per capita, which can help identify how projects (land development and infrastructure) affect GHG emissions, but do not
4.13-70 JUNE 1, 2016 SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
provide information about how the transportation network performs or functions with respect to efficiency or user experience. SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to analyze delay or LOS as part of other plans (i.e., the general plan), studies, or on-going network monitoring, but once the new CEQA Guidelines are adopted, LOS metrics may no longer constitute the sole basis for CEQA impacts. However, VMT has no currently adopted guidelines, standards, or definitions of impact. Therefore, this section provides a VMT discussion for informational purposes only and not as part of the CEQA findings of significance discussion.
Vehicle Miles Traveled with the Proposed Plan
As described previously in Section 4.13.3.1, Model Methodology, the Alameda Countywide Model was used to help evaluate cumulative transportation impacts of local land use decisions on the CMP system. Daily (24-hour) VMT were tabulated with the proposed Plan using the countywide travel demand model.
Total daily VMT and VMT per capita are TABLE 4.13-20 VMT PER CAPITA – EXISTING AND PROJECTED presented in Table 4.13-20. As shown in the Existing Projected table, VMT per capita is forecast to decrease to 2015 2035 25.5 miles per service population per day in Daily VMT 3,425,390 3,978,866 2035 with the proposed Plan, compared to 26.5 miles per service population per day in 2015 Households 31,320 36,685 under existing conditions. Total Population 86,615 102,595
Total Jobs 42,870 55,000 Total daily trips and VMT by trip orientation for cumulative conditions are presented Table VMT Per Capita 26.5 25.5 Source: Association of Bay Area Government (ABAG) Projections 2013; Kittelson 4.13-21. & Associates, Inc. 2015.
TABLE 4.13-21 DAILY TRIPS AND VMT BY TRIP ORIENTATION – CUMULATIVE CONDITIONS
Cumulative Cumulative Trips Cumulative Cumulative 2035 Trip Orientation 2035 Trips Proportions 2035 VMT VMT Proportions Total San Leandro VMTa 372,719 100% 3,978,866 100%
Internal-External VMTb 141,038 37.8% 1,894,328 47.6%
External-Internal VMTc 141,150 37.9% 1,917,114 48.2%
Internal-Internal VMTd 90,531 24.3% 164,506 4.2% Notes: Estimate of VMT is based on the current Alameda CTC Countywide Model and on ABAG Projection 2013 land use projections. a. Trips with one trip end outside San Leandro were counted as one trip-end, whereas trips with both ends in San Leandro were counted as two trip-ends. b. “Internal-External” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination outside San Leandro. c. “External-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base outside San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. d. “Internal-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2015.
PLACEWORKS 4.13-71 CITY OF SAN LEANDRO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE DRAFT EIR CITY OF SAN LEANDRO TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
A comparison of VMT by trip orientation between existing and cumulative conditions is presented in Table 4.13-22. VMT for the proposed Plan is fairly balanced between internal-external and external-internal trip making with a slight increase in the proportion of VMT. The increase in VMT with the proposed Plan is oriented slightly towards internal-external and external-internal trip versus the internal-internal trips. This indicates that internal-external and external-internal VMT is projected to grow faster than internal- internal VMT.
TABLE 4.13-22 VMT BY TRIP ORIENTATION COMPARISON
2015 2015 2035 Proposed Plan Trip Orientation Existing VMT Proportions Proposed Plan VMT Proportions Total San Leandro VMTa 3,425,390 100% 3,978,866 100%
Internal-External VMTb 1,625,513 47.4% 1,894,328 47.6%
External-Internal VMTc 1,646,233 48.1% 1,917,114 48.2%
Internal-Internal VMTd 150,745 4.5% 164,506 4.2% Notes: Estimate of VMT is based on the current Alameda CTC Countywide Model and on ABAG Projection 2013 land use projections. a. Trips with one trip end outside San Leandro were counted as one trip-end, whereas trips with both ends in San Leandro were counted as two trip-ends. b. “Internal-External” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination outside San Leandro. c. “External-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base outside San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. d. “Internal-Internal” VMT refers to VMT generated by trips associated with a home base in San Leandro and a work or non-work destination in San Leandro. Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 2015.
4.13-72 JUNE 1, 2016