Appendix I: Transportation Supporting Information
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
City of Richmond Richmond Country Club Residential Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Appendix I: Transportation Supporting Information FirstCarbon Solutions THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK City of Richmond Richmond Country Club Residential Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration I.1 - Draft Transportation Impact Analysis FirstCarbon Solutions THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Draft Report Transportation Impact Analysis for the Richmond Country Club Prepared for the City of Richmond May 6, 2020 490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 201 SANTA ROSA, CA 95401 707.542.9500 505 17th Street, 2nd Floor OAKLAND, CA 94612 510.444.2600 1276 Lincoln Avenue, Suite 204 SAN JOSE, CA 95125 650.314.8313 w-trans.com Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Transportation Setting ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Capacity Analysis ....................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Alternative Modes .................................................................................................................................................................. 32 Access and Circulation .......................................................................................................................................................... 33 Parking ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 36 Conclusions and Recommendations ............................................................................................................................... 37 Study Participants and References ................................................................................................................................... 39 Figures 1. Study Area and Existing Lane Configurations .................................................................................................................. 5 2. Existing Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 3. Background Traffic Volumes................................................................................................................................................. 16 4. Cumulative Traffic Volumes .................................................................................................................................................. 18 5. Site Plan ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 6. Project Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................................................... 24 7. Existing plus Project Traffic Volumes ................................................................................................................................. 25 8. Background plus Project Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................................................ 27 9. Cumulative plus Project Traffic Volumes ......................................................................................................................... 29 Tables 1. Bicycle Facility Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... 6 2. Intersection Level of Service Criteria ................................................................................................................................... 9 3. Existing Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ......................................................................................................... 15 4. Background Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ................................................................................................ 17 5. Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service .................................................................................................. 19 6. Trip Generation Summary ..................................................................................................................................................... 19 7. Trip Distribution Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................. 21 8. Citywide Vehicle Miles Traveled .......................................................................................................................................... 22 9. Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ....................................................... 23 10. Background and Background plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ...................................... 26 11. Cumulative and Cumulative plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service ......................................... 28 12. Cumulative 2040 Conditions Delay Index on CMP Routes ......................................................................................... 31 13. Parking Analysis Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 36 Transportation Impact Analysis for the Richmond Country Club May 6, 2020 i Appendices A. Intersection Level of Service Calculations B. Turn Lane Warrant Analyses C. Signal Warrant Analyses Transportation Impact Analysis for the Richmond Country Club ii May 6, 2020 Executive Summary The proposed project includes the construction of 102 single-family homes on the western portion of the Richmond Country Club site. The analysis addresses potential impacts at ten study intersections. The intersection of Castro Street/I-580 West Ramps currently operates at an unacceptable level of service during the p.m. peak hour and would be expected to continue doing so with the addition of project-generated trips and under Background (Existing plus Approved) Conditions. The intersection of San Pablo Avenue/Richmond Parkway currently operates at an unacceptable level of service during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours and would be expected to continue doing so with the addition of project-generated trips and under Background Conditions. The intersections of Castro Street/I-580 West Ramps, Canal Boulevard/I-580 East Ramps, San Pablo Avenue/ Richmond Parkway, and Blume Drive-I-80 South Ramps/Richmond Parkway would operate at unacceptable levels of service with or without the project under Cumulative conditions. The impact of the project on the study intersections would be within the range of added delay that is considered acceptable under applicable standards. The project VMT rate is expected to be less than the citywide average, indicating that the project would be expected to have a less-than-significant impact on vehicle miles traveled. The project should implement a TDM plan to encourage smarter travel and reduce the amount of congestion generated by the project. The operation at the at-grade railroad crossing at Giant Road/Giant Highway would be minimally impacted by the project. Signage at the intersection should be improved. The project is not expected to increase the Delay Index above significant levels identified in the CCTA Technical Procedures or above 5 percent, therefore the project will not cause a significant impact to the CMP routes. Access for pedestrians will be adequate upon construction of sidewalks between the project site and the nearest transit stop. Bicycle and transit facilities are adequate to serve the project site. A left-turn lane on Markovich Lane at the new street connection is not warranted under Cumulative plus Project volumes during either the a.m. or p.m. peak hour. Sight distances at the project driveway are adequate, as is internal vehicle circulation within the site. The Richmond Fire Department should be consulted to confirm that the site plan is consistent with their minimum standards for fire truck access. Transportation Impact Analysis for the Richmond Country Club May 6, 2020 1 Introduction This report presents an analysis of the potential transportation impacts that would be associated with the proposed development of 102 single family homes to be located at the Richmond Country Club in the City of Richmond. The traffic study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the City of Richmond and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques. Prelude The purpose of a traffic impact study is to provide City of Richmond staff and policy makers with data they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential traffic impacts of a proposed project, and any associated improvements that