4.12 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
4.12.1 INTRODUCTION
This section of the Draft EIR describes the transportation and circulation conditions in the area surrounding the project site, and identifies transportation impacts associated with the development of the California State University East Bay (CSUEB) Hayward campus (hereinafter Hayward campus) under the proposed Master Plan. The analysis focuses on potential impacts to intersections and roadway segments, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and transit service. Significant impacts are quantified and mitigation measures are identified to address these impacts, as necessary. All technical analyses related to this study are included in Appendix 4.12
Scoping comments received in response to the original and revised Notices of Preparation (NOPs) for this EIR requested that the EIR include the following:
The EIR should address project impacts on the intersection of Campus Drive and Hayward Boulevard and at intersections along Mission Boulevard.
The EIR should include the effects of the proposed project on the state highway system and the Congestion Management Program (CMP) facilities in the project area.
The traffic impact study should include the project’s trip generation, distribution and assignment; average daily traffic and peak hour volumes at all significantly affected streets, highways, and intersections; analysis of existing plus project traffic; cumulative traffic impacts, and mitigation measures.
The EIR should include measures to reduce motorized vehicle trips associated with the campus, including the use of TDM measures such as rideshare, flextime, transit, subsidized bus passes, bicycling, and telecommuting, and improved transit connections to BART stations (including Castro Valley BART station).
The EIR should address impacts to the Metropolitan Transportation System (MTS) roadway and transit systems and the impacts must be addressed for 2015 and 2030 conditions.
The EIR should consider opportunities to promote bicycle routes.
The University needs to improve transit access to the campus and reduce the amount of parking that is provided in order to encourage alternative transportation.
The University should evaluate economics of parking structures and the effect of parking charges on parking demand.
The University should evaluate various aspects of bus transit including provision of rapid bus service and financing of bus service. The EIR should evaluate the level of service of transit.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-1 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Parking structures are unacceptable and those need to be compared to transit.
The University should consider a connection between Hayward Boulevard and East Loop Road as this connection would alleviate congestion on Carlos Bee and Hayward Boulevard.
The City is considering realignment and reconstruction of the steepest portion of Carlos Bee Boulevard to address traffic safety. Additional traffic added by the proposed project could exacerbate this condition.
All of the scoping comments pertinent to the project’s traffic impacts are addressed in the analysis below. Although year 2030 is the horizon year for the buildout of the campus under the proposed Master Plan, the intersection impacts were assessed against 2025 conditions, which is the horizon year of the City of Hayward Travel Demand Model. A separate roadway segment analysis, prepared to meet the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency’s requirements, was conducted for the years 2015 and 2030, using the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model.
The traffic impact analysis does not account for the potential physical realignment of Carlos Bee Boulevard. However, if the City moves forward with this improvement project, it would benefit existing and future traffic flows, and the proposed Master Plan would not make such a project infeasible, based on the information available.
The bicycle impact analysis acknowledges that the proposed Master Plan accommodates bicycles on site, but does not identify impacts on nor improvements needed to off-site bicycle routes, due to the low existing and projected future level of bicycle commuting to the campus, which results from the surrounding topography combined with typical commute trip lengths.
The transit impact analysis is performed for year 2025, but does not analyze transit financing nor detailed operations options such as bus rapid transit, as these analyses are outside the scope of an EIR.
The proposed Master Plan contains travel demand management policies and programs, including parking pricing management, to reduce vehicle trip generation and associated parking demand, with the overall goals of creating a more sustainable campus, The costs of constructing and operating a parking structure and parking charges affect the feasibility of building such a structure, but not the environmental impact analysis per se so therefore that discussion is not included in this Draft EIR. Travel demand is generated primarily by enrollment. Construction of a parking structure provides a means to use campus land more efficiently to meet travel demand that still remains after transportation demand management (TDM) measures have been implemented.
For an evaluation of why transit would not serve as a full alternative to the proposed parking structure, please see Section 3.0 in Volume 2.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-2 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
The proposed Master Plan includes the framework of a transportation demand management (TDM) program and identifies a series of measures that the Campus will consider for inclusion in a TDM program that it will develop, adopt, and implement to minimize the number of single-occupant vehicle trips that would be added by campus growth to the study area road network. Two measures, flextime and telecommuting, already apply to the majority of the campus population—students and faculty— because their schedules vary from term to term and many study or do course preparation and grading at home. Some administrative staff positions also have flexible hours, as appropriate to their work assignments.
4.12.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
4.12.2.1 Existing Roadway System
Figure 4.12-1, Site Location Map and Study Intersection Locations, shows the traffic study area. The Hayward campus is located in Hayward, California, about two miles southeast of downtown. The campus is directly served by Carlos Bee Boulevard and Harder Road, both of which connect to Mission Boulevard, which is State Route (SR) 238 in the campus vicinity. Regional access to the campus is provided by I-580 to the north, and I-880 and SR 92 to the west. The following describes the key highways and roadways in the study area.
Freeways
Interstate 580 (I-580) is a six-lane freeway connecting Hayward to the Contra Costa Tri-Valley and San Joaquin Valley to the east, and Oakland/Berkeley to the north.
Interstate 880 (I-880) is a four- to five-lane freeway running north-south through the project area, connecting Hayward to San Jose in Santa Clara County and to Oakland to the north, and to San Francisco and points north of Oakland, via I-80.
SR 238 (SR 238) is a short, four-lane freeway connection between I-580 and I-880, near Hayward’s north border. SR 238 continues as a non-freeway facility on Foothill Boulevard and Mission Boulevard south of Foothill in Hayward.
State Route 92 (SR 92) is a six-lane freeway starting at I-880 and continuing west, connecting Hayward to San Mateo via the Hayward-San Mateo bridge.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-3 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Local Roadways
Foothill Boulevard is a six-lane arterial connecting I-580 to Mission Boulevard on downtown Hayward. Foothill Boulevard is Route 238 along this section.
Mission Boulevard is a four-lane arterial connecting East 14th Street and Oakland to the north to I-880 to the south in Fremont. In the study area, Mission Boulevard is SR 185 between East 14th and Foothill, and SR 238 south of Foothill.
Hayward Boulevard is four-lane arterial connecting the Hayward hills to Carlos Bee Boulevard at the campus entrance.
Carlos Bee Boulevard is a four-lane arterial connecting the campus to Mission Boulevard, and providing a route to SR 92 via Orchard Avenue and Soto Road.
Harder Road is a four-lane arterial connecting the campus to SR 92 at Santa Clara Street.
Tennyson Road is a four-lane arterial connecting Mission Boulevard to Industrial Avenue, providing access to I-880 at a full-access interchange.
East Loop Road is a four-lane campus road that runs along the eastern side of the developed campus core between approximately Campus Drive to the north and Harder Road to the south.
West Loop Road is a four-lane campus road that runs along the western side of the campus core between Campus Drive to the north and Harder Road to the south.
Campus Drive is a four-lane arterial to the north of the existing campus which connects Hayward Boulevard and 2nd Street.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-4 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 Castro Valley Blvd 185 580 580
Redwood
238 Rd d6 R Grove Way Mattox
Center St 7 F oo th B St il l B lv Mission Blvd d A St
238 D St 880 8 E St E Ave 9 2 nd St A St 10 5 B St hland ig Bl
238 H vd Campus Dr D St D D St D Jackson St 11 Hesperian Blvd 4 Ha arlos yw 12 C Be EastLoo a e B pRd rd 92 lv 1 B Winton Ave d 2 lv W d est Lo S o a Orchard Ave p n R t d a D C ob la b r 3 el a Av Dr S e ine t 13 l y
Harder Rd k 15 PROJECT S Mission Blvd SITE
880 14
Legend: Jackson St W. Tennyson Rd 238 92 1 = Study Intersection
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers – September 2008
FIGURE 4.12-1 Site Location Map and Study Intersection Locations
961-002•10/08 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Study Intersections
The 15 intersections studied in this analysis were selected in consultation with City of Hayward staff, and are shown in Figure 4.12-1. They are listed below.
1. Carlos Bee Boulevard/Hayward Blvd.
2. Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road
3. Harder Road/West Loop Road
4. Hayward Boulevard/Campus Drive
5. 2nd Street/Campus Drive
6. Foothill Boulevard/Mattox Rd./Castro Valley Boulevard
7. Foothill Boulevard /Grove Way
8. Foothill Boulevard /A Street
9. Foothill Boulevard /D Street
10. FoothillBoulevard /Mission Boulevard /Jackson Street/E Street
11. Mission Boulevard /Highland Boulevard
12. Mission Boulevard /Carlos Bee Boulevard /Orchard Avenue
13. Mission Boulevard /Harder Road
14. Mission Boulevard /Tennyson Road
15. Jackson Street/Santa Clara Street/Harder Road
Mission Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard (SR 238) intersections are evaluated in this traffic study. The proposed project would add a small number of trips to other state facilities including I-880 and I-580. The number of trips would be too small to significantly affect the operation of those facilities. The analysis presented below included an evaluation of the CMP and MTS facilities.
4.12.2.2 Intersection Volumes and Levels of Service
AM and PM peak period traffic counts were conducted in October 2007 at the study intersections. The intersection control type, lane configuration, and peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 4.12-2, Existing Intersection Lane Geometry and Traffic Control. The methodology used to assess the level of service (LOS) at the study intersections is described below.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-6 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Signalized Intersections
In accordance with the City of Hayward’s Requirements for Traffic Studies (May 2003), traffic conditions at signalized intersections were evaluated using the method from Chapter 9 of the Transportation Research Board’s 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. This operations analysis method uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the average stopped delay experienced by motorists traveling through an intersection. Table 4.12-1, Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria, summarizes the relationship between average stopped delay per vehicle and LOS for signalized intersections.
Table 4.12-1 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria
Average Stopped Delay Per Level of Vehicle Service Description (Seconds) A Low delay, extremely favorable progression, 5.0 most vehicles arrive on green, many do not stop at all. B Low delay, extremely favorable progression, 5.0 to 15.0 most vehicles arrive on green, many do not stop at all. C Fair progression, individual cycle failures 15.0 to 25.0 (some waiting vehicles cannot get through on green), number of vehicles stopping is significant. D Congestion becomes noticeable, longer delays, 25.0 to 40.0 unfavorable progression, higher volume/capacity ratios, many vehicles stop, individual cycle failures noticeable E High delay values, poor progression, high 40.0 to 60.0 volume/capacity ratios, frequent cycle failures. F Unacceptable to most drivers, oversaturation 60.0 (more vehicles arrive in an hour than can be served in an hour), high volume/capacity ratios, many cycle failures, poor progression.
Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 1994).
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-7 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - August 2008
FIGURE 4.12-2 Existing Intersection Lane Geometry and Traffic Control
961-002•10/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - August 2008
FIGURE 4.12-3 Existing Traffic Volumes
961-002•10/08 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Unsignalized Intersections
In accordance with the City of Hayward’s Requirements for Traffic Studies (May 2003), traffic conditions at unsignalized intersections were evaluated using the method from Chapter 10 of the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual. With this method, operations are defined by the average total delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each movement that must yield the right-of-way. This incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping and moving up in the queue. For all-way stop-controlled intersections, the total delay is calculated for the intersection as a whole. At two-way or side street-controlled intersections, the delay (and LOS) is calculated for each controlled movement, the left-turn movement from the major street, and the entire intersection. For controlled approaches composed of a single lane, the delay is computed as the average of all movements in that lane. The delays for the entire intersection and for the movement or approach with the highest delay are reported. Table 4.12-2, Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria, summarizes the relationship between delay and LOS for unsignalized intersections.
Table 4.12-2 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Criteria
Level of Average Control Delay Service Description of Traffic Conditions (seconds/vehicle) A Little or no delays 5.0 B Short traffic delays 5.0 to 10.0 C Average traffic delays 10.0 to 20.0 D Long traffic delays 20.0 to 30.0 E Very long traffic delays 30.0 to 45.0 F Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded 45.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 1994)
TRAFFIX version 7.9 was used to calculate signalized and unsignalized intersection LOS. Table 4.12-3, Existing Intersection Levels of Service, lists the current service levels at the study intersections. The City of Hayward General Plan and Traffic Study requirements cite a LOS standard of D at intersections during peak commute periods, except when a LOS E may be acceptable due to costs of mitigation or when there would be other unacceptable impacts. Due to heavy regional and local travel demand through downtown Hayward on SR 238, SR 92, and SR 185, the City has used LOS E as the standard of significance in recent environmental documents such as the SR 238 Improvement Project EIR.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-10 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-3 Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Traffic Delay2 Intersection Control1 Peak Hour (Seconds) LOS3 1. Carlos Bee Blvd./Hayward Blvd. Signal AM 22 C PM 20 C 2. Carlos Bee Blvd./West Loop Rd. AWS AM 9 B PM 9 B 3. Harder Rd./West Loop Rd. AWS AM 7 B PM 12 C 4. Hayward Blvd./Campus Dr. Signal AM 7 B PM 9 B 5. 2nd St./Campus Dr. SSSC AM 2 (6) A (B) PM 1 (8) A (B) 6. Foothill Blvd./Mattox Rd./Castro Valley Blvd. Signal AM 33 D PM 32 D 7. Foothill Blvd./Grove Way Signal AM 17 C PM 19 C 8. Foothill Blvd./A St. Signal AM 33 D PM 25 D 9. Foothill Blvd./D St. Signal AM 29 D PM 31 D 10. Foothill Blvd./Mission Blvd./Jackson St./E St. Signal AM 52 E PM 38 E 11. Mission Blvd./Highland Blvd. Signal AM 14 B PM 15 C 12. Mission Blvd./Carlos Bee Blvd./Orchard Ave. Signal AM 43 E PM 47 E 13. Mission Blvd./Harder Rd. Signal AM 43 E PM 46 E 14. Mission Blvd./Tennyson Rd. Signal AM 20 C PM 44 E 15. Jackson St./Santa Clara St./Harder Rd. Signal AM 59 E PM 49 E
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1. Signal, Side-Street Stop Control (SSSC) or All-Way Stop (AWS). 2. For side-street stop-controlled intersections, delays for worst movement are shown. 3. Intersections operating at unacceptable levels (LOS E or LOS F) are shown in bold.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-11 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Currently, five of the study intersections operate at LOS E in one or both peak hours, including:
Foothill Boulevard/Mission Boulevard/Jackson Street/E Street (AM and PM peak hours)
Mission Boulevard/CarlosBee Boulevard/Orchard Avenue (AM and PM peak hours)
Mission Boulevard/Harder Road (AM and PM peak hours)
Mission Boulevard/Tennyson Road (PM peak hour only)
Jackson Street/Santa Clara Street/Harder Road (AM and PM peak hours)
4.12.2.3 Congestion Management Program Network and Current Operating Conditions
The Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) is responsible for maintaining the Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Alameda County. The CMP requires that LOS standards be established and monitored biennially on the Alameda County CMP designated roadway system. In the project traffic study area, the CMP designated system includes I-880, I-580, SR 238 (including the freeway portion, Foothill Boulevard, and Mission Boulevard), SR 92, SR 185 (Mission between SR 238 and Foothill Boulevard), A Street between Foothill Boulevard and I-880, and Tennyson Road. The CMA also requested that Harder Road, B Street, and D Street be included in this study. The CMA has established LOS E as the standard for all CMP designated system facilities, except where the segment operated at LOS F in 1991, when the first CMP was prepared. In the project study area, there are several such “grandfathered” segments:
SR 238 between I-880 and I-580 (Eastbound, PM)
I-880 between Tennyson and SR 92 (Northbound, PM)
I-880 between SR 92 and A Street (Northbound, PM)
I-880 between SR 238 and A Street (Southbound, PM)
SR 92 between Toll Plaza and I-880 (Eastbound, PM)
SR 92 between Clawiter and Toll Plaza (Westbound, PM)
SR 92 between I-880 and Mission (Eastbound, PM)
SR 238 (Mission) between Jackson and Sorenson (Southbound, PM)
The CMA’s monitoring program uses “floating car” travel time runs to measure the average travel speed and corresponding operating condition on the CMP designated system. The CMA’s 2006 LOS Monitoring
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-12 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Report lists four LOS F segments in the study area, two of which are grandfathered due to the LOS F condition in 1991:
SR 238 between I-580 and I-880, Westbound, PM
I-880 between Alvarado-Niles and Tennyson, Northbound, PM
SR 238 between I-880 and I-880, Eastbound, PM (grandfathered)
SR 92 between Clawiter and I-880 Eastbound, PM (grandfathered)
4.12.2.4 Transit Service
Transit service in the vicinity of the project site is provided by Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and Alameda-Contra Costa Transit (AC Transit), and a University-operated shuttle.
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
BART provides regional rail commuter transit service. The Downtown Hayward BART Station is located approximately 2 miles northwest of the project site on B Street. The South Hayward BART Station is located approximately 2.5 miles south of the project site on Dixon Street. Two of BART’s five lines pass through both BART stations, providing direct service to Richmond, Fremont, San Francisco, and Daly City. BART service from Pittsburg/Bay Point, Dublin/Pleasanton, and San Francisco International Airport (SFO) does not pass through the Hayward and South Hayward stations. The Castro Valley BART station is located approximately 2 miles to the north of the campus.
Table 4.12-4, Peak Hour Load Factors by Line at Hayward and Castro Valley BART Stations, presents the peak hour BART ridership on the lines passing through the downtown Hayward BART station (the Fremont-Richmond and Fremont–Daly City lines) and at the Castro Valley BART station (the Dublin/Pleasanton – Daly City line). Currently, the trains are operating under capacity at these stations.
Hillhopper Shuttle
The Hillhopper Shuttle, operated by the University, provides free service between the Downtown Hayward BART station and the CSUEB Hayward campus during the weekday morning and evening peak hours. The shuttle operates at 25 to 30 minute headways during weekday mornings (7:15 AM–9:37 AM), afternoons (4:40 PM–7:02 PM) and evenings (7:45 PM–10:22 PM). On Friday evenings service ends at 6:37 PM.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-13 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-4 Peak Hour Load Factors by Line at Hayward and Castro Valley BART Stations
Maximum Load Maximum Load Line Peak Hour Capacity1 Peak Hour (Passenger/Car) Downtown Hayward Station Fremont – Daly City NB 3,600 7:30–8:30 AM 2,235 Fremont – Daly City NB 3,600 5:30–6:30 PM 2,659 Fremont – Richmond NB 2,800 7:20–8:20 AM 1,231 Fremont – Richmond NB 2,800 5:00–6:00 PM 1,393 Castro Valley Station Dublin/Pleasanton – Daly City WB 3,600 7:10–8:10 AM 1,844 Dublin/Pleasanton – Daly City WB 3,600 5:20–6:20 PM 2,289
Based on 100 passengers per car, train sizes from BART staff, and 4 trains per hour in peak hour Source: BART, July 2008
AC Transit Routes
AC Transit operates two local routes in the vicinity of the project site, shown in Figure 4.12-4, Existing Transit Route Map.
Route 92 operates between the CSUEB Hayward campus, Downtown Hayward BART, and Chabot College with 15-minute headways between 5:56 AM and 11:02 PM on weekdays. The route is extended to serve the South Hayward BART Station on weekends, operating with 60-minute headways between 7:42 AM and 7:36 PM. Table 4.12-5, AC Transit Loads, Boardings, and Alightings (Average Weekday), gives the current ridership data for Route 92 at the Downtown Hayward BART Station and the various campus stops.
Route 94 provides weekday service between the Hayward Highlands neighborhood south of the project site and the Downtown Hayward BART station via Hayward Boulevard and East Avenue in the project study area, with one morning stop and one afternoon stop at Hayward High School. This route operates with 45-minute headways during weekday mornings (6:25 AM–9:19 AM) and afternoons (3:15 PM to 7:14 PM), with one additional eastbound run at 1:46 PM.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-14 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-5 AC Transit Loads, Boardings, and Alightings (Average Weekday) 4 2 6 5 1 3 Bus Line Stop Location Directions Average Capacity (seats) Average Load Average Load Factor Maximum Load Maximum Load Factor Boards (Ons) Alightings (Offs)
Downtown Hayward NB 9.1 21% 34 79% 329 333 36 BART Station SB 9.5 22% 24 56% 384 289 NB 5.2 12% 27 63% 1 63 West Loop/Carlos Bee 36 SB 6.0 14% 27 63% 25 0 NB 4.6 11% 14 32% 7 44 Old Hillary 36
NB 4.1 9% 11 25% 1 26 92 Parking Lot G 36
NB 3.4 8% 8 19% 4 43 Parking Lot F 36
NB 2.3 5% 5 12% 15 82 Harder/Lot C 36
West Loop/Warren NB 0.3 1% 2 5% 319 0 36 Hall SB 5.6 13% 27 63% 151 95
Source: March-June 2008 data provided by AC Transit, July 2008. Bold indicated maximum load factor above seating capacity. 1. Number of passengers on the bus averaged on a typical weekday. 2. Average load divided by average seated capacity (36). 3. Maximum number of passengers on the bus observed on a typical weekday. 4. Maximum load divided by average seated capacity (36). 5. Total number of passengers boarding the bus at this location on a typical weekday. 6. Total number of passengers alighting the bus at this location on a typical weekday.
Amtrak
The Hayward Amtrak train station is located approximately 2.5 miles northwest of the project site on Meekland Avenue. Amtrak’s Capital Corridor route serves this station. The Capitol Corridor route connects San Jose to the Sacramento region with approximately 24 trains per day.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-15 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 Castro Valley Blvd 185 580 580
Redwood
238 Rd Rd Grove Way Matto x
Center St F oo th B St il l B lv d Mission Blvd A St
238 D St 880 E St E Ave 2 nd St A St bBARTa
B St land igh Blv
238 H d Campus Dr
D St D D St D Jackson St Hesperian Blvd
los Hay Car Be wa e B Wes rd lvd t Lo B 92 op lv Winton Ave Rd d
Ea S st L a Orchard Ave n t a d C D la ob r b a el A S v r t e e D i n l y
Harder Rd k
S
Mission Blvd Legend:
= AC Transit Route 92 = AC Transit Route 94 = AC Transit Route 92 880
(weekend only) BART ba = BART Line Jackson St W. Tennyson Rd 238 = Amtrak Line 92
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers – August 2008
FIGURE 4.12-4 Existing Transit Route Map
961-002•11/08 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
4.12.2.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle facilities fall into three classes:
Class I Bikeway– Typically called a “bike path,” a Class I bikeway provides bicycle travel on a paved right-of-way completely separated from any street or highway.
Class II Bikeway – Often referred to as a “bike lane,” a Class II bikeway provides a striped and stenciled lane for one-way travel on a street or highway.
Class III Bikeway – Generally referred to as a “bike route,” a Class III bikeway provides for shared use with motor vehicle traffic and is identified only by signing.
According to the City of Hayward Bicycle Master Plan, updated in October 2007, there are currently the following bicycle facilities in the project study area:
Class III routes on Hayward Boulevard – Carlos Bee Boulevard – Orchard Avenue from the eastern city limits to Soto Road; on Campus Drive between Hayward Boulevard and Second Street; and on Whitman Street – Sycamore Avenue – Silva Avenue – Meekland Avenue – Grand Street – Western Avenue, roughly paralleling Mission Boulevard to the west and providing a north-south route between the project site and downtown Hayward.
A Class II bike lane on Harder Road – Santa Clara Street from Westview Way to A Street
The Hayward Bicycle Master Plan includes one potential new bikeway that could be built in the project area: the Hayward Fault Trail, which is included in the Mission-Foothills Neighborhood Plan adopted in 1992.
Pedestrian facilities in the immediate project area include sidewalks along a portion of the north side of Carlos Bee Avenue, and along Harder Road near the campus entrance.
4.12.3 REGULATORY SETTING
The City of Hayward General Plan (adopted March 12, 2002) was used to provide evaluation criteria for determining project impacts. Key statements from Section 3, Circulation, which were used for reference in this study, are summarized below.
Circulation Policy 3: Minimize Adverse Impacts of Regional Traffic on Existing Neighborhoods
1. Minimize adverse impacts of road construction and expansion projects on neighborhoods and the downtown.
2. Identify and pursue alternatives to road construction and expansion as necessary for improving traffic flows.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-17 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
3. Evaluate circulation patterns and develop appropriate traffic-calming measures to discourage through traffic in neighborhoods.
Circulation Policy 4: Improve Mobility to Foster Economic Vitality
1. Provide a safe and efficient transportation system for the movement of people, goods and services through and within Hayward.
2. Provide leadership in educating the community about the benefits of commuting via alternative transportation modes and other ways to help the environment in making transportation choices.
3. Encourage staggered work hours and flexible schedule options to distribute traffic loads.
4. Encourage use of telecommuting and home offices to reduce the need for trips to work, shopping, libraries, and other frequent destinations.
5. Provide leadership in development of regional and local Transportation Demand Management strategies (e.g., HOV lanes, preferential parking, car/van pools, casual car pools, subsidized transit passes).
Circulation Policy 5: Improve Coordination among Public Agencies and Transit Providers
1. Consider the needs of transit riders, pedestrians, people in wheelchairs, cyclists, and others in long-range planning and the review of development proposals.
2. Encourage AC Transit and BART to expand access to cyclists, including providing racks on buses and secure bicycle parking.
3. Work with AC Transit to coordinate routes and service times and to post routes and schedules at bus stops.
4. Seek to provide attractive, sheltered bus stops whenever feasible throughout the City that are sensitive to the needs of each neighborhood in location and design.
5. Promote effective intermodal connections at transit stations.
Circulation Policy 6: Support Expansion and Reconfiguration of Public Transit Service to Meet Demand, Provide Greater Mobility, and Reduce Traffic Congestion
1. Promote improved transit service along higher density corridors, providing service frequencies of at least 15 minutes during peak hours in the densest corridors.
2. Encourage alternatives to diesel transit coach service in less dense neighborhoods.
3. Urge AC Transit to expand service to underserved areas in Hayward.
4. Advise AC Transit of proposed changes in street networks which may affect bus service, and require developers to discuss with AC Transit the potential impacts of their projects.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-18 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Circulation Policy 7: Address Special Needs of Transit Users
1. Continue to promote paratransit services for all Hayward residents with special needs, to include both mandated (ADA) and non-mandated services.
2. Encourage AC Transit to consider demographic factors in establishing its basic route structure; service should be available within 1/4 mile of areas with especially high concentrations of senior citizens, persons with disabilities, low-income residents, and school-aged children.
3. Achieve full compliance with regulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and improve accessibility of transit stations and vehicles to seniors and other persons with special needs.
4. Improve security on transit and implement design standards for lighting, walkways and landscaping that promote a feeling of safety at transit stops.
5. Give priority for sidewalk and other pedestrian improvements for pathways to key transit stops.
Circulation Policy 8: Create Improved and Safer Circulation Facilities for Pedestrians.
1. Complete planned sidewalk system and maintain and repair sidewalks to ensure pedestrian safety.
2. Increase consideration of pedestrian needs including appropriate improvements to crosswalks, signal timing, signage, and curb ramps.
3. Enhance pedestrian linkages from neighborhoods to recreational facilities and open spaces with pedestrian paths, creekside walks, and utility greenways.
4. Encourage design of development that contributes to continuous pedestrian pathways and pedestrian connectivity.
Circulation Policy 9: Provide the opportunity for safe, convenient, and pleasant bicycle travel throughout all areas of Hayward.
1. Implement system of bikeways throughout the City (per the Bicycle Master Plan) tying residential areas to commercial areas and to recreational open space along the shoreline and in the hills.
2. Provide the related facilities and services necessary to allow bicycle travel to assume a significant role as a local alternative mode of transportation and recreation.
3. Encourage the use of bicycles as a pleasant means of travel and recreation embodying physical, environmental, and social benefits.
Circulation Policy 10: Encourage Land Use Patterns that Promote Transit Usage
1. Encourage transit-oriented development; where appropriate, encourage intensive new residential and commercial development within 1/2 mile of transit stations or 1/4 mile of major bus routes.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-19 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
2. Encourage mixed-use residential and commercial development to reduce the need for multi- destinational trips.
3. Promote high-density new residential development, including residential above commercial uses, near transit facilities, activity generators, and along major arterials.
4. Encourage alternatives to automobile transportation through development policies and provision of transit, bike, and pedestrian amenities.
5. Continue to require large developments to provide bus turnouts and shelters, and convenient pedestrian access to transit stops.
6. Encourage design of development that facilitates the use of transit. Improving Local Access and Circulation
Circulation Policy 11: Enhance the Capability of the Arterial Street Network to Reduce Congestion and Improve Traffic Flow.
1. Seek a minimum Level of Service D at intersections during the peak commute periods except when a LOS E may be acceptable due to costs of mitigation or when there would be other unacceptable impacts.
2. Consider alternatives to street widening that balance the needs of pedestrian and bicycle movements with that of vehicles.
3. Focus improvements on arterials with transit service to preserve operating speeds.
4. Add needed traffic signals and coordinate signals to optimize traffic flow.
5. Review and comment on any development in the county or adjoining cities which might add to Hayward's traffic problems; work to reduce negative effects.
Circulation Policy 12: Improve Access to the Downtown and Other Major Activity Centers
1. Improve access to and circulation within the Downtown area, consistent with the Downtown Design Plan.
2. Improve transit links from the BART stations to other major activity centers such as Southland Mall and California State University-Hayward.
3. Promote shuttle service between the Amtrak and BART stations and other focal points in the Downtown area.
4. Improve access to and circulation within the Industrial Corridor, especially with regard to public transportation.
Circulation Policy 13. Provide for Future Parking Demand in Ways that Optimize Mode Choice
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-20 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
1. Consider reduced parking for new residential developments that fulfill elderly, disabled, or other special housing needs and/or are located near public transit.
2. Encourage developers/employers to offer transit passes or other transit enhancements to offset some parking requirements, pursuant to provisions of the Parking Ordinance.
3. Coordinate with other public and institutional parking suppliers (e.g., BART, Chabot College, Kaiser) in the provision of parking, parking charges and preferential parking.
4. Consider consolidation and expansion of downtown parking with multi-level parking structures.
5. Consider park-and-ride lots for bus patrons and for carpooling centers.
Circulation Policy 14. Seek to Address Traffic Operations and Safety Concerns
1. Provide clear and consistent signage and roadway markings, and strengthen enforcement of traffic laws through increased patrols.
2. Evaluate ways to reduce traffic speeds in neighborhoods through use of various traffic calming measures.
3. Require trucks to use designated routes rather than local streets and prohibit overnight and other specified truck parking activities in residential areas.
Circulation Policy 15. Utilize All Possible Sources of Funding for Proposed Transportation Improvements.
1. Encourage Federal and State agencies to allocate funds for freeway, highway, and transit improvements and pursue all available funding for alternative modes of transportation.
2. Seek funding through Regional and County measures for transportation improvements.
3. Utilize local financing mechanisms, such as the Supplemental Building and Construction Improvement Tax, to help fund transportation projects, and pursue establishment of the Industrial Assessment District to help fund needed improvements in the Industrial Corridor.
4. Maintain a comprehensive Capital Improvement Program that adequately addresses all modes of transportation.
4.12.4 IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
4.12.4.1 Significance Criteria
The following standards of significance have been defined for purposes of transportation impact evaluation. These standards were used by the City of Hayward in its recent Route 238 Corridor Improvement Project Draft EIR (March 2007). The impact of the proposed project on traffic would be
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-21 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
considered significant if it would exceed the following significance criteria, in accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and the CSU CEQA Handbook:
Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, volume-to- capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections); or exceed, individually or cumulatively, a LOS standards established by the local jurisdictions for designated roads and highways.
To evaluate whether the traffic added by the proposed project would be substantial or whether it would cause an exceedance of a LOS standard, the following thresholds were used:
The addition of project traffic would cause the LOS at study intersections to either individually or cumulatively exceed LOS E during the peak commute hours.
If an intersection is already operating at LOS F, a significant impact would occur if project traffic causes the delay per vehicle to increase by 4 seconds or more.
Result in a change in traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels of a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses.
Result in inadequate emergency access.
Result in inadequate parking capacity. Note that the Court of Appeals has held that parking is not part of the permanent physical environment; that parking conditions change over time as people change their travel patterns; and that unmet parking demand created by a project need not be considered a significant environmental effect under CEQA unless it would cause significant secondary effects. Such effects could include recirculating vehicles hunting for scarce parking spaces, and parking overflow that causes nearby local streets to experience a large increase in traffic volume inconsistent with the capacity of a local residential roadway.
Conflicts with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation.
4.12.4.2 Methodology
Horizon Year used in Analysis
Although year 2030 is the horizon year for the buildout of the campus under the proposed Master Plan, the intersection impacts are assessed against 2025 conditions, which is the horizon year of the City of Hayward Travel Demand Model. The analysis is conservative because it imposes full buildout traffic on 2025 conditions. A separate roadway segment analysis, prepared to meet the Alameda County CMA’s requirements, was conducted for the years 2015 and 2030, using the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-22 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Traffic Forecasting Methodology
The Future No Project intersection traffic projections are based on the City of Hayward Travel Demand Model runs conducted for the Route 238 Improvement Project EIR in 2007. The 2025 traffic volumes at the study intersections along Mission and Foothill Boulevards were taken from that analysis to ensure consistency. At the direction of the City of Hayward, the Route 238 Improvement Project was assumed to be completed in the forecasts and the traffic operations analysis. The improvement project includes conversion of portions of Mission Boulevard and Foothill Boulevard to one-way operation, and widening of portions of these roadways in the downtown.
For intersections not included in the Route 238 Improvement Project traffic study,1 traffic forecasts prepared with the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model were compared to the City of Hayward Travel Demand Model forecasts from the Route 238 study at nearby intersections, and the forecasts were adjusted to approximate the traffic growth at these locations. The Future With Project traffic projections were prepared by adding traffic generated by the project (discussed below) onto the Future No Project baseline volumes. The project traffic was generated, distributed, and assigned using a TRAFFIX model which allows trips and paths to be directly selected.
For the CMP system impact evaluation, roadway segment projections were prepared with the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model. For the Future No Project case, the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) containing the Hayward campus was modified to remove growth in the campus. The Future With Project traffic projections were prepared as described above, i.e., by adding project traffic using the TRAFFIX model.
Project Description
The proposed Master Plan circulation and parking plans are shown on Figure 4.12-5.a, Vehicular Circulation Plan, Figure 4.12-5.b, Parking Plan, Figure 4.12-5.c, Transit Plan, and Figure 4.12-5.d, Pedestrian Circulation Plan.
The proposed Master Plan envisions campus growth to 18,000 full-time equivalent students (FTES), up from the 8,758 FTES present in the fall 2007 traffic baseline, with associated faculty and staff growth. Up to 5,000 students would be housed on the campus, up from the 820 housed on campus in the traffic baseline. Faculty/staff housing is envisioned for three potential sites: at the northeast corner of Hayward Boulevard/Campus Drive; south of Carlos Bee Boulevard and west of campus; and south of campus adjacent to Pioneer Heights with access either from the Pioneer Heights student residence area or from
1 Intersections 1, 3, 4, 5, and 15.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-23 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Grandview Avenue southeast of the campus. For purposes of traffic impact evaluation, a total of 220 faculty/staff residences are assumed, distributed among the three sites.
The proposed Master Plan includes a potential new entrance (third entrance) from the east on Hayward Boulevard, which would serve to better distribute vehicle trips internally and provide a major new gateway to the campus. This new connection, which would be controlled by a traffic signal, would also accommodate travel between neighborhoods to the east of campus and Mission Boulevard, via East Loop Road – Harder Road. However, the connection would be designed to discourage excessive through-travel and speeds, because East Loop Road runs between the central academic campus and the primary student residential area, and will therefore see a high level of pedestrian crossings throughout the day. Since building the third entrance depends in part on the City of Hayward’s participation and approval of the design of the new intersection, this EIR provides a traffic analysis for two cases: with the third entrance, and without the third entrance.
The proposed Master Plan projects the need for up to 8,750 parking spaces, which would be an increase of about 3,900 spaces over the inventory available in January 2007. (Note that the parking baseline is earlier than the traffic baseline, because the parking needs analysis was based on the latest available supply/occupancy data at the time of the Master Plan analysis). This projection conservatively assumes that current commuting mode choice characteristics would continue. However, rather than assuming future parking demand and resulting supply needs will mimic past trends, the Master Plan parking plan proposes to carefully grow the parking supply while managing the growth in parking demand, with the goal of cutting that growth by approximately 50 percent. Thus, rather than adding 3,900 spaces to the current 4,800, the addition is proposed to be 1,900, for a maximum of 6,700 spaces. While the campus has space sufficient to provide up to the full 8,750 spaces should they ultimately be needed, the plan proposes four or five strategically located parking structures to provide the 6,700 total spaces (see Figure 4.12-5.b). The structures would be located near the Harder Road and Carlos Bee Boulevard gateways, and on the east side of the campus, near the proposed third entrance.
The proposed Master Plan also includes a framework for the establishment of an aggressive Travel Demand Management (TDM) program designed to reduce the projected need for parking and corresponding new vehicle trips. This traffic impact analysis assumes a continuation of current travel patterns and mode choice, in order to assess a worst-case condition; however, full implementation of the programs outlined in the proposed Master Plan would substantially reduce both the new parking supply needed and peak hour vehicle trips. This is discussed in the traffic mitigation section.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-24 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 E V I R
D
E
D I S K R A P C AM PUSU S D HAYWARD BOULEVARD RI VE
RELOCATED EAST LOOP ROAD
1 0 M i n OLD HILLARY PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY u t e
W 5 a M l k in u . D t LV e B D W R A W a Y l A k H
. D V L B EE S B O RL CA
ROAD WESTWLOESOTPLROOOAPD
LEGEND Property Line
Primary Traffic Route
Secondary Traffic Route HARDER ROAD Parking Structure Access
Exterior Traffic Development Sites
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers – October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-5a Vehicular Circulation Plan
961-002•11/08 E V I R
D
E
D I S K R A P C AM PU S D RI VE
A B C
1 0 D 3 E 4 M i n u t e
W 5 a M l k in u . D t e LV B W RD A a W Y l A k H G
2 . D V L B EE S B O RL CA
WEST LOOP ROAD F 5
1 LEGEND Property Line HARDER ROAD Structured Parking Site
Surface Parking Site
Limited Access Parking Zone
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers – October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-5b Parking Plan
961-002•11/08 E V I R
D
E
D I S K R A P C AM PU S D RI VE
1 0 M i n u t e
W 5 a M l k in u . D t LV e B W RD A W a Y l A k H
. D V L B EE S B O RL CA
WEST LOOP ROAD LEGEND
Property Line AC Transit, Route 94 AC Transit, Route 92 Existing Shuttle Stop HARDER ROAD Relocated Shuttle Stop
2-3 Minute Walk
Parcels
N
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers –October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-5c Transit Plan
961-002•11/08 E V I R
D
E
D I S K R A P C AM PU S D RI VE
1 0 PS PS M i n u t e
W 5 a M l k in u . t D e LV B W D R A a W l AY k H
PS . D V L B EE S B O RL CA
WEST LOOP ROAD
LEGEND PS Property Line
Primary Pedestrian HARDER ROAD Promenades
Pedestrian Circulation
Primary Pedestrian Entries
Pedestrian Bridge
Parcels
PS Parking Structures
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers –October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-5d Pedestrian Circulation Plan
961-002•11/08 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-6 No Project Trip Generation
7:30–8:30 AM 5:15–6:15 PM ADT In Out Total In Out Total Existing Commuter Trip Generation (Fall 2007) Carlos Bee Blvd east of 13,180 832 89 921 513 942 1,455 Hayward Blvd HarderRdwestofLoopRd 11,070 587 155 742 512 644 1,156 Total Trips Generated 24,250 1,419 244 1,663 1,025 1,586 2,611 Trip Rate per Commuter1 2.634 0.154 0.026 0.181 0.111 0.172 0.284 Total Future No Project Trip Generation (Current Campus Capacity) Total Commuting Trips 34,560 2,020 348 2,370 1,460 2,260 3,720 Generated Trip Rate per Commuter2 2.634 0.154 0.026 0.181 0.111 0.172 0.284 Net New Trips NetNewCommutingTrips 10,310 600 100 700 440 670 1,110 Net New Student 2 21 23 41 5 46 Residential Trips3 Net New Faculty/Staff 0 0 0 0 0 0 Residential Trips4 Net New Trips 602 121 723 481 675 1,156
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1Total commuters (existing) = 9,208 2Total commuters (future) = 13,121 3New student resident trip rate = 0.05 trips/bed AM, 0.10 trips/bed PM 4New faculty/staff resident trip rate = 0.38 trips/bed AM, 0.47 trips/bed PM
In addition to the potential third entrance, the Master Plan circulation plan includes a right-turn only entrance into the Carlos Bee Boulevard parking structure from Hayward Boulevard, via a new right-turn deceleration lane. This would reduce the traffic load on the internal Campus (East and West) Loop Roads, with minimal effect on Hayward Boulevard traffic flow. The proposed Master Plan also anticipates new traffic signals internal to the campus, at the Harder Road/West Loop Road intersection, and potentially at the Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road intersection. West Loop Road is planned to stay open to general traffic, but to be redesigned as a slow street on which cross-campus traffic would be discouraged.
Project Trip Generation, Distribution, and Assignment
Table 4.12-6, No Project Trip Generation, and Table 4.12-7, Project Trip Generation, below, give the No Project and With Project trip generation estimates, respectively. The commuter trip generation rates are
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-29 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
based on fall 2007 counts of the campus gateways; the resident trip rates are taken from studies of similar student and faculty/staff campus housing at other campuses, including UC Davis, UC Riverside, and Stanford University. The No Project case shown in Table 4.12-6 assumes that the campus would grow from the current (fall 2007) baseline of 8,758 FTE students to its current instructional capacity of 12,586 FTE students (i.e., the maximum number of students that can be served by current facilities), along with corresponding growth in faculty and staff. The With Project case shown in Table 4.12-7 assumes the campus grows from the current baseline to the Master Plan target of 18,000 FTE students, with corresponding faculty and staff growth, and including a total on-campus student housing of 5,000 beds and on-campus faculty/staff housing to include a maximum combined total of 220 units at three potential sites.
Table 4.12-7 Project Trip Generation
7:30–8:30 AM 5:15–6:15 PM ADT In Out Total In Out Total Existing Commuter Trip Generation (Fall 2007) Carlos Bee Blvd east of 13,180 832 89 921 513 942 1,455 Hayward Blvd HarderRdwestofLoopRd 11,070 587 155 742 512 644 1,156 Total Trips Generated 24,250 1,419 244 1,663 1,025 1,586 2,611 Trip Rate per Commuter1 2.634 0.154 0.026 0.181 0.111 0.172 0.284 Total Future Trip Generation (Master Plan Buildout) Total Commuting Trips 40,530 2,370 408 2,780 1,710 2,650 4,360 Generated Trip Rate per Commuter2 2.634 0.154 0.026 0.181 0.111 0.172 0.284 Net New Trips NetNewCommutingTrips 16,280 950 160 1,110 690 1,060 1,750 Net New Student 21 188 209 376 42 418 Residential Trips3 Net New Faculty/Staff 17 67 84 67 36 103 Residential Trips4 Net New Trips 988 415 1,403 1,133 1,138 2,271
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1 Total commuters (existing) = 9,208 2 Total commuters (future) = 15,391 3 New student resident trip rate = 0.05 trips/bed AM, 0.10 trips/bed PM 4 New faculty/staff resident trip rate = 0.38 trips/bed AM, 0.47 trips/bed PM
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-30 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
As shown at the bottom of each table, the No Project net new trips are estimated at 723 AM peak hour trips and 1,156 PM peak hour trips. The With Project net new trips are estimated at 1,403 AM peak hour trips and 2,271 PM peak hour trips. The With Project trip generation is approximately double that of the No Project trip generation, even though the With Project FTE student growth is about 140 percent of the No Project growth; the reason for the difference is the addition of 4,180 student beds (relative to the 820 present at the Fall 2007 baseline). Resident students generate peak commute hour trips at a substantially lower rate than commuting students.
The commuter trip generation estimate reflects the current campus travel and mode choice characteristics, and does not take into account the effect that the aggressive TDM measures proposed in the proposed Master Plan may have on vehicle use. This effect is discussed in the traffic impact and mitigation section below.
Figure 4.12-6 shows the project trip distribution, which is based on the Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model trip patterns for the campus zone, along with student residence zip code data. The actual trip distribution and assignment was performed separately from the Countywide Model, using the TRAFFIX software, to ensure appropriate trip routing within the traffic study area.
Figure 4.12-7 shows the assumed future intersection lane configuration, which incorporates the planned Route 238 improvement project. This project will increase the number of through lanes on Mission Boulevard between Foothill and Highland, and will convert sections of Foothill Boulevard, Mission Boulevard, and A Street to one-way flow. Appendix 4.12 contains a description of the final improvement project. Figures 4.12-8 through 4.12-12 show intersection volumes under the various study scenarios.
Intersection Volumes and Levels of Service – Future Conditions
Tables 4.12-8, Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (No Third Entrance), and 4.12-9, Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (With Third Entrance), show the Future No Project and Future With Project service levels, along with the existing intersection service levels for comparison purposes. Table 4.12-8 gives the results for the No Third Entrance scenario, and Table 4.12-9 gives the intersection service levels for the With Third Entrance scenario.
The addition of project traffic to 2025 traffic conditions has significant impacts at the intersections listed below. The locations of the project impacts are the same for both the No Third Entrance and With Third Entrance cases, except for Carlos Bee/West Loop, which operates acceptably with the third entrance, but would require capacity expansion without the third entrance. Most of these locations are projected to operate over capacity in 2025 with or without the Project, due to the non-project traffic growth projected by the City of Hayward Travel Demand Model and the growth that could occur with the campus’
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-31 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
existing facilities. Three intersections fall from LOS E or better with the addition of project traffic, as indicated by dark shading in Tables 4.12-8 and 4.12-9:
Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road (No Third Entrance case only)
Mission Boulevard/Harder Road
Mission Boulevard/Tennyson Road
Six intersections that are projected to operate at LOS F without the project in 2025 worsen by 4 or more seconds of delay with the addition of project traffic. These intersections are:
Foothill Boulevard/Mattox Road/Castro Valley Boulevard
Foothill Boulevard/Grove Way
Foothill Boulevard/D Street
Foothill Boulevard/Mission Boulevard/Jackson Street/E Street
Mission Boulevard/ Carlos Bee Boulevard/Orchard Avenue
Jackson Street/Santa Clara Street/Harder Road
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-32 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 Castro Valley Blvd 185 580 580
15% Redwood 7% 238 Rd d6 R Grove Way 5% Mattox
Center St 7 F oo th B St il l B lv Mission Blvd d A St
238 D St HAYWARD 880 8 5% E St HILLS E Ave 10% 9 2 nd St A St 10 5 B St hland ig Bl
238 H vd Campus Dr D St D D St D Jackson St 11 Hesperian Blvd 4 Ha LOCAL arlos yw 12 C Be EastLoo a e B pRd rd 922 HAYWARD lv 1 B Winton Ave d 2 lv d W d TRIPS est Lo S o a Orchard Ave p n R t 10% d a D C 5% ob la b r 3 el a Av Dr S e ine t 13 l y
HarderHard Rd k 15 PROJECT S Mission Blvd SITE
880 14 Legend: 3% 30% XX% = Project Trip Distribution Jackson St W. Tennyson Rd 238 92 10% 1 = Study Intersection
n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers – September 2008
FIGURE 4.12-6 Project Trip Distribution
961-002•10/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - August 2008
FIGURE 4.12-7 Future Intersection Lane Geometry and Traffic Control
961-002•11/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-8 Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (No Third Entrance)
961-002•11/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-9 Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (With Third Entrance)
961-002•11/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - October 2008
FIGURE 4.12-10 Future No Project Intersection Volumes
961-002•11/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - September 2008
FIGURE 4.12-11 Future With Project Intersection Volumes - (No Third Entrance)
961-002•10/08 n NOT TO SCALE
SOURCE: Fehr & Peers - September 2008
FIGURE 4.12-12 Future With Project Intersection Volumes - (With Third Entrance)
961-002•11/08 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-8 Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (No Third Entrance)
Existing Future No Project Future With Project Traffic Peak Delay2 Delay2 Delay2 Intersection Control1 Hour (Seconds) LOS3 (Seconds) LOS3 (Seconds) LOS3 1. Carlos Bee Signal AM 22 C 25 D 43 E Blvd./Hayward Blvd. PM 20 C C 36 D 2. Carlos Bee Blvd./West AWS AM 9 B 22 D 37 E Loop Rd. PM 9 B E 82 F 3. Harder Rd./West Loop AWS AM 7 B 21 B 12 C Rd. PM 12 C C 36 D 4. Hayward Signal AM 7 B 37 B 12 C Blvd./Campus Dr. PM 9 B B 10 B 5. 2nd St./Campus Dr. SSSC AM 2 (6) A (B) 8 A (B) 3 (10) A (B) PM 1 (8) A (B) A (C) 4 (21) A (D) 6. Foothill Blvd./Mattox Signal AM 33 D 15 F 131 F Rd./Castro Valley Blvd. PM 32 D F 167 F 7. Foothill Blvd./Grove Signal AM 17 C 11 F 81 F Way PM 19 C F 135 F 8. Foothill Blvd./A St. Signal AM 33 D 10 D 44 E PM 25 D C 30 D 9.FoothillBlvd./DSt. Signal AM 29 D 3 (9) F 67 F PM 31 D F 110 F 10. Foothill Blvd./Mission Signal AM 52 E 4 (17) E 57 E Blvd./Jackson St./E St. PM 38 D F 215 F 11. Mission Signal AM 14 B 121 C 18 C Blvd./Highland Blvd. PM 15 B D 36 D 12. Mission Blvd./Carlos Signal AM 43 E 148 E 57 E Bee Blvd./Orchard Ave. PM 47 E F 125 F 13. Mission Blvd./Harder Signal AM 43 E 75 E 87 F Rd. PM 46 E F 169 F 14. Mission Signal AM 20 C 121 E 48 E Blvd./Tennyson Rd. PM 44 E E 74 F 15. Jackson St./Santa Signal AM 47 E 38 F 618 F Clara St./Harder Rd. PM 49 E F 181 F 16. Hayward Signal AM N/A N/A 24 N/A N/A N/A Blvd./Harder Rd. PM
Source: Fehr & Peers, September 2008 1 Signal, Side-Street Stop Control (SSSC) or All-Way Stop (AWS). 2 For side-street stop-controlled intersections, delays for worst movement are shown. 3 Intersections operating at unacceptable levels (LOS E or LOS F) are shown in bold.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-40 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-9 Intersection Levels of Service – Future Conditions (With Third Entrance)
Existing Future No Project Future With Project Traffic Peak Delay2 Delay2 Delay2 Intersection Control1 Hour (Seconds) LOS3 (Seconds) LOS3 (Seconds) LOS3 1. Carlos Bee Signal AM 22 C 25 D 23 C Blvd./Hayward Blvd. PM 20 C 22 C 22 C 2. Carlos Bee Blvd./West AWS AM 9 B 21 D 23 D Loop Rd. PM 9 B 37 E 30 E 3. Harder Rd./West AWS AM 7 B 8 B 12 C Loop Rd. PM 12 C 15 C 33 E 4. Hayward Signal AM 7 B 11 B 11 B Blvd./Campus Dr. PM 9 B 10 B 10 B 5. 2nd St./Campus Dr. SSSC AM 2 (6) A (B) 3 (9) A (B) Same as Table 7 PM 1 (8) A (B) 4 (17) A (C) 6. Foothill Blvd./Mattox Signal AM 33 D 121 F Same as Table 7 Rd./Castro Valley Blvd. PM 32 D 148 F 7. Foothill Blvd./Grove Signal AM 17 C 75 F Same as Table 7 Way PM 19 C 121 F 8.FoothillBlvd./ASt. Signal AM 33 D 38 D Same as Table 7 PM 25 D 24 C 9.FoothillBlvd./DSt. Signal AM 29 D 64 F Same as Table 7 PM 31 D 103 F 10. Foothill Signal AM 52 E 50 E Same as Table 7 Blvd./Mission PM 38 D 194 F Blvd./Jackson St./E St. 11. Mission Signal AM 14 B 18 C Same as Table 7 Blvd./Highland Blvd. PM 15 B 30 D 12. Mission Blvd./Carlos Signal AM 43 E 45 E 48 E Bee Blvd./Orchard Ave. PM 47 E 77 F 126 F 13. Mission Signal AM 43 E 70 E 87 F Blvd./Harder Rd. PM 46 E 86 F 170 F 14. Mission Signal AM 20 C 43 E Same as Table 7 Blvd./Tennyson Rd. PM 44 E 58 E 15. Jackson St./Santa Signal AM 47 E 603 F Same as Table 7 Clara St./Harder Rd. PM 49 E 171 F 16. Hayward Signal AM N/A N/A N/A N/A 10 B Blvd./Harder Rd. PM 8 B
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1 Signal, Side-Street Stop Control (SSSC) or All-Way Stop (AWS). 2 For side-street stop-controlled intersections, delays for worst movement are shown. 3 Intersections operating at unacceptable levels (LOS E or LOS F) are shown in bold.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-41 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
CMP Network Operating Condition – Future Conditions
The Alameda County CMP requires the assessment of development-driven impacts on regional roadways. Because the project would generate more than 100 “net new” PM peak hour trips, the CMP requires the use of the ACCMA Countywide Travel Demand Model to assess impacts on regional roadways in the project vicinity during the AM and PM peak hours. The CMP and MTS roadways in the project vicinity include I-880, SR 92, I-580, SR 238, Foothill Boulevard, Mission Boulevard, A Street, B Street, D Street, Tennyson Road, and Harder Road.
The ACCMA Countywide Model is a regional travel demand model that uses socio-economic data and roadway and transit network assumptions to forecast traffic volumes and transit ridership using a four-step modeling process that includes trip generation, trip distribution, mode split, and trip assignment. This process accounts for changes in travel patterns due to future growth and balances trip productions and attractions.
For the purposes of the CMP analysis, the land use growth in the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) representing the project site was removed from the assumptions in the Countywide Model; the remaining land use assumptions in the Countywide Model were not modified. This version of the Countywide Model is based on the Association of Bay area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2005 land uses for 2015 and 2030.
The traffic baseline forecasts for 2015 and 2030 were extracted for the CMP and MTS roadway segments from the Countywide Model. Due to fluctuations in the model forecasts and the model’s limited number of TAZs in the project area, vehicle trip generation estimates were computed for the proposed project and manually added to the 2015 and 2030 baseline volumes from the Countywide Model.
Operations of the MTS freeway and surface street segments were assessed using a volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio methodology. For freeway segments, a per-lane capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour (vph) was used, consistent with the 2005 Congestion Management Program documents. For surface streets, a per- lane capacity of 800 vehicles per hour was used. Roadway segments with a v/c ratio greater than 1.00 signify LOS F.
The “plus project” results were compared to the baseline results for each horizon year. The 2015 and 2030 peak hour volumes, v/c ratios and the corresponding level of service for baseline and “plus project conditions are provided in Tables 4.12-10a through 4.12-10d.
Due to the use of different travel demand models, the forecast traffic volumes on the CMP and MTS networks are different from the intersection volumes forecast with the City of Hayward Travel Demand
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-42 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Model. In addition, it should be noted that, for arterials and collector roadways, intersection service levels are considered a more accurate measure of operating conditions because the capacity of an urban street is generally limited by the number of vehicles that can pass through its intersections.
4.12.4.3 PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
MPImpactTRANS-1: Full buildout of the campus under the proposed Master Plan, with and without the Third Entrance, will contribute to sub-standard intersection operations at eight study intersections, in either the AM peak hour or PM peak hour, or both peak hours.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
As shown in Tables 4.12-8 and 4.12-9 which reflect the results of the LOS analysis based on the City of Hayward’s travel demand model, the addition of project traffic (No Third Entrance and With Third Entrance) to cumulative traffic growth in 2025 would result in significant traffic impacts at eight intersections outside of the campus:
Foothill Boulevard/Mattox Road/Castro Valley Boulevard
Foothill Boulevard/Grove Way
Foothill Boulevard/D Street
Foothill Boulevard/Mission Boulevard/Jackson Street/E Street
Mission Boulevard/Carlos Bee Boulevard
Mission Boulevard/Harder Road
Mission Boulevard/Tennyson Road
Jackson Street/Santa Clara Street/Harder Road
The projected poor service levels are the result of substantial cumulative traffic growth, in addition to project traffic. The traffic analysis includes the planned SR 238 Corridor Improvement project, which will improve the capacity of the Mission and Foothill Boulevard corridors; therefore, further capacity improvements are not considered feasible. As congestion grows at these intersections and along the corridors, driver responses to the worsening conditions may result in lower growth in non-project travel demand during the peak commute hours. In other words, drivers may shift to other modes of travel, they may shift theirtime of travel, or they may choose not to make the trip at all. These changes would reduce
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-43 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
the volumes and projected poor service levels, although the extent of these reductions cannot be predicted.
As for vehicle trips generated by campus growth under the proposed Master Plan, the travel demand management programs and policies outlined in the proposed Master Plan are intended to reduce the net new vehicle trips generated by campus growth, which would in turn lessen the significance of the intersection impacts. The following mitigation measure is included in order to ensure that the Campus develops and implements a comprehensive TDM plan to address this significant impact.
MP MM TRANS-1a: The Campus shall prepare a comprehensive TDM Implementation Plan that includes the steps necessary to plan for, fund, implement, and monitor the effectiveness of the measures outlined in the Master Plan TDM section and listed below.
Improved Transit Service
Enhanced AC Transit Route 92 service to the Downtown Hayward BART station, ensuring 15-minute headways from 6 AM to 10 PM; or continued and enhanced campus shuttle service providing a direct connection between campus and Downtown Hayward BART.
Alternative Mode Use Incentives
Discounted or free AC Transit passes for all students, faculty and staff
Discounted BART tickets for students, faculty and staff through the Commuter Check program or a similar program; or a ‘Clean Air Cash’ program where those choosing to commute by BART receive a cash payment and are not allowed to purchase a normal parking permit
Carpool matching service and vanpool program
Preferential parking for carpools and vanpools
Continued participation in the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency’s Guaranteed Ride Home program for alternative mode users
Provision of a flexible car rental service program (carsharing) on campus to provide access to vehicles for those who choose not to commute to campus by car or residents who do not maintain a car on campus
Provision for participants in alternative mode programs to purchase a certain number of single-day parking permits to allow for commute flexibility and promote alternative mode use for those who may occasionally need to use a car.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-44 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Parking Management
Provide a scaled parking permit pricing structure that ties the cost of parking to the level of use and location, and that provides the funding needed to maintain and operate the parking system, including provision of new parking lots/structures
Discourage on-campus residents from bringing cars to campus, and encourage the use of transit service(s) and the flexible rental car service (when instituted) for travel off campus.
MP MM TRANS-1b: The Campus will conduct periodic traffic counts at the primary gateways (Harder Road, Carlos Bee Boulevard, and the new Third Entrance if and when constructed) to monitor the effectiveness of new TDM programs as they are implemented. This information will be helpful in fine-tuning the TDM programs to ensure maximum effectiveness at reducing growth in single-occupant vehicle travel.
Significance after Mitigation: As noted earlier, further physical improvements to the affected intersections are not feasible. An assessment of the potential effectiveness of full implementation of the TDM measures listed above indicates that peak hour vehicle trips could be reduced by approximately 300 AM peak hour trips and 400 PM peak hour trips, or about 24 percent and 20 percent of the total peak hour trip generation in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. While this would reduce the additional delay caused by the proposed project at the impact locations, it would not reduce the impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, implementation of the mitigation measures above will reduce the level of significance, but the impact will remain significant and unavoidable.
MP Impact TRANS-2: Campus gateway intersections will operate at unacceptable levels of service in the future.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
Addition of project traffic under future conditions will cause operations at the Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road intersection to degrade from acceptable LOS E to unacceptable LOS F in the PM peak hour. In addition, the intersections of Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road, Harder Road/West Loop Road, and the new intersection of Hayward Boulevard and New Campus Entry (Third Entrance, if implemented) are projected to meet the peak hour signal warrant under 2025 conditions (signal warrant charts are included in Appendix 4.12). The two existing intersections should be signalized when a full warrant study indicates the signals are needed, which would be at some point prior to full buildout of the proposed Master Plan. The Campus should conduct periodic traffic counts and observations of these
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-45 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
intersections and retain a registered traffic engineer to assess the need for and develop an appropriate design of new traffic signals, when traffic volumes indicate the need for a signal. The potential new campus gateway intersection on Hayward Boulevard should be signalized when, and if, it is constructed.
MP MM TRANS-2: The Campus shall monitor traffic volumes and conditions periodically at Carlos Bee Boulevard/West Loop Road and Harder Road/West Loop Road, and retain a registered traffic engineer to conduct a full warrant study when peak hour volumes reach the level of the peak hour volume warrant. If the study indicates the need for a signal at either location, the Campus will construct the new signal. The Campus will also ensure that the new campus gateway intersection on Hayward Boulevard, if approved by the City and constructed, is signalized and provides a left turn lane to serve traffic turning into the campus.
Significance after Mitigation: Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level.
MP Impact TRANS-3: Traffic added by the proposed project would not adversely affect intersection operations at Hayward Boulevard and Civic Avenue.
Level of Significance: Less than significant
One of the three potential sites for the construction of faculty and staff housing that is under consideration in this proposed Master Plan is located in the southeastern portion of the campus off of Grandview Avenue. If this site is eventually selected for housing development, it will be determined at that time whether access to the housing would be provided via the campus streets that serve the Pioneer Heights student housing complex or via Civic Avenue, Cotati Road, and Grandview Avenue. Conservatively, it was assumed for the purposes of this traffic analysis that residents of the faculty and staff housing would use the Civic Avenue route to access their homes. Trips added by the development of this housing to the intersection of Hayward Boulevard and Civic Avenue were evaluated for their effect on intersection operations. The number of trips that would be added during the AM and PM peak hour would not affect the operation of this signalized intersection. The impact would therefore be less than significant.
Mitigation Measure: No mitigation is required.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-46 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
MPImpact TRANS-4: Pedestrian safety on Harder Road in the vicinity of the student housing area could be affected by traffic volumes and speeds, with the provision of the third entrance on Hayward Boulevard.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
The potential new entrance on Hayward Boulevard would serve some of the current and future campus traffic that would otherwise use the Carlos Bee Boulevard entrance. It would also allow non-campus traffic to travel on the campus portion of Harder Road and on East Loop Road between Mission Boulevard and the hills to the east of the campus. It is estimated that about 400 trips in the AM peak hour and 160 such trips in the PM peak hour would use the new connection; this is derived from an analysis of the trips traveling on Hayward Boulevard at Campus Drive and turning to the south on Mission Boulevard. This also assumes that the roadway would be designed at 25 mph and that measures would be incorporated into the design to discourage speeding. Although this shift in non-campus traffic does affect traffic volumes at several intersections outside of the Hayward campus, including those on Mission Boulevard from Carlos Bee Boulevard to Harder Road, it does not affect the number or location of the project’s significant impacts on the local traffic network.
Table 4.12-11, Peak Hour Volumes on Harder Road With and Without the Third Entrance, compares the peak hour traffic volumes on Harder Road east of West Loop Road with and without the third entrance on Hayward Boulevard. The difference in volumes is primarily due to non-campus, cut-through traffic, although some is due to the rerouting of campus trips. The additional trips are not projected to cause a capacity problem for automobiles on the campus roadways. The volume growth would, however, have a potentially significant impact for pedestrians crossing Harder Road. MP Mitigation Measure TRANS-4 is proposed to address this impact.
MP MM TRANS-4: If the Third Entrance on Hayward Boulevard is constructed, the Campus will design and construct traffic calming measures along Harder Road and retain the traffic signal serving pedestrian crossings between the student housing and the core campus, in order to maintain a pedestrian-friendly environment and manage the volume and speed of traffic along this roadway.
Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-47 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-11 Peak Hour Volumes on Harder Road With and Without the Third Entrance
Eastbound Traffic Westbound Traffic Volume Volume Total Traffic Volume AM PM AM PM AM PM No Third Entrance 719 459 109 772 828 1231 With Third Entrance 772 584 503 889 1275 1473
Difference 53 125 3941 117 447 242 % Difference 7% 27% 361% 15% 54% 20%
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1 The westbound AM difference (341) is substantially higher than the eastbound PM difference (125) because the forecast demand for travel west on Hayward-Carlos Bee turning south onto Mission is substantially higher in the morning commute hour than the reverse movement in the evening commute hour.
MP Impact TRANS-5: Campus development under the proposed Master Plan will substantially increase volumes on several segments of the CMP or MTS networks.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
Under the CMP analysis guidelines, significant impacts are defined as those that would cause a roadway segment on the MTS to degrade from LOS E or better to LOS F, or that would increase the v/c ratio by more than 3 percent for roadway segments that would operate at LOS F without the project. Based on the analysis summarized above and in Tables 4.12-10a through 4.12-10d, the proposed project would cause significant impacts on the following CMP and MTS roadway segments:
Foothill Boulevard between I-580 and A Street (2030 AM and PM)
Mission Boulevard between A Street and Jackson Street (2015 AM, 2030 AM and PM)
Mission Boulevard Between Jackson Street and Highland Boulevard (2030 AM and PM)
Mission Boulevard between Highland Boulevard and Harder Road (2015 AM and PM, 2030 AM and PM)
Mission Boulevard between Harder Road and Tennyson Road (2015 AM and PM, 2030 AM and PM)
A Street between Foothill Boulevard and Mission Boulevard (2030 AM)
Harder Road between Mission Boulevard and Cypress Avenue (2015 PM, 2030 AM and PM)
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-48 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
The extensive capacity improvements planned as part of the Route 238 Corridor Improvement project were included in this analysis, and no further roadway improvements are currently identified to mitigate the above impacts. The CMA requires preparation of a deficiency plan to address projected sub-standard conditions on the CMP and MTS systems. The following mitigation measure is proposed to address this impact.
MP MM TRANS-5: The City of Hayward should review the projected volume growth on the CMP and MTS networks within the City and prepare a deficiency plan to address future projected deficiencies. The Campus will cooperate with the City in developing measures to address future deficiencies, including the measures described in MP Mitigation MeasureTRANS-1.
Significance after Mitigation: Significant and unavoidable
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-49 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-10a CMP Designated System Impact Analysis – 2015 AM
Link No Project Project With Project V/C/ Ratio – V/C Ratio – No Project With Project Change in Change in Location Segment Limits # Lanes Capacity Volume Volume Volume % Increase No Project With Project LOS LOS V/C >3% LOS FREEWAY SEGMENTS I-880 Between Marina SR 238 5 9,750 9,119 7 9,126 0% 0.94 0.94 E E No No Change Between SR 238 SR 92 5 10,000 11,277 7 11,284 0% 1.13 1.13 F F No No Change Between SR 92 Tennyson 5 9,750 9,573 7 9,580 0% 0.98 0.98 E E No No Change Between Tennyson Industrial 5 9,950 9,582 15 9,597 0% 0.96 0.96 E E No No Change SR 92 Between I-880 Hesperian 3 5,850 7,004 4 7,008 0% 1.20 1.20 F F No No Change Between Hesperian Clawiter 3 5,850 6,711 4 6,715 0% 1.15 1.15 F F No No Change I-580 Between SR 238 Center 5 9,750 1,121 0 1,121 0% 0.11 0.11 A A No No Change Between Center Crow Canyon 4 8,000 10,831 22 10,853 0% 1.35 1.36 F F No No Change Between SR 238 Bayfair 4 8,000 7,367 21 7,388 0% 0.92 0.92 E E No No Change SR 238 Between I-580 I-880 3 5,850 6,425 7 6,432 0% 1.10 1.10 F F No No Change ARTERIALS Foothill Between I-580 A Street 3 2,700 2,721 63 2,784 2% 1.01 1.03 F F No No Change Between A Street Jackson 6 5,400 4,334 40 4,374 1% 0.80 0.81 D D No No Change Mission Between SR 238 A Street 2 1,900 1,970 0 1,970 0% 1.04 1.04 F F No No Change Between A Street Jackson 5 4,750 4,651 84 4,735 2% 0.98 1.00 E F No Change Between Jackson Highland 3 2,850 2,703 84 2,787 3% 0.95 0.98 E E No No Change Between Highland Harder 2 1,960 1,881 84 1,965 4% 0.96 1.00 E F Yes Change Between Harder Tennyson 2 1,960 1,942 50 1,992 3% 0.99 1.02 E F No Change A Street Between Foothill Mission 5 4,500 3,510 85 3,595 2% 0.78 0.80 D D No No Change B Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,900 1,363 0 1,363 0% 0.72 0.72 C C No No Change D Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,300 1,300 0 1,300 0% 1.00 1.00 F F No No Change Tennyson Between I-880 Mission 2 1,900 1,480 16 1,496 1% 0.78 0.79 D D No No Change Harder Between Mission Cypress 2 1,800 1,736 25 1,761 1% 0.96 0.98 E E No No Change
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-50 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-10b CMP Designated System Impact Analysis – 2015 PM
No Project Project With Project V/C/ Ratio – V/C Ratio – No Project With Project Change in Link Location Segment Limits # Lanes Capacity Volume Volume Volume % Increase No Project With Project LOS LOS V/C >3% Change in LOS FREEWAY SEGMENTS I-880 Between Marina SR 238 5 9,750 9,105 19 9,124 0% 0.93 0.94 E E No No Change Between SR 238 SR 92 5 10,000 10,515 18 10,533 0% 1.05 1.05 F F No No Change Between SR 92 Tennyson 5 9,750 9,227 19 9,246 0% 0.95 0.95 E E No No Change Between Tennyson Industrial 5 9,950 9,240 38 9,278 0% 0.93 0.93 E E No No Change SR 921.23 Between I-880 Hesperian 3 5,850 7,192 11 7,203 0% 1.23 1.23 F F No No Change Between Hesperian Clawiter 3 5,850 6,254 11 6,265 0% 1.07 1.07 F F No No Change I-580 Between SR 238 Center 5 9,750 10,061 0 10,061 0% 1.03 1.03 F F No No Change Between Center Crow Canyon 4 8,000 9,997 25 10,022 0% 1.25 1.25 F F No No Change Between SR 238 Bayfair 4 8,000 7,724 57 7,781 1% 0.97 0.97 E E No No Change SR 238 Between I-580 I-880 3 5,850 5,378 19 5,397 0% 0.92 0.92 E E No No Change ARTERIALS Foothill Between I-580 A Street 3 2,700 2,936 72 3,008 2% 1.09 1.11 F F No No Change Between A Street Jackson 6 5,400 4,810 97 4,907 2% 0.89 0.91 D E No Change Mission Between SR 238 A Street 2 1,900 1,845 0 1,845 0% 0.97 0.97 E E No No Change Between A Street Jackson 5 4,750 4,768 103 4,871 2% 1.00 1.03 F F No No Change Between Jackson Highland 3 2,850 2,874 97 2,971 3% 1.01 1.04 F F No No Change Between Highland Harder 2 1,960 2,008 97 2,105 5% 1.02 1.07 F F Yes No Change Between Harder Tennyson 2 1,960 1,994 132 2,126 7% 1.02 1.08 F F Yes No Change A Street Between Foothill Mission 5 4,500 2,509 102 2,611 4% 0.58 0.58 B B No No Change B Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,900 1,746 0 1,746 0% 0.92 0.92 E E No No Change D Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,300 882 0 882 0% 0.68 0.68 C C No No Change Tennyson Between I-880 Mission 2 1,900 2,002 18 2,020 1% 1.06 1.06 F F No No Change Harder Between Mission Cypress 2 1,800 1,780 54 1,834 3% 0.99 1.02 E F No Change
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-51 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-10c CMP Designated System Impact Analysis – 2030 AM
No Project Project With Project V/C/ Ratio – V/C Ratio – No Project With Project Change in Link Location Segment Limits # Lanes Capacity Volume Volume Volume % Increase No Project With Project LOS LOS V/C >3% Change in LOS FREEWAY SEGMENTS I-880 Between Marina SR 238 5 9,750 11,289 43 11,332 0% 1.16 1.16 F F No No Change Between SR 238 SR 92 5 10,000 15,008 43 15,051 0% 1.50 1.51 F F No No Change Between SR 92 Tennyson 5 9,750 12,203 20 12,223 0% 1.25 1.25 F F No No Change Between Tennyson Industrial 5 9,950 13,314 40 13,354 0% 1.34 1.34 F F No No Change SR 92 Between I-880 Hesperian 3 5,850 8,310 12 8,322 0% 1.42 1.42 F F No No Change Between Hesperian Clawiter 3 5,850 8,260 12 8,272 0% 1.41 1.41 F F No No Change I-580 Between SR 238 Center 5 9,750 13,500 0 13,500 0% 1.38 1.38 F F No No Change Between Center Crow Canyon 4 8,000 13,442 60 13,502 0% 1.68 1.69 F F No No Change Between SR 238 Bayfair 4 8,000 9,056 59 9,115 1% 1.13 1.14 F F No No Change SR 238 Between I-580 I-880 3 5,850 7,833 20 7,853 0% 1.34 1.34 F F No No Change ARTERIALS Foothill Between I-580 A Street 4 3,600 3,977 172 4,149 4% 1.10 1.15 F F Yes No Change Between A Street Jackson 6 5,400 4,704 109 4,813 2% 0.87 0.89 D D No No Change Mission Between SR 238 A Street 2 1,900 2,264 0 2,264 0% 1.19 1.19 F F No No Change Between A Street Jackson 5 4,750 5,367 232 5,599 4% 1.13 1.18 F F Yes No Change Between Jackson Highland 4 3,800 4,200 232 4,432 6% 1.11 1.17 F F Yes No Change Between Highland Harder 4 3,800 3,913 232 4,145 6% 1.03 1.09 F F Yes No Change Between Harder Tennyson 3 2,940 3,280 138 3,418 6% 1.12 1.16 F F Yes No Change A Street Between Foothill Mission 5 4,500 4,711 235 4,946 4% 1.05 1.10 F F Yes No Change B Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,900 2,081 0 2,081 0% 1.10 1.10 F F No No Change D Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,300 1,445 0 1,445 0% 1.11 1.11 F F No No Change Tennyson Between I-880 Mission 2 1,900 2,250 20 2,270 1% 1.18 1.19 F F No No Change Harder Between Mission Cypress 2 1,800 2,243 70 2,313 3% 1.25 1.29 F F Yes No Change
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-52 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-10d CMP Designated System Impact Analysis – 2030 PM
With Project V/C/ Ratio – V/C Ratio – No Project With Project Change in Link Location Segment Limits # Lanes Capacity No Project Volume Project Volume Volume % Increase No Project With Project LOS LOS V/C >3% Change in LOS FREEWAY SEGMENTS I-880 Between Marina SR 238 5 9,750 10,261 50 10,311 0% 1.05 1.06 F F No No Change Between SR 238 SR 92 5 10,000 13,450 50 13,590 0% 1.35 1.36 F F No No Change Between SR 92 Tennyson 5 9,750 12,469 52 12,521 0% 1.28 1.28 F F No No Change Between Tennyson Industrial 5 9,950 12,779 104 12,883 1% 1.28 1.29 F F No No Change SR 92 Between I-880 Hesperian 3 5,850 8,255 31 8,286 0% 1.41 1.42 F F No No Change Between Hesperian Clawiter 3 5,850 8,927 31 8,958 0% 1.53 1.53 F F No No Change I-580 Between SR 238 Center 5 9,750 11,851 0 11,851 0% 1.22 1.22 F F No No Change Between Center Crow Canyon 4 8,000 12,374 69 12,443 1% 1.55 1.56 F F No No Change Between SR 238 Bayfair 4 8,000 8,932 156 9,088 2% 1.12 1.14 F F No No Change SR 238 Between I-580 I-880 3 5,850 7,680 52 7,732 1% 1.31 1.32 F F No No Change ARTERIALS Foothill Between I-580 A Street 4 3,600 3,944 198 4,142 5% 1.10 1.15 F F Yes No Change Between A Street Jackson 6 5,400 4,632 268 4,900 6% 0.86 0.91 D E Yes Change Mission Between SR 238 A Street 2 1,900 2,193 0 2,193 0% 1.15 1.15 F F No No Change Between A Street Jackson 5 4,750 4,460 282 4,742 6% 0.94 1.00 E F Yes Change Between Jackson Highland 4 3,800 4,138 268 4,406 6% 1.09 1.16 F F Yes No Change Between Highland Harder 4 3,800 3,877 268 4,145 7% 1.02 1.09 F F Yes No Change Between Harder Tennyson 3 2,940 3,091 363 3,454 12% 1.05 1.17 F F Yes No Change A Street Between Foothill Mission 5 4,500 3,296 280 3,576 8% 0.73 0.79 C D Yes Change B Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,900 1,762 0 1,762 0% 0.93 0.93 E E No No Change D Street Between Foothill Mission 2 1,300 1,428 0 1,428 0% 1.10 1.10 F F No No Change Tennyson Between I-880 Mission 2 1,900 2,599 52 2,651 2% 1.37 1.40 F F No No Change Harder Between Mission Cypress 2 1,800 2,634 181 2,815 7% 1.46 1.56 F F Yes No Change Source: Alameda Countywide Travel Demand Model (No Project volumes), and Fehr & Peers (Project volumes), July 2008 Light shading indicates a significant impact on the segment Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-53 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
MP Impact TRANS-6: Campus development under the proposed Master Plan will increase BART ridership, but will not lead to over-capacity conditions in the peak commute hours.
Level of Significance: Less than significant
An analysis of the current use of the Hillhopper Shuttle and AC Transit Route 92, both of which connect the campus to the Downtown Hayward BART station, indicate that currently about 310 commuters use the two services in the AM and PM peak hours. It is presumed that most if not all of the riders are commuting by BART and completing their trip on Route 92 or the Hillhopper. With the Master Plan growth and current transit use trends, the additional ridership would grow to about 490 in each peak hour. However, with full implementation of the policies and programs outlined in the Master Plan, including reduced-cost BART tickets and a free BART shuttle service with higher frequency and minimal intermediate stops (either provided by AC Transit and funded by the University, or provided directly by the University) BART–bus/shuttle ridership is estimated to grow by 50 percent above current trends to 730 peak hour riders (Refer to Appendix 4.12 for this analysis).
Current BART loading data on the routes serving Castro Valley and Downtown Hayward BART stations2 indicate ample capacity to accommodate additional BART ridership to the campus. The estimates derive from a projected total BART ridership growth of 520 riders, the approximate geographic distribution of commuters along the BART lines to the north, south and east, and the “reverse commute” characteristic for riders originating in the north (Berkeley, Oakland San Francisco, Richmond) and northeast (Walnut Creek, Concord, Pittsburg) of the campus, i.e., most of these commuters trips will be southbound toward the campus in the morning, in the non-peak direction, and northbound in the evening, also against the peak direction. Commuters coming from the Tri-Valley area will travel in the peak direction, as shown in Table 4.12-12, Project Impact on Bart Ridership with Max Travel Demand Management. Because there would be adequate capacity, the impact is considered less than significant.
2 The proposed project’s effect on the South Hayward BART station was not analyzed because given the proximity of the Downtown Hayward BART station to the campus and the fact that the Downtown BART station has direct transit service to the campus via the Hillhoppper and AC transit buses, few persons accessing the campus are likely to use the South Hayward BART station to travel to and from the campus.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-54 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-12 Project Impact on Bart Ridership with Max Travel Demand Management
Available Load at Projected Project Peak Hour in Trips at Peak Hour in Remaining Load Line Peak Direction Peak Direction Capacity Downtown Hayward Station Fremont – Daly City NB 1,365/AM 50 1,310 Fremont – Daly City SB 940/PM 50 890 Fremont – Richmond NB 1,570/AM 50 1,520 Fremont – Richmond SB 1,410/PM 50 1,360 Castro Valley Station
Dublin/Pleasanton – Daly City WB 1,760/AM 150 1,610 Dublin/Pleasanton – Daly City EB 1,310/PM 150 1,160
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008 1. Refer to Table 4.12-4 for existing loading. Mitigation Measure: No mitigation is required.
MP Impact TRANS-7: Implementation of the proposed Master Plan will increase bus transit demand, particularly for connections between the campus and the Downtown Hayward and Castro Valley BARTstations.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
While BART has capacity available to serve the projected increase in transit riders, the increase would overload AC Transit’s Route 92, as shown in Table 4.12-13, Project Impact on AC Transit Max Loads with Max Travel Demand Management. The impact would be potentially significant. This would also support the need for enhanced shuttle service to Downtown Hayward and Castro Valley BART stations.
MP MM TRANS-7: The Campus shall implement MP Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, which includes enhancing AC Transit Route 92 service to the Downtown Hayward BART station, ensuring 15-minute headways from 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM; or continued and enhanced campus shuttle service providing a direct connection between campus and Downtown Hayward BART.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-55 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
Table 4.12-13 Project Impact on AC Transit Max Loads with Max Travel Demand Management
Maximum Load Maximum Load (Passengers)a Factor Average Existing Existing Existing Bus Capacity Existing No Plus No Plus Line Stop Location Direction (seats) Project Project Project Project 92 Downtown Hayward NB 34 132 94% 190% BART Station 36 SB 24 222 67% 520% 92 West Loop/Carlos Bee NB 27 125 75% 250% 36 SB 27 125 75% 250% 92 West Loop/Warren Hall NB 2 100 6% 180% 36 SB 27 125 75% 250%
Source: Fehr & Peers, October 2008. Project trips = 520 total new round trip riders/day x 0.75 in peak hour / 4 buses per hour
Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant
MPImpactTRANS-8: Walking and bicycling trips to campus may increase moderately with implementation of the proposed Master Plan.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
The proposed Master Plan provides for good bicycle and pedestrian connections internal to the campus. Due to the topography surrounding the Hayward campus, commuting to the campus by walking or bicycling is difficult for all but those living in very close proximity to the campus. Based on casual observation, some bicycle and pedestrian trips are generated by students, faculty, and staff living in nearby housing. The proposed Master Plan includes one potential faculty/staff housing site, at the intersection of Hayward Boulevard and Campus Drive that would be expected to generate additional pedestrian or bicycle trips crossing and/or walking along Hayward Boulevard. The signal at Campus Drive/Hayward Boulevard has crosswalks to serve pedestrians walking between the housing site and the campus, and there is an internal crosswalk on East Loop Road adjacent to the intersection to guide pedestrians onto the campus. Thus, pedestrians would be served adequately at this site.
The other two housing sites are located adjacent to campus, such that walking and bicycling trips would take place within the campus.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-56 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
The potential addition of a third campus entrance on Hayward Boulevard would draw walking and bicycling trips from students, faculty and staff living in neighborhoods to the east. Unless the intersection is designed with appropriate facilities for pedestrians, there potentially could be a significant safety impact related to pedestrians. The following mitigation measure is included to address this impact.
MP MM TRANS-8: The Campus will ensure that the third campus entrance, if constructed, is designed with crosswalks and pedestrian call buttons to serve pedestrians and bicycles entering the campus from neighborhoods to the east.
Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant
MPImpactTRANS-9: The proposed Master Plan could result in overflow parking on nearby neighborhood streets, if the supply is not managed to meet demand as the campus grows.
Level of Significance: Potentially significant
The proposed Master Plan projects that up to 8,750 total parking spaces may be needed by buildout based on continuation of current parking demand characteristics. This projection conservatively assumes that current commuting mode choice characteristics would continue. However, rather than assuming future parking demand and resulting supply needs will mimic past trends, the Master Plan parking plan proposed carefully growing the parking supply while managing the growth in parking demand, with the goal of cutting that growth by approximately 50 percent. Thus, rather than adding 3,900 spaces to the current 4,800, the addition is proposed to be 1,900, for a maximum of 6,700 spaces. While the campus has space sufficient to provide up to the full 8,750 spaces should they ultimately be needed, the plan proposes four or five strategically located parking structures to provide the 6,700 total spaces. The structures would be located near the Harder Road and Carlos Bee Boulevard gateways, and on the east side of the campus, near the proposed new Hayward Boulevard entrance.
The proposed Master Plan also contains travel demand management policies and programs, including parking pricing management, to reduce vehicle trip generation and associated parking demand, with the overall goals of creating a more sustainable campus, reducing the negative environmental effects of vehicle traffic growth, and conserving campus lands for their highest and best use. The parking demand management measures may create demand for unregulated off-campus spaces within walking distance of the campus. Thus, it will be necessary for the Campus to work with surrounding neighborhoods should they experience campus parking overflow as a result of the Campus’ efforts to minimize vehicle trips by controlling the number of parking spaces on campus and by parking price management. The following mitigation measures are proposed to address this impact.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-57 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008 4.12 Transportation and Traffic
MP MM TRANS-9a: The Campus shall monitor parking occupancy in all campus lots/structures on a yearly basis, and will also monitor participation in its TDM programs to determine how many single-occupant-vehicle trips are being diverted to carpools, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian trips. Based on these surveys, and the traffic counts noted in MP Mitigation Measure TRANS-2, the parking supply management plan will be periodically re-evaluated to ensure that construction of new parking keeps pace with demand.
MP MM TRANS-9b: If overflow parking in surrounding neighborhoods becomes a problem, the Campus will work with neighborhood representatives to develop strategies to mitigate the problem. Strategies could include a campus education program to discourage off-campus parking, parking restrictions during peak commute times on affected streets, or institution of residential permit parking programs.
Significance after Mitigation: Less than significant
4.9.4.5 Cumulative Impacts and Mitigation Measures
MP Impact TRANS-1 above evaluates the increase in project traffic to cumulative traffic growth in 2025 and 2030. The 2025/2030 background traffic volumes reflect the increased traffic that would result from population and employment growth projected in the study area through 2025/2030. The LOS analysis presented under MP Impact TRANS-1, therefore, presents the cumulative traffic impacts in the study area. As shown under MP Impact TRANS-1, the proposed project would result in a significant cumulative traffic impact which would not be reduced to a less than significant level by available mitigation. Similarly, MP Impact TRANS-5 presents the growth in traffic at CMP and MTS facilities and the project’s incremental impact on those facilities. Further evaluation of cumulative impacts is not required.
4.9.5 REFERENCES
Fehr and Peers. 2008. CSU East Bay Master Plan Draft EIR– Traffic, Circulation and Parking. Prepared for Impact Sciences, Inc. October.
Impact Sciences, Inc. 4.12-58 CSU East Bay Hayward Campus Master Plan Draft EIR 0961.002 November 2008