CCMIN042407WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Stern said staff further looked at a variation for the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) scenario. There have been many studies that have looked at traffic advantages of locating mixed use development near transit so they ran the TOD option twice; first with the Institute of Traffic Engineers generation rates and, secondly using a modified traffic generation rate which is based on research and studies of similar mixed use development adjacent to transit, where it is found that if you live near BART, you are more likely to use BART and similarly walk to retail. The results were that citywide because of the large numbers of trips altogether within the City few differences could be discerned in terms of traffic delay or traffic volumes between the two. However, individual projects may well result in less traffic compared to conventional development. At the last workshop there were many questions raised as to the validity of the model. Ms. Stern noted there was quite a bit of detail in Attachment 2 which addresses validity concerns and that Kim Sterner from Dowling Associates could also answer questions. She said the model makes an assumption that if you can replicate the current conditions using the model, future traffic conditions can be forecasted. Preliminary model results were measured against actual traffic volumes, counts, and then adjustments are made to make the model replicate real world conditions. Ms. Stern said there are many assumptions that go into the modeling such as future development, future roadway improvements, assumptions about the number of trips and cars, and there can be significant unanticipated changes that could mean that the model does not accurately predict future traffic conditions. For example, there was an actual economic decline in Silicon Valley downtown and a reduction in traffic was seen, which contradicted the actual models at that time. However, given this, traffic modeling still remains the best tool to predict future traffic. Regarding the impact of the Stoneridge Drive extension at build-out, more congestion is seen throughout the City, it results in a re-distribution of traffic flows, results in reduced traffic volumes on Valley Avenue and Stanley Boulevard as compared to what one would see without the Stoneridge Drive extension and also, acceptable levels of service at intersections could generally be achieved with fewer improvements than without the Stoneridge Drive extension. She noted with the Stoneridge Drive extension, traffic volumes increase several-fold on Stoneridge Drive between Santa Rita Road and El Charro Road, and that the extension would require three additional traffic signals between Santa Rita and El Charro Roads. Regarding who is using the routes, Stoneridge Drive extension reduces the total volumes and cut-through trips on Valley Avenue and Stanley Boulevard at build-out compared to not building the extension at that time. The proportion of cut-through traffic on Stoneridge Drive with the extension varies between 10% to 50%, depending on when the extension is built relative to area development and the completion of regional traffic improvements such as on I-580 and State Route 84. She noted these were broad conclusions and that Mr. Tassano would provide more detailed information, then take public comment and Council/Commission comments, and adjourn to the st May 1 meeting to take action. Mike Tassano indicated that Council requested looking at three different land use plans and 4 different models which were built to look at with and without the Stoneridge Drive extension in the AM and PM for the 2030 build-out. Five broad conclusions were identified; 1) at build-out there is very little difference in traffic volume in looking at the three land use plans; 2) there is Workshop Minutes 2 April 24, 2007