HomeMy WebLinkAboutDEIR Appendix H - Transportation Supporting InformationCity of South San Francisco—General Plan Update, Zoning Code Amendments, and Climate Action Plan
Draft Program EIR
FirstCarbon Solutions
Appendix H:
Transportation Supporting Information
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
City of South San Francisco—General Plan Update, Zoning Code Amendments, and Climate Action Plan
Administrative Draft Program EIR
FirstCarbon Solutions
H.1 - Transportation Existing Conditions Report
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL PLAN
Transportation
November 2019 | EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
1 Existing Conditions Report
Chapter 4: Transportation
This chapter provides an assessment of existing transportation regulations,
infrastructure conditions, services, and system performance in South San Francisco.
The information provided in this chapter establishes a consistent baseline that
frames the City’s transportation conditions in the larger regional context of San
Mateo County and the San Francisco Bay Area. Ultimately, the assessment of
existing conditions will help the City develop a General Plan update strategy to
encourage an integrated, multimodal transportation system that meets the needs
of South San Francisco. This chapter reviews several aspects of transportation
including: travel characteristics; roadways and functional classifications;
pedestrian facilities; bicycle facilities; transit services and facilities; goods
movement; Transportation Demand Management (TDM); parking; and the mobility
regulatory setting.
South San Francisco’s transportation system not only serves the everyday mobility
needs of its residents, but also affects regional travel patterns associated with its
growing employers and goods movement industry. Consequently, the General Plan
Update will evaluate transportation conditions in South San Francisco at both a
local and regional scale in this changing context.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
2 Existing Conditions Report
Key Findings
• Over the past decade, San Mateo County’s jobs-housing imbalance has substantially worsened.
Between 2010 and 2015, the County added an estimated 72,000 jobs and 3,800 housing units, a ratio of
19 jobs for every new constructed unit. South San Francisco, has approved approximately 12,000 jobs
and 800 homes, which translates to 15 jobs per housing unit. This jobs-housing imbalance not only has
socioeconomic effects related to housing affordability and gentrification, but also significant
transportation effects associated with longer commutes, increased regional traffic congestion, and
growing greenhouse gas emissions.
• As South San Francisco continues to experience growth and change, its transportation needs are
increasingly mismatched with its infrastructure and services. This mismatch is especially apparent in
the East of 101 Area, where the current transportation paradigm is not able to accommodate expected
growth. However, similar questions are facing developing areas around the Lindenville and El
Camino/Chestnut areas.
• Caltrain electrification, service, and station improvements, coupled with changes to SamTrans bus
service, ferries, and U.S.-101 present an opportunity to reduce driving alone in the city over the next five
to ten years.
• The City is uniquely positioned to capitalize on several local and regional transportation improvements
that may help reshape travel patterns for residents and employees, including expansions of Caltrain,
SamTrans, and ferry service along with the introduction of high occupancy toll lanes on U.S.-101.
• Continued freight rail and truck operations in the East of 101 Area can be at odds with the evolving
nature of the area. While current freight operations support continued success of local industry, it can
limit the city’s ability to improve on-street bicycle and pedestrian facilities and pursue rails to trails
projects.
• In order to realize growth expectations and capitalize on these regional improvements, the City has
identified a significant backlog of transportation needs that extend beyond its available funding. A
combination of regional grants and development fees may help partially offset these costs, but there
remain significant unmet needs. Concurrent discussions of a Community Facilities District to fund East
of 101 improvements are relevant to informing the financial constraints of the General Plan process.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
3 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 1: Existing Transportation Setting
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
4 Existing Conditions Report
Regulatory Setting
Transportation in South San Francisco is shaped by several agencies as well as key state legislation. A description
of these agencies and relevant legislation is provided below.
City of South San Francisco
The City of South San Francisco is responsible for planning, constructing, and maintaining local public
transportation facilities, including all city streets, city-operated traffic signals, sidewalks, and bicycle facilities.
These local services are funded primarily by gas-tax revenue and developer fees. The City has jurisdiction over all
city streets and traffic signals with the exception of those operated by Caltrans (noted below).
San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG)
C/CAG is the Congestion Management Agency (CMA) for San Mateo County authorized to set State and federal
funding priorities for improvements affecting the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP)
roadway system. C/CAG-designated CMP roadway system components in South San Francisco include SR 82 (El
Camino Real), U.S. 101, I-380, and I-280, but do not include any intersections within the City.
C/CAG has adopted guidelines to reduce the number of net new vehicle trips generated by new developments.
These guidelines apply to all developments that generate 100 or more net new peak hour vehicular trips on the
CMP network and are subject to CEQA review. The goal of the guidelines is that the developer and/or tenants will
reduce the demand for all new peak hour trips (including the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by the
development.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)
The regional transportation planning agency and Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the nine-county
Bay Area is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). MTC is the authorized clearinghouse for State and
federal transportation improvement funds. Each county’s CMA, including C/CAG, forwards a capital improvement
project list to MTC. MTC reviews the lists submitted by all nine Bay Area counties and submits a regional priority
list to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) and/or the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for
selection of projects to receive funding. Funded projects are then included in the Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP) prepared by MTC.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Caltrans has authority over the State highway system, including mainline facilities, interchanges, and arterial State
routes. Caltrans approves the planning and design of improvements for all State-controlled facilities. Caltrans
facilities in South San Francisco include U.S. 101 and its interchanges, I-280 and its interchanges, I-380 and its
interchanges, SR 82 (El Camino Real) and SR 35 (Skyline Boulevard).
Transit Operators
SamTrans operates bus service in San Mateo County. SamTrans manages local and regional bus service,
paratransit services, and Caltrain commuter rail.
Caltrain operates commuter rail between San Francisco and San Jose, and limited service trains to Morgan Hill
and Gilroy during weekday commute periods. Caltrain’s South San Francisco Station serves the downtown and
East of 101 Areas. Caltrain is funded through the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board and managed by
SamTrans.
5 Existing Conditions Report
BART is a rapid transit system serving San Mateo, San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, and soon-to-be Santa
Clara counties. Within South San Francisco, BART operates trains underground and stops at the South San
Francisco Station in the northern part of the City and San Bruno Station just across the southern City boundary.
WETA operates regional ferry service on the San Francisco Bay and coordinates water transit response to regional
emergencies. WETA provides public ferry service to the cities between South San Francisco and the East Bay cities
of Alameda and Oakland.
Commute.org provides first/last mile shuttle service between transit stations and employers in San Mateo County.
Commute.org is funded by a coalition of private businesses and government agencies, including SamTrans,
Caltrain, and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).
The South City Shuttle provides free transit service around South San Francisco, connecting local destinations,
SamTrans services, and the BART Station. The shuttle is managed by the City of South San Francisco and funded
by both the City and the San Mateo County Transportation Authority.
Key State Legislation
Senate Bill 375 provides guidance regarding curbing emissions from cars and light trucks. There are four major
components to SB 375. First, SB 375 requires regional GHG emissions targets. These targets must be updated every
8 years in conjunction with the revision schedule of the housing and transportation elements of local general
plans. Second, MPOs are required to create a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that provides a plan for
meeting regional targets. Third, SB 375 requires regional housing elements and transportation plans to be
synchronized on 8-year schedules. Finally, MPOs must use transportation and air emissions modeling techniques
that are consistent with the guidelines prepared by the CTC.
Assembly Bill 1358, also known as the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, requires cities and counties to
include “complete street” policies in their general plans. These policies address the safe accommodation of all
users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, public transit vehicles and riders, children, the elderly, and the
disabled. These policies can apply to new streets as well as the redesign of corridors. South San Francisco adopted
their Complete Streets Policy (Resolution 86-2012) in 2012.
Senate Bill 743 changes the focus of transportation impact analysis in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
from measuring impacts to drivers, to measuring the impact of driving. The change is being made by replacing
level of service (LOS) with vehicle miles of travel (VMT) and providing streamlined review of land use and
transportation projects that will help reduce future VMT growth. This shift in transportation impact focus is
expected to better align transportation impact analysis and mitigation outcomes with the State’s goals to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, encourage infill development, and improve public health through more active
transportation.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
6 Existing Conditions Report
Travel Characteristics
Residents and employees in South San Francisco use many different forms of transportation. The proportion of
travelers taking different transportation modes (e.g., driving alone, riding transit, cycling, walking) is referred to as
“mode share.” The California Household Travel Survey data collected in 2012-2013 provides the most recent
comparison data between commute mode share patterns and overall mode share patterns. The commute and
overall mode shares for South San Francisco and San Mateo County residents are shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Mode Share for Commute Trips and General Trips
Sources: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates; 2012-2013 California Household Travel Survey. Retrieved
by Fehr & Peers, 2019.
Residents of South San Francisco primarily rely on driving both for commuting and other trips. Driving alone or
carpooling accounts for 90% of all trips and 80% of commute trips, which is comparable to countywide averages.
Transit use is also similar to countywide averages, tending to be higher for commute trips (14%) than all trips (4%).
Residents of South San Francisco tend to walk and bike less compared to countywide averages.
South San Francisco experiences a net inflow of commuters on a daily basis. Figure 2 demonstrates that there are
~36,000 commuters that originate in South San Francisco and ~51,000 that commute to South San Francisco.
Within each of groups, there are ~12,000 that don’t leave the city because they commute from and to the city
(according to LEHD 2015 data). When comparing that mode share between these two groups, commuters to South
San Francisco are more likely to drive alone and less likely to carpool or use public transportation than those
commuters from South San Francisco.
South San Francisco San Mateo County
Population 67,120 763,450
Mode All Trips Commute
Trips All Trips Commute
Trips
Drove alone 43% 67% 43% 69%
Carpooled 47% 13% 38% 11%
Public transit 4% 14% 4% 10%
Walked 6% 3% 12% 3%
Bicycled <1% <1% 2% 1%
Other <1% 4% 1% 6%
7 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 2: Mode Share of Commuters from and to South San Francisco
Sources: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. Tables S0802 and S0804.
Many factors effect mode choice, including vehicle ownership, availability of each mode at the start and end of a
journey, and the length of a journey. These are each explored in more detail in the sections below.
Socioeconomic Factors
Commute patterns tend to vary between white and nonwhite residents of South San Francisco, as shown in Figure
3. White residents tend to drive alone more and carpool or ride transit less, while nonwhite residents still tend to
rely on driving alone, but also carpool and ride transit in larger percentages.
Figure 3: Journey to Work Mode Percent for Different Races/Ethnicities
Sources: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. Table B08105. Only Asian, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic
White groups are included because of the low margins of error for other groups.
67%
72%
13%
11%
14%
11%7%
6%
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Commuters from SSF Commuters to SSFNumber of CommutersDrive Alone Carpool Public Transportation Other
60
17 18
42
66
11 12
32
80
7 9
19
67
13 14
Drive Alone Carpool Public
Transportation
Commuters in
General
Asian Hispanic or Latino Non-Hispanic White Average
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 8
Commuting patterns are relatively comparable across incomes, as shown in Figure 4. Moderate income
households tend to drive alone slightly more than lower or higher income households, while higher income
households tend to ride transit more frequently than middle or low-income households. One possible explanation
for this pattern is that some of the highest paying jobs in downtown San Francisco are more accessible via transit
(particularly BART) compared to lower paying jobs, and offer a typical 9-5 workday that aligns with peak transit
schedules. Higher-income households also have the financial means to move near transit or pay for all-day parking
at a transit station – both extra costs that are not always accessible to lower or middle income households.
Figure 4: Journey to Work Mode Percent by Household Income Levels
Sources: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. Table S0802.
Vehicle Ownership
Seven percent of South San Francisco households are car-free households, compared with five percent in San
Mateo County. Although most South San Francisco households own 1 or 2 vehicles, nearly a third of households
own three or more vehicles. Downtown, the portion of Sunshine Gardens along El Camino Real and surrounding
the BART station, and the Baden/Avalon neighborhoods have the lowest rates of vehicle ownership in the City, as
shown in Figure 5.
63
14 13
39
73
11 11
37
65
12
18
24
67
13 14
Drive Alone Carpool Public
Transportation
Commuters in
General
Under $35K $35K to Under $75K $75K and over Average
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
9 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 5: Zero Vehicle Households
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
10 Existing Conditions Report
In/Out Commute Patterns
Of the approximately 35,000 employed South San Francisco residents, approximately 59% are employed outside
of San Mateo County. More than one-third of residents (almost 12,000 people) work in San Francisco, while
Alameda and Santa Clara counties employ approximately 3,000 residents each.
Figure 6: Top Workplace Destinations of South San Francisco Residents
Sources: Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics program 2015 data.
South San Francisco has approximately 50,000 employees, but the vast majority of these employees live outside
of the city (91%). San Mateo County, San Francisco County, and Alameda County are home to the majority of South
San Francisco employees, accounting for 42%, 22%, and 15% of the city’s workforce, respectively.
Figure 7: Top Home Locations of South San Francisco Employees
Sources: Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics program 2015 data.
13,720
42%
11,913
36%
3,004
9%
2,763
8%
1,673
5%
San Mateo
San Francisco
Alameda
Santa Clara
Other
18,680
42%
9,867
22%
6,836
15%
3,495
8%
2,891
7%
2,654
6%
San Mateo
San Francisco
Alameda
Santa Clara
Contra Costa
Other
11 Existing Conditions Report
Commute Lengths
Commute times into South San Francisco jobs are significantly longer than commute times to jobs outside of
South San Francisco. The outbound commute averages 27 minutes per direction as compared to the average
inbound commute at 35 minutes per direction. The difference is particularly pronounced for transit trips, which
take 47 minutes for outbound commuters, but 63 minutes for inbound commuters each way. This means that the
typical inbound transit commuter spends more than two hours of the day traveling to and from work in South San
Francisco.
Figure 8: Mean Commute Time to Work (Minutes)
Sources: 2013-2017 American Community Survey 5-Year estimates. Table a S0802, S0804.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
VMT measures the total amount of vehicular travel by service population for a specific area. It is a vehicle-focused
metric, but ultimately a powerful performance indicator of a City’s land use plan and multi-modal transportation
network. VMT generation is influenced by several factors that may or may not be affected by city goals, policies,
and plans. These factors include, but are not limited to:
• The location of the city within the San Francisco Bay Area region;
• The diversity, density, and location of land uses internal and external to the city;
• Access to destinations (accessibility) and speed of travel/congestion (mobility) along automobile,
bicycle, pedestrian, and transit networks;
• Convenience of travel (e.g., parking availability, Wi-Fi availability on transit, lockers/showers at the end of
a bicycle trip), and;
• Costs of travel (e.g., gas prices, transit fares, auto/bike maintenance costs).
24 27
47
2730
37
63
35
Drive Alone Carpool Public
Transportation
Average
Commuters from SSF Commuters to SSF
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
12 Existing Conditions Report
The VMT per service population data from the MTC travel demand model yields the following conclusions on the
existing state of VMT generation in the City as shown in Table 2:
• Residential VMT per capita is approximately 10% less than the regional average and 15% less than the
county average.
• Employee VMT per capita is approximately six percent less than the county average but 13% higher than
the regional average
Table 2: South San Francisco VMT Per Capita
Amount City of South San
Francisco San Mateo County 9-County Bay
Area Region
Household VMT per Resident
2015 Baseline VMT per
Resident 13.8 16.3 15.3
15% Reduction from
2015 Baseline 11.7 13.9 13.0
Work VMT per Worker
2015 Baseline VMT per
Job 25.6 27.1 22.7
15% Reduction from
2015 Baseline 21.8 23.0 19.3
Source: Fehr & Peers 2019; MTC Travel Model One, 2017.
South San Francisco is already home to and is continuing to expand one of the largest employment centers in the
region in the East of 101 area. San Mateo County has a severe housing shortfall compared to the number of jobs
in the County.1 This means that many employees in South San Francisco must travel long distances, sometimes
crossing multiple county lines for work. The majority of these trips are completed by driving today and unless
regional housing development shifts to a transit-oriented land use pattern, this mode share and VMT pattern will
persist in the future.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) refers to a set of strategies intended to reduce the demand for private
automobile travel. The City of South San Francisco requires that all nonresidential development expected to
generate an average of 100 or more daily vehicle trips implement TDM measures to reduce vehicle traffic. C/CAG
guidelines require developments that generate 100 or more peak hour trips to implement TDM measures that have
the capacity to mitigate new peak hour trips. The TDM ordinance requires reductions in a site’s drive alone mode
share between 28% and 45% depending on floor area ratio (FAR), but does not specify reductions in trip
generation. Most new employment projects and some residential projects in the past 15 years have TDM programs,
while older land uses tend to not include TDM programs.
1 Between 2010 and 2016, 80,000 new jobs were created, but permits were only issued for 8,000 new homes. That’s one home approved for
every 10 jobs created. Source: San Mateo County Economic Forecast. 2017. California Department of Transportation.
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/eab/socio_economic_files/2017/SanMateo.pdf
13 Existing Conditions Report
Emerging Trends
Transportation patterns are changing with technology, demographics, and behavioral trends. Some of the
emerging trends discussed below are still in their nascent stages in South San Francisco while others are familiar
sights on the city’s streets. These trends will be referenced throughout this document.
Micromobility
Micromobility refers to very light electric vehicles – such as e-bikes and e-scooters – that may be used for personal
and shared use. Micromobility devices have increased in popularity over the past few years and represent a
relatively affordable alternative to automobiles for short trips. One micromobility company, Lime, operated a
small fleet of pedal bikes and e-bikes in South San Francisco between Fall 2017 and Spring 2019. In the Bay Area,
Lyft’s BayWheels service offers e-bikes in San Francisco, San Jose, and the inner East Bay, while several e-scooter
operators are present in San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose.
Ride-Hailing Services
Less than a decade ago ride-hailing services such as Uber and Lyft did not exist. Today, these services are regularly
used to provide on-demand transportation using smartphone applications and electronic payment. The use of
ride-hailing apps tends to be most prevalent in the evening hours and for occasional social and errand purposes.
Strong associations between ride-hailing use and low vehicle ownership indicate that these services can provide
auto-mobility for individuals without access to a personal vehicle2.
Ride-hailing trips do not generate a parking event but do generate a vehicle trip in either direction and require
space for passenger pick-up and drop-off. Increased demand for loading space, both now and in the future, should
2 Brown, A. E. (2018). Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles. UCLA. ProQuest ID: Brown_ucla_0031D_16839. Merritt ID:
ark:/13030/m5d847t1. Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4r22m57k
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 14
not be underestimated when planning street design changes in South San Francisco, particularly in commercial
districts with high levels of visitor turnover. The flipside of this change is that there may be reduced demand for
parking in the future—this is particularly true with the prospect of an autonomous vehicle future on the horizon.
As part of the General Plan and Zoning Code updates, the City may want to think about designing near-term
parking that can be converted into other uses in the future.
Complete Streets
Complete Streets are spaces designed and operated to enable safe use and mobility for all users. This includes
people of all ages and abilities, regardless of whether they are traveling as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public
transportation riders. Part of developing complete streets includes rethinking the classification of street types.
Roads are often sorted by differences such as width or hourly motor vehicle capacity. Complete streets encourages
a multimodal typology that characterizes streets by the modes or activities that are prioritized on each street.
South San Francisco adopted its Complete Streets Policy in 2012 establishing a commitment to serve all street
users:
• Resolution 86-2012: Create and maintain complete streets that provide safe, comfortable, and
convenient travel along and across streets including streets, roads, highways, bridges, and other portions
of the transportation system through a comprehensive, integrated transportation network that serves all
categories of users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of
commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, seniors, children, youth, and families.
Since adopting this policy, several Complete Streets projects have been implemented in South San Francisco.
Example improvements currently underway include the Grand Boulevard Project on El Camino and the Linden
Avenue Complete Streets project.
Curb Management
The conversation about who controls the curb is shifting in cities as ride-hailing, commercial loading, and
micromobility use increases. For several decades, curb space uses and regulations have been assembled
piecemeal in response to property and business owners, and overwhelmingly allocated to car parking. However,
cities are increasingly turning toward other curb uses that may be particularly well suited to a given location, such
as passenger loading zones, commercial loading zones, parklets, rain gardens, or trash collection. The movement
for complete streets is another factor making cities rethink their curb space as flexible public space that could be
better optimized for enjoyment of a streetscape by all people and modes.
15 Existing Conditions Report
Roadway
System and
Parking
This section describes the existing
regional highway system and the local
street circulation system for South San
Francisco. The regional highway system
and roadway classifications described
in this section are illustrated in Figure 9,
below.
Regional Highways
Interstates
U.S.-101
U.S.-101 is an eight lane freeway that extends north to south on the eastern side of South San Francisco. U.S.-101
is a heavily traveled freeway connecting San Francisco and the Bay Bridge with San Mateo and Santa Clara
Counties. Three U.S.-101 interchanges serve South San Francisco at South Airport Boulevard, Grand Avenue, and
Oyster Point Boulevard. The addition of high occupancy toll lanes (HOT Lanes) on U.S.-101 presents an
opportunity to increase carpooling and support express bus service to destinations such as San Francisco and the
East Bay.
Interstate 280
I-280 is an eight lane freeway that extends north to south on the western side of South San Francisco. The freeway
connects San Francisco with San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. One I-280 interchange serves South San
Francisco at Westborough Boulevard/Avalon Drive, while a second interchange at Hickey Boulevard is
immediately adjacent to the City. King Drive crosses I-280, but does not have any on-ramps or off-ramps to the
freeway.
Interstate 380
I-380 is a short east-west freeway spur that connects U.S.-101 and I-280 via San Bruno and South San Francisco.
The freeway has two interchanges that serve local traffic in or adjacent to South San Francisco at El Camino Real
and North Access Road.
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 16
State Routes
California State Route 82
California State Route 82, otherwise known as El Camino Real, is a street that extends north to south in South San
Francisco connecting San Francisco and Daly City to San Jose. SR-82 is generally four to six lanes with a speed
limit of 35 mph.
California State Route 35
California State Route 35 is a four lane street that extends north to south along the western border of South San
Francisco. It connects South San Francisco and San Bruno with Daly City, Pacifica, and western San Francisco.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
17 Existing Conditions Report
Local Circulation
In South San Francisco, the local street system is organized into a hierarchy of four roadway types according to
the 1999 South San Francisco General Plan. These four types are major arterial, minor arterial, collector, and
“other.” The General Plan classifies all streets within the City according to their functional classification.
Functional classifications of roadway networks categorize streets by purpose, location, and typical land uses to
which they provide access. The functional classification system is often considered an automobile-centric method
of planning and does not typically consider travel characteristics and multimodal priorities; consequently, this
classification is becoming less common in California cities. Because streets oftentimes have multiple functions,
defining street “typologies” beyond the existing functional roadway classifications could better support a
multimodal transportation network.
Arterials
The 1999 General Plan classifies arterial streets as major streets that primarily serve through traffic and provide
access to abutting properties as a secondary function. Described in Table 3 below, these streets form the
backbone of South San Francisco’s circulation system. Minor arterials, such as Orange Avenue and Linden Avenue
makeup a second classification group. These serve a similar function as major arterials, but generally have fewer
lanes and support lower speed limits.
East Grand Avenue, looking east under Highway 101, is an example of an arterial.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
18 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 9: Existing Roadway Network
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
19 Existing Conditions Report
Table 3: Major Arterials
Name Description Features1 City Owned?
Hillside Boulevard Connects Linden Avenue to
Daly City in the northern part of
the City.
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 40 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II/III
Yes
Sister Cities Boulevard Runs east-west from Airport
Boulevard to Hillside Boulevard
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 40 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II
Yes
Oyster Point Boulevard Runs east-west from terminus
near Oyster Point Marina to
Airport Boulevard
Lanes/direction: 1-5
Speed limit: 30-35 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II
Yes
Grand Avenue/East
Grand Avenue
Runs east-west from Mission
Road to the Haskins Way
Lanes/direction: 1-3
Speed limit: 35 mph
Median: Yes, east of U.S.-101
Bike lane: Class II/III
Yes
Westborough Boulevard Runs east-west from El Camino
Real and Chestnut Ave to Sharp
Park Road and Skyline
Boulevard
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 35 mph speed limit (except
25 mph in some areas)
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II/III
Partial; El
Camino Real to
Junipero Serra
Blvd. is owned
by County of
San Mateo
Forbes Boulevard Runs a loop from two sections
of Grand Avenue in East of 101
area
Lanes/direction: 1-2
Speed limit of 30/35 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II/III
Yes
Hickey Boulevard Runs from El Camino Real west
into Serramonte
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit of 40 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: None
Yes
Airport / S. Airport
Boulevard
Runs north-south from U.S. 101
425C Exit ramps (Bayshore
Boulevard) to San Mateo
Avenue / S. Airport Boulevard
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 35 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II/III for north section of
corridor
Yes
Chestnut Avenue Runs north-south from Hillside
Boulevard to El Camino Real
Lanes/direction: 1-2
Speed limit: 30 mph
Median: None
Bike lane: Class III
Yes
Gateway Boulevard Runs north-south from Oyster
Point Boulevard to South
Airport Boulevard
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 35 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II for south section of
corridor
Yes
Junipero Serra
Boulevard
Runs north-south from Daly
City to Avalon Drive (relatively
parallel to I-280)
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 50 mph
Median: Yes
Bike lane: Class II
Yes
Gellert Boulevard Runs north-south from Daly
City through Westborough
neighborhood
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit: 35 mph
Median: Yes
Yes
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 20
Bike lane: none
Spruce Avenue Runs north-south connecting
Hillside Boulevard (via School
Street) to El Camino Real
Lanes/direction: 1-2
Speed limit: 30 mph
Median: No
Bike lane: None
Yes
Mission Road Runs parallel to El Camino Real
north of Chestnut Avenue
Lanes/direction: 2
Speed limit of 30 mph
Median: No
Bike lane: Class III
Yes
Note: 1 features are defined based on the characteristics of the majority of the route – some sections of each route may diverge
from these definitions.
Collectors
The 1999 General Plan classifies Collectors as streets that connect arterials with local streets and provide access
and circulation within neighborhoods. Examples of collector streets include Shannon Drive, Del Monte Avenue,
and Commercial Avenue. South San Francisco has numerous collector streets, generally with posted speed limits
of 25 to 30 mph.
Local Streets
The 1999 General Plan classifies Local Streets as those that provide direct access to abutting properties as their
primary function Most local streets are in residential neighborhoods. These streets typically have a speed limit of
25 mph.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
21 Existing Conditions Report
Bicycle Network
Bicycle facilities in South San Francisco consist of bike lanes, routes, trails, and paths, as well as bike parking,
discussed in the parking section below. The existing bicycle network is shown in Figure 10. On-street bicycle
facilities are classified into four categories depending on their design and function as described in Table 4 below.
The City’s large arterial streets, freeway interchanges, and hilly topography can serve as barriers to bicycling.
Table 4: Bikeway Classifications
Class I (10 miles): Provides a completely
separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of
cyclists and pedestrians with cross-flow
minimized. Typically, the most desirable for all
ages and abilities.
Example: Centennial Trail
Class II (13 miles): Provides a striped lane for
one-way travel on a street, which may include
a “buffer” zone consisting of a striped portion
of roadway between the bicycle lane and the
nearest vehicle travel lane. Typically, suitable
for some bicyclists comfortable sharing some
space with cars.
Example: Grand Avenue
Class III (24 miles): Provides for shared use with
motor vehicle traffic to help guide bicyclists
between major destinations. Typically, not
suitable for most bicyclists except on local
residential streets.
Example: Chestnut Avenue
Class IV (0 miles): Provides a right-of-way
designated exclusively for bicycle travel, which
is protected from vehicular traffic. Types of
separation include, but are not limited to,
grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible
physical barriers, or on-street parking.
Typically, suitable for most bicyclists.
No examples in South San Francisco
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
23 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 10: Existing Bicycle Network
Source: Active South City: Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, 2019.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
24 Existing Conditions Report
Pedestrian Network
Pedestrian facilities in South San Francisco consist of sidewalks, trails, staircases, crosswalks, curb ramps, and
signals. Pedestrian-oriented land uses, street widths, lighting, and landscaping also contribute to the quality of
the pedestrian environment.
Pedestrian activity in South San Francisco tends to be highest around downtown, the South San Francisco BART
Station and El Camino High School, South San Francisco High School, retail destinations along El Camino Real,
along the Centennial and Bay Trails, and around the Genentech Campus. The city’s large arterial streets, freeway
interchanges, and hilly topography can serve as barriers to walking. The high stress pedestrian streets and
crossings are highlighted in Figure 11. About 15 miles of streets in South San Francisco are missing one or both
sidewalks, including along major arterials such as Westborough Boulevard, Junipero Serra Boulevard, and Hillside
Boulevard.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
25 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 11: Existing Pedestrian Network
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
26 Existing Conditions Report
Near-Term Roadway Improvements
The City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) includes both Streets and Traffic projects that include updates to
the vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian networks. The CIP includes funding for pre-construction activities such as
feasibility studies and design, as well as construction funding. The proposed network improvements in South San
Francisco with construction funding in the 2018-2019 CIP include:
General:
• Underground Utility District on Mission Road
• Underground Utility District on Antoinette Lane
• South Airport Boulevard Bridge Replacement
• El Camino Gateway Sign and Median Improvement (Noor Avenue to Spruce Avenue)
• Ongoing bridge, pavement, and street lighting maintenance program
Vehicle Traffic:
• New signals: Hillside Boulevard at Lincoln Street; Commercial Avenue at Spruce Avenue
• Oyster Point and East Grand Corridor Improvements
• Linden Avenue/Spruce Avenue Traffic Calming Improvements
• Avalon-Brentwood Park Neighborhood Traffic Improvements
• Adaptive Traffic Control System East of 101
Bike and Pedestrian:
• Grand Boulevard Project Phase I – Phase III (El Camino Real from McLellan Drive to Chestnut Avenue)
• Caltrain Station Enhancements and Bike/Pedestrian Tunnel
• North Access Road Bike and Pedestrian Improvements
• Grand Avenue Pedestrian Crossing & Streetscape Improvements
• Linden Avenue Complete Streets Improvements (California Avenue to Aspen Avenue)
• Bicycle Lanes on Hillside Boulevard, Oyster Point, Gull Drive, and East Grand Avenue
• Safety and Connectivity Improvements – Miller Avenue, Evergreen Drive, and Holly Avenue
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
27 Existing Conditions Report
Balancing Street Performance Goals
Historically, the City of South San Francisco has designed its streets based on automobile LOS standards, which
measures vehicle congestion. Consequently, some of the City’s streets can be hostile environments for people
walking, biking, or accessing transit. The City’s Downtown Specific Plan, Active South City Plan, and Mobility 20/20
Plan identify a range of multimodal improvements to address these unmet needs; however, some of these
improvements would require compromising the City’s LOS standards. Determining how the City continues to use
LOS and its priority amongst other topics such as mode shift, complete streets and safety is a key question for the
General Plan.
Parking Standards and Management
This section describes the existing public parking supply and regulations in the city. The city has on-street parking
options and off-street lots. The City charges for parking in Downtown, and there are parking meters on the 100
block of McLellan Avenue, but public parking in the rest of the city is free. Street parking is time-restricted in some
locations near commercial centers and civic uses. There is no residential permit program in place at this time,
however, there is a BART preferential parking area with parking permits issued only to residents.
Public Parking
Paid public parking in downtown is managed by the City’s Parking Place Commission. After the City Council adopts
hourly and permit parking fee ranges in the Master Fee Schedule every year, the commission has the authority to
modify the rates for hourly and permit parking within the rate schedule.
Figure 12: Downtown Parking Map
Source: South San Francisco Downtown Parking Study, 2016.
There is a mix of on street meter parking and meter parking lots. Along the downtown core, the rate for on street
parking is $1.25 an hour, but decreases to $1.00 an hour just outside the core. Parking is enforced from 9:00 A.M.
to 6:00 P.M. for all areas, and then until 8:00 P.M. for the downtown core. The 12 parking lots downtown offer a
mixture of hourly, daily, monthly, and quarterly rates. Lots 2, 6, 15 and the lot at 418 Linden Avenue have been lost
to redevelopment. Figure 13 illustrates the weekday parking occupancy in Downtown as recorded in spring 2016.
A few other locations around town restrict parking duration to encourage turn-over and improved access to
important city facilities and shopping districts. Example parking restrictions include 2-hour and 24-minute parking
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 28
spaces, which can be found both in front of the Municipal Services Building on Arroyo Drive and on the Hazelwood
Drive commercial corridor.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
29 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 13: Downtown Parking Occupancy
Source: South San Francisco Downtown Parking Study, 2016.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
30 Existing Conditions Report
Network Performance and Safety
This section includes key facts related to the performance of the city’s roadway system, including existing roadway
traffic counts and collision trends broken down by vehicle-vehicle, vehicle-bicycle, and vehicle-pedestrian
collisions.
Motor Vehicle Safety
South San Francisco’s motor vehicle collision record from 2009-2018, excluding collisions on I-280 and US-101, is
mapped in Figure 15. Most collisions take place on the city’s arterial network where travel speeds are faster and
vehicle volumes are highest. A few locations around the city are hotspots for vehicle collisions, including:
• Westborough Blvd. at Gellert Blvd and at Junipero Serra Blvd
• El Camino Real at Chestnut Ave./Westborough Blvd., at W. Orange Ave., and at Spruce Ave.
• Hickey Blvd. at Junipero Serra Blvd. and at El Camino Real
• Spruce Ave. through downtown, especially at Grand Ave.
• Linden Ave. through downtown, especially at Grand Ave.
• Airport Blvd at San Mateo Ave.
Each of these locations had at least 20 collisions in the last 10 years. Fatal collisions are also concentrated on the
arterial network with the exception of two fatal collisions on Poletti Way.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
31 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 15: Vehicle Collisions
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 32
Bicycle Safety
In the ten years from 2009 through 2018, there were 133 bicyclist injury collisions in the city, none of which were
fatal. As shown in Figure 17, most of these collisions were concentrated on a small portion of the city’s streets, with
53% occurring on just eight percent of the roadway network. The Primary Collision Factors (PCF) for these
collisions are described below:
Figure 16: Bicycle Injury Collisions by Primary Collision Factor (PCF)
Source: Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS), 2009-2018
• Improper Turning: collisions where the party at fault made an unsafe turning movement or failed to
signal.
• Automobile Right of Way: collisions where it was determined that the motor vehicle had the right of way
and the cyclist did not.
• Traffic Signals and Signs: collisions where the party at fault failed to obey a traffic signal or sign.
• Wrong Side of Road: collisions where the party at fault was driving or biking in the incorrect travel lane.
Grand Avenue and El Camino Real experienced the highest and second-highest number of collisions, respectively.
Collisions on Grand Avenue were most heavily concentrated downtown. The leading PCF for collisions on Grand
Avenue was improper turning. Crashes on El Camino Real occurred near commercial districts and at major
intersections such as South Spruce Avenue, and the leading PCF for these crashes was bicycling on the wrong side
of the road.
Automobile
Right of Way
18%
Improper
Turning
19%
Traffic
Signals and
Signs
16%
Wrong Side of
Road
15%
Other
32%
33 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 17: Bicycle Collisions
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 34
Pedestrian Safety
Between 2009 and 2018, there were 228 total vehicle collisions in the city that involved a pedestrian fatality or
injury. Of these collisions, six led to a pedestrian death. As shown in Figure 19, the pedestrian collisions were
concentrated on a small portion of the city’s roadway network, similar to the bicyclist injuries. Forty-seven percent
of these collisions occurred on eight percent of the city’s streets. The Primary Collision Factors (PCF) for these
collisions are described below:
Figure 18: Pedestrian Collisions by Primary Collision Factor (PCF)
• Pedestrian Right of Way: collisions where it was determined that the pedestrian had the right of way and
the motorist did not.
• Pedestrian Violation: collisions where it was determined that the pedestrian committed a crossing
violation or was otherwise at fault.
As with the bicyclist collisions, Grand Avenue and El Camino Real experienced the highest number of collisions.
They also accounted for four of the six fatalities that occurred during the ten-year study period. Collisions on Grand
Avenue were concentrated downtown and in residential neighborhoods to the west, and the leading PCF for the
roadway was “Pedestrian Right of Way.” Crashes on El Camino Real occurred near commercial districts and at
major intersections such as South Spruce Avenue. The leading PCF for crashes on El Camino Real was “Pedestrian
Violation.”
Pedestrian
Right of Way
49%
Pedestrian
Violation…
Other…
35 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 19: Pedestrian Collisions
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 36
Transit
Public Transit Services
The City of South San Francisco has bus, rail, and ferry service provided by six transit providers—BART, Caltrain,
WETA, SamTrans, Commute.org, and the City of South San Francisco. Table 6 displays operational information for
these services, while Figure 20 illustrates these services.
Table 6: Transit Services in South San Francisco
Service Description Peak Period Frequency
BART Red Line
Connects Millbrae Station
with Richmond Station via
downtown San Francisco
and downtown Oakland
15 Minutes
BART Yellow Line
Connects SFO Airport with
Pittsburg/Bay Point and
Antioch Stations via
downtown San Francisco
and downtown Oakland
15 Minutes
Caltrain
Connects San Francisco’s
4th & King Station with
San Jose’s Diridon Station
25-35 Minutes
(Northbound
AM/Southbound PM)
60 Minutes (Southbound
AM/Northbound PM)
Commute.org Genesis
Towers Shuttle
Connects Genesis Towers
with BART and Caltrain 45 Minutes
Commute.org Oyster Point
Shuttle
Connects northern East of
101 Area employers with
BART, Caltrain, and ferry
services
25 Minutes (BART)
25-35 Minutes (Caltrain)
3 Daily Round Trips (Ferry)
Commute.org Utah-Grand
Shuttle
Connects southern East of
101 Area employers with
BART, Caltrain, and ferry
services
30 Minutes (BART)
25-35 Minutes (Caltrain)
3 Daily Round Trips (Ferry)
SamTrans 28, 35, 37, and
39
School bus routes serving
Alta Loma Middle School,
El Camino High School,
and South San Francisco
High School
2-3 Daily Round Trips
SamTrans 38
Connects Safe Harbor
shelter in the East of 101
Area with downtown and
BART
6 Daily Round Trips
SamTrans 122
Connects South San
Francisco BART Station
with San Francisco State
University via Daly City
30 Minutes
37 Existing Conditions Report
SamTrans 130
Connects downtown
South San Francisco with
the Daly City BART Station
via the South San
Francisco
15 Minutes
SamTrans 141
Connects downtown
South San Francisco with
San Bruno and the San
Bruno BART Station
30 Minutes
SamTrans 292/397
Connects San Francisco
and San Mateo via
Brisbane, South San
Francisco, SFO, and
Burlingame (Route 397
extends to Palo Alto for
late night service)
15 Minutes
SamTrans ECR/ECR Rapid
Operates along El Camino
Real between the Daly City
BART Station and the Palo
Alto Caltrain Station via
Daly City, Colma, South
San Francisco, San Bruno
Millbrae, Burlingame, San
Mateo, Belmont, San
Carlos, Redwood City,
Atherton, Menlo Park, and
Palo Alto.
12 Minutes (ECR)
20 Minutes (ECR Rapid)
South City Shuttle
Free circulator connecting
destinations within South
San Francisco
40 Minutes
WETA
Connects South San
Francisco Ferry Terminal
with Oakland and
Alameda (Main Street)
Ferry Terminals
3 Daily Round Trips
SamTrans is considering expanding service in the East of 101 Area, focusing on the Oyster Point Boulevard and
East Grand Avenue corridors. WETA also expects to add additional service in accordance with its service expansion
policy as ridership continues to grow.
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 38
Figure 20: Existing Transit Network
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
39 Existing Conditions Report
Private Transit Services
Genentech and other employers operate their own transit services to supplement public transit services within the
city. Genentech operates 23 long-distance express bus routes, three shorter distance connectors to transit
stations, six on-campus circulator routes, and two ferry routes. While most of these services are not open to the
public, a few (such as shuttles to the Millbrae Caltrain station) are open to all riders.
Bus Ridership Patterns and Gaps
West of U.S.-101, SamTrans ridership is primarily concentrated at the South San Francisco BART Station and along
El Camino Real, Grand Avenue, and Airport Boulevard. Smaller concentrations occur near commercial centers
along Westborough Boulevard and Callan Boulevard. Ridership is illustrated in Figure 21.
East of U.S.-101, Commute.org ridership is concentrated along Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue
near major employers (approximately 90% of total ridership) while the remainder occurs along other corridors.
Ridership activity is also high on the Genentech campus for Genentech-specific services.
There are several notable gaps in bus service within South San Francisco
• There is no SamTrans service connecting downtown and other neighborhoods west of U.S.-101 with
employers in the East of 101 Area.
• There is no SamTrans service in the northern area of the City along Hillside Boulevard.
• There is no direct service connecting South San Francisco and Skyline College. Residents wishing to
access the college need to transfer in San Bruno or Daly City.
• Circulating within the city can be challenging if traveling outside the main corridors of El Camino Real,
Grand Avenue, and Airport Boulevard. Although the South City Shuttle fills some gaps, driving remains
more convenient for many trips.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
40 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 21: Transit Ridership
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
41 Existing Conditions Report
Major Transit Stations
South San Francisco BART Station
The South San Francisco BART station serves approximately 3,500 passengers on an average weekday. Over the
past decade, ridership at the station has increased by approximately 20%, illustrated in Figure 22. The dip in
ridership in the last two years can be attributed to a variety of systemwide factors including crowding and lower
service quality satisfaction. The station is primarily accessed via car (34% park-and-ride, 24% drop-off/pick-up) or
by walking (34%), as shown in Figure 23.
Figure 22: South San Francisco BART Station Ridership over Time
Source: BART, 2018 Figure 23: Mode of Access to South San Francisco BART Station
Source: 2015 BART Station Profile Study.
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018Average Weekday Station ExitsBicycle, 4%Bus, 5%
Drop-Off, 24%
Drove Alone or
Carpool, 34%
Walk, 34%
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 42
SSF BART station users walk a median of 0.42 miles to get to the station and drive (carpool or alone) a median of
1.94 miles.
San Bruno BART Station
The San Bruno station is just south of the city. Though the station is very close to South San Francisco, just 14% of
riders from San Bruno station live in South San Francisco, while 69% live in San Bruno and the rest live elsewhere.
South San Francisco Caltrain Station
The South San Francisco Caltrain Station is
currently located along Dubuque Avenue
underneath the East Grand Avenue overpass on
the east side of US-101. The station serves
approximately 470 passengers per day (Figure 23).
It is one of the least utilized in the Caltrain system
due to its relatively inaccessible location and low
service levels. However, Caltrain is currently
constructing a new station several hundred feet to
the south near the Grand Avenue/Airport
Boulevard intersection (described below) and
electrifying its fleet to add more trains systemwide
(which will be complete in 2022). The station is
primarily accessed via walking (47%) or biking
(19%).
Figure 24: South San Francisco Caltrain Station Ridership over Time
0
100
200
300
400
500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
43 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 25: Mode of Access to South San Francisco Caltrain Station
Improvements associated with the Caltrain station and service levels have the potential to reshape South San
Francisco’s interface with the regional rail system. The Station Improvement Project includes a new median
platform, underpass entrances connecting to downtown and East Grand Avenue, and a shuttle loading area along
Poletti Way. Combined with the Caltrain Electrification project, the reconstructed station is expected to see as
many as four trains per hour, per direction in 2022. Over the long-term, Caltrain has identified South San Francisco
as an express station in its Business Plan, which would further increase service levels to eight trains per hour, per
direction.
These changes may be transformative. Caltrain expects South San Francisco Station to serve roughly 5,000 to 7,000
passengers by 2040, ten to fourteen times greater than today. In order to capitalize on this opportunity and
accommodate expected passenger volumes, the city needs to invest in a range of station access improvements
and increase shuttle service levels connecting the station with East of 101 employers.
South San Francisco Ferry Terminal
The South San Francisco Ferry serves approximately 580 daily passengers commuting from the East Bay to South
San Francisco in the mornings and back to the East Bay in the evenings. Although ferry ridership has steadily
increased by approximately 20% over the past five years, it remains among the least utilized regional ferry services
due to its low service levels and limited adjacent land uses.
Walk, 47%
Bicycle, 19%
Transit, 5%
Drop-Off, 16%
Park-and-Ride,
13%
City of South San Francisco General Plan Update 44
Rail and Goods Movement
South San Francisco rail infrastructure is mapped in Figure 26.
Rail Movement
Caltrain
Caltrain operates along a mostly separated corridor through South San Francisco, with the exception of the at-
grade crossing of South Linden Avenue in the Lindenville area. There are grade separated crossings at Airport
Boulevard, U.S. 101, Grand Avenue, U.S. 101 SB off-ramp towards Oyster Point, Oyster Point Boulevard, and U.S.
101 NB off-ramp towards Sierra Point Parkway.
BART
BART travels underground for the duration of its path through South San Francisco.
Freight Rail
Historically, South San Francisco experienced a relatively high volume of freight rail operations on rail spurs
serving both in the East of 101 and Lindenville areas. As land uses have changed over time, these operations have
decreased.
Freight rail service is provided (as of July 2019) by the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) in accordance with the terms
of a 1991 Trackage Rights Agreement between UPRR and the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB). The
PCJPB owns the Peninsula Main Line right-of-way on which Caltrain operates, but UPRR owns several rail spurs in
the East of 101 Area. Freight operation is restricted during the AM and PM peak periods and largely occurs during
evening and night hours. UPRR currently operates three freight trains per weekday, all based out of the yard next
to the South San Francisco Caltrain Station:
South City Switcher
The South City Switcher operates early in the morning and connects industries within South San Francisco,
Brisbane, and San Francisco with port facilities at Pier 96. Shippers in South San Francisco include Granite Rock
and Central Concrete in Lindenville and Pacific AgriProducts along Forbes Boulevard in the East of 101 Area. In
order to access Pacific AgriProducts, the South City Switcher travels along railroad spurs paralleling East Grand
Avenue and Harbor Way/Forbes Boulevard in the East of 101 Area across several uncontrolled rail crossings.
Broadway Local
The Broadway Local starts operating around 5:30 p.m. and serves industries between South San Francisco and
San Jose, such as the Port of Redwood City and the Unilever plant in Sunnyvale, after the evening rush hour ends.
The Broadway Local does not deviate from the Caltrain corridor in South San Francisco.
45 Existing Conditions Report
Mission Bay Hauler
The Mission Bay Hauler starts operating around 6:30 p.m. and gathers up the outbound cars brought in by the
other two local services and hauls them to the Union Pacific yard in Milpitas, then returns with the inbound cars
for distribution by local services. The Mission Bay Hauler does not deviate from the Caltrain corridor in South San
Francisco.
Ongoing Changes
Freight service varies in response to freight customer needs and activity. The Peninsula Freight Rail User’s Group
estimates that the number of rail cars between San Jose and San Francisco over the past decade has averaged
about 60 to 80 cars per day in each direction (once loaded, once empty). This translates to 20,000 to 30,000 loaded
rail cars carrying 2 to 3 million tons of cargo between San Jose and the San Francisco Peninsula each year, the
equivalent of at least 100,000 truck trips annually.
In December 2016, UPRR and the PCJPB agreed to a transfer of the freight rights and intercity passenger rights for
the portion of the Caltrain corridor north of CP Coast to San Francisco from UPRR to the PCJPB. The agreement
established how the PCJPB and UPRR would initiate a selection process to identify a third-party short-line railroad
operator, select an operator, and obtain Surface Transportation Board approvals, and then PCJPB would obtain
the freight and intercity passenger rights for this portion of the Caltrain corridor, among other requirements. At
present (July 2019), the existing trackage rights agreement is still in force for the Caltrain corridor until the transfer
is complete and a new trackage rights agreement is established for the area.
Truck Routes
The City of South San Francisco has not designated formal truck routes for goods movement. Most truck activity
occurs in the East of 101 and Lindenville areas serving warehouse, manufacturing, and R&D uses. The state
requires that general plans identify truck routes.
Freight Issues
Continued freight rail operations in the East of 101 Area provides tradeoffs for the evolving district. Current freight
rail operations support continued success of local industry and help reduce overall truck traffic in the city and
region. However, while freight operations along the mainline corridor have a relatively minimal effect on the city,
continued operations (or the potential for future operations) on active and inactive rail spurs in the East of 101
Area pose challenges for improving connectivity and safety for people walking, biking, and driving in the East of
101 Area.
Similarly, the City’s flexibility toward truck operations also provides tradeoffs. While goods movement activities
can occur freely on all streets, it can result in overbuilt intersections with very wide lane widths and curb radii,
resulting in challenging street designs for pedestrians and bicyclists.
CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION
46 Existing Conditions Report
Figure 26: Rail Infrastructure
City of South San Francisco—General Plan Update, Zoning Code Amendments, and Climate Action Plan
Administrative Draft Program EIR
FirstCarbon Solutions
H.2 - Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled by Speed Bin
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Start End 2015 Base - 2019 LU 2040 NP 2040 PP 2040 Pref Alt v2
0 5 1,751 32,159 39,633 70,943
5 10 8,129 18,987 30,685 97,852
10 15 59,213 88,876 86,846 121,482
15 20 291,438 495,647 540,290 603,058
20 25 343,677 443,490 524,106 717,474
25 30 281,061 549,904 615,093 620,764
30 35 396,715 373,351 413,205 466,865
35 40 207,725 392,095 423,604 518,247
40 45 253,079 381,248 464,744 558,003
45 50 214,550 486,885 593,422 614,382
50 55 336,953 463,086 429,736 554,114
55 60 530,947 656,890 780,115 862,687
60 65 404,780 445,167 499,094 632,154
65 9999 7,273 10,531 11,908 14,495
3,337,291 4,838,316 5,452,480 6,452,522Total
Speed Bin (mph)All Vehicles (incl. Trucks)
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK