HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix H - Transportation Impact AnalysisAppendix H: Transportation Impact Analysis
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact
Analysis
Prepared for:
City of South San Francisco and
US Terminal Owner LLC
June 2024
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Description ............................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Significance Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................. 2
2. Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Roadway Facilities ................................................................................................................................................................. 5
2.2 Transit Facilities and Service ............................................................................................................................................. 5
2.3 Pedestrian Facilities .............................................................................................................................................................. 6
2.4 Bicycle Facilities ..................................................................................................................................................................... 7
2.5 Emergency Vehicle Access ................................................................................................................................................ 7
2.6 Transportation Plans and Policies .................................................................................................................................. 7
2.5.1 General Plan ................................................................................................................................................................ 7
2.5.2 Active South City Plan ...........................................................................................................................................10
2.5.3 Transportation Demand Management Ordinance ....................................................................................10
2.5.4 Lindenville Specific Plan .......................................................................................................................................10
3. Transportation Analysis .......................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Project Travel Demand .....................................................................................................................................................15
3.2 Consistency with Plans & Policies ................................................................................................................................16
3.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled ......................................................................................................................................................20
3.3.1 Summary of TDM Program and Effectiveness .............................................................................................20
3.4 Design Hazards ....................................................................................................................................................................22
3.4.1 US-101 Southbound Offramp/Produce Avenue Intersection ...............................................................22
3.4.2 US-101 Southbound Onramp/Terminal Court/Produce Avenue Intersection................................23
3.4.3 San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue intersection ...........................................................24
3.4.4 Site Circulation .........................................................................................................................................................24
3.5 Emergency Access ..............................................................................................................................................................25
4. Impacts and Mitigations Summary ....................................................................................... 26
4.1 Consistency with Plans & Policies ................................................................................................................................26
4.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled ......................................................................................................................................................28
4.3 Design Hazards ....................................................................................................................................................................28
4.4 Emergency Access ..............................................................................................................................................................29
5. Local Transportation Analysis ................................................................................................ 30
5.1 Parking ....................................................................................................................................................................................30
5.2 Passenger Loading .............................................................................................................................................................30
5.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Access .......................................................................................................................................30
5.4 Transit ......................................................................................................................................................................................31
5.5 Off-Site Traffic Operations ..............................................................................................................................................31
5.5.1 Approach and Methodology ..............................................................................................................................31
5.5.2 Analysis Scenarios ...................................................................................................................................................34
5.5.3 Analysis Results: South San Francisco .............................................................................................................35
5.5.4 Analysis Results: San Bruno.................................................................................................................................38
5.5.5 Improvement Measures .......................................................................................................................................39
List of Figures
Figure 1-1 Project Location .............................................................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 1-2 Project Site Plan .............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Figure 2-1 Existing Transit Facilities ........................................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 2-2 Existing and Planned Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities................................................................................. 14
Figure 3-1 Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 Improvements .................................................................................................. 19
Figure 3-2 Terminal Court Driveways ........................................................................................................................................ 24
Figure 5-1 City of San Bruno LOS Standards .......................................................................................................................... 32
List of Tables
Table 2.1 South San Francisco General Plan Mobility Goals, Policies, and Actions ................................................... 8
Table 2.2 Lindenville Specific Plan Mobility Goals and Policies ...................................................................................... 11
Table 3.1 Vehicle Trip Generation ............................................................................................................................................... 15
Table 3.2 Estimated Peak Hour Person Trips and Mode Share ....................................................................................... 16
Table 3.3 Home-Based Work Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Employee ............................................................................ 20
Table 3.4 TDM Program Elements .............................................................................................................................................. 21
Table 5.1 Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria ....................................................................................................................... 33
Table 5.2 Unsignalized Intersection LOS Criteria .................................................................................................................. 34
Table 5.3: South San Francisco LOS Analysis, AM Peak ..................................................................................................... 36
Table 5.4: South San Francisco LOS Analysis, PM Peak ...................................................................................................... 37
Table 5.5: San Bruno LOS Analysis, AM Peak ......................................................................................................................... 38
Table 5.6: San Bruno LOS Analysis, PM Peak .......................................................................................................................... 39
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
1
1. Introduction
1.1 Project Description
This transportation impact analysis (TIA) evaluates potential transportation impacts associated with the
Infinite 131 development located west of Highway 101 in South San Francisco, California (herein referred to
as the “Project”). The Project is located on a 17.67 acre site presently zoned as Mixed Industrial High and
Mixed Industrial Medium. The Project includes demolition of approximately 126,750 square feet of industrial
and operational uses that are currently occupied by the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, along with
approximately 116,572 square feet of open-air structures such as loading docks and trash compactor areas.
The Project would construct 1,632,000 square feet of research & development space, 21,000 square feet of
conference space, a 20,000 square foot fitness center, 27,000 square feet of restaurant space, and 4,050
square feet of daycare space, for a total of 1.704 million square feet across seven campus buildings. The
Project includes 2,976 proposed stalls, including 50 accessible spaces and 1,339 electric vehicle capable
spaces. The Project would include amendments to the City’s General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and
Zoning Code to change the existing land use and zoning designations to Business Technology Park High.
The Project site is bounded by the Park & Fly lot, US-101, and Produce Avenue to the east, Terminal Court
to the north, the Navigable Slough to the south, and the San Mateo Avenue corridor to the west. The Park
& Fly lot was recently entitled as the Infinite 101 development, a 696,000 square foot research and
development campus by the same owner that would function as a separate phase to the Project. The Project
site is approximately one mile south of the South San Francisco Caltrain Station, one mile north of the San
Bruno Caltrain station, and one mile northeast of the San Bruno BART station. Primary bicycle and pedestrian
site access is provided via the planned Class I Shared-Use Path along the western frontage of the site, which
would connect to Shaw Road and Terminal Court/Produce Avenue. San Francisco International Airport (SFO)
is located approximately two miles to the south.
The Project is subject to the City’s TDM Ordinance (Chapter 20.400 of the City’s Municipal Code) which
requires the Project to implement a TDM program that achieves a 50 percent drive alone mode share
target and complies with a trip cap. The TDM program elements include site enhancement strategies, on-
site amenities, and programmatic and service strategies that encourage the use of alternative modes of
travel. As described in the TDM Plan in Appendix A, the Project’s TDM program would include all
required measures including participation in Commute.org programs, a carpool/vanpool program, bicycle
storage, showers, and lockers, a TDM coordinator, bicycle- and pedestrian-oriented site access, and
encouragement telecommuting. Additionally, the Project would include fully subsidized transit passes,
new shuttle services to Caltrain and BART, active transportation and transit capital improvements, on-site
amenities, and a bicycle repair station. The measures will be monitored to ensure that they comply with
the 50 percent non-drive-alone mode share required by the ordinance; failure to reach this goal would
result in the implementation of additional measures and/or administration of penalties. Upon completion
of both the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 developments, monitoring would be coordinated between the
two sites as a single campus.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
2
Figure 1-1 shows the Project location, nearby intersections, and the surrounding roadway system. Figure
1-2 presents the Project site plan. All figures in the report can be found at the end of their respective
sections.
1.2 Significance Criteria
The impacts of the Project related to transportation will be considered significant under CEQA if any of the
following thresholds of significance are exceeded, per Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines:
• Consistency with Plans & Policies: A significant impact would a occur if the development of the
Project would conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities;
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): A significant impact would a occur if the development of the
Project would generate per-employee VMT greater than the City's adopted threshold of 15
percent below the regional average, according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision
(b) and City of South San Francisco Resolution 77-2020 related to VMT;
• Design Hazards: A significant impact would a occur if the development of the Project would
substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or
• Emergency Access and Evacuation: A significant impact would a occur if the development of the
Project would result in inadequate emergency access
The thresholds of significance used in this document are based on Appendix G criteria and the City of South
San Francisco's adopted local policies. The criteria of significance apply to all Project scenarios as measured
against the corresponding No Project scenarios.
CrestmoorCanyon
3101
W e st O range Avenue
C h estnutA v
S
o
u
t
h Air
p
o
r
t
B
o
ul
e
v
a
r
d
Westb or o u g h B l
El C
a
m
in
o R
e
al
S a n B r u n o A v e n u e W e st
yW robraH
South Linden Avenue
El
C
a
mi
n
o
R
e
al
OrangeAvenue Grand Avenue
H
u
nti
n
g
t
o
n
A
v
North
Mc
donnel
l
Ro
a
d
C o u ntry ClubDr ive
DubuqueAv
U t a h A v e n u e
Gate wayBl
S n e ath La n e
Linden Av
San Bruno Avenue East
SouthSpruceAvenue
ProduceAv
EastGr a ndAv
eunevA oetaM naS
C
h
e
r
r
y
A
v
D
o
ra
d
o W
y
Cr
estwo
od D
rive
Spruce Avenue
Avalo n Drive
MitchellAvenue
·82
%&280
%&38017
24
31
20
26
25
27
18 19
11 16
28
13
10
87
2
3
1
4
30
6
Project LocationFigure 1-1
Project Site
City Boundary
!
!
San Bruno
South San Francisco
DOWNTOWN
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
BAYHILL
TanforanShopping Center
OrangeMemorial Park
Sou
t
h
M
a
p
l
e
Aven
u
e
H
u
n
�
n
g
t
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
S
e
a
Sco� St
Miller Av
Baden Av
Bis
c
uit Av
Air
p
o
r
t B
l
San Mateo Av
3101
·82
%&38017
24
25
27
18 19
8
2
3
1
4
San Bruno
South San Francisco
DOWNTOWN
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
BAYHILL
TanforanShopping Center
OrangeMemorial Park
So
u
t
h
M
a
p
l
e
Aven
u
e
H
u
n
�
n
g
t
o
n
A
v
e
n
u
e
S
e
a
Sco� St
Miller Av
Baden Av
B
i
s
c
u
it Av
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
B
l
San Mateo Ave
n
u
e
Shaw Road
San Mateo Ave
n
u
e
Tanforan
A
v
e
n
u
e
Mitchell Avenue
S
o
u
t
h
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
B
l
v
d
BART Route and Station
Caltrain Route
P
r
o
duce Avenue
South Linden Av
e
nue
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
5
2. Environmental Setting
This section describes the existing transportation and circulation setting near the Project site: the existing
roadway network, transit network and service, pedestrian conditions, bicycle conditions, and emergency
vehicle access.
2.1 Roadway Facilities
The Project site is located on the west side of U.S. Route 101 (US-101), south of Terminal Court, in the city’s
Lindenville District. Regional access to the Project site is provided via US-101, accessed via Produce Ave.
Key local roadways in the vicinity of the Project site are described below:
▪ US-101 is an eight-lane freeway and principal north-south roadway connection between San
Francisco, San José, and intermediate San Francisco Peninsula cities. In South San Francisco, US-
101 is located directly adjacent to the Project site and serves the Project area with the Produce
Ave/S Airport Boulevard Road exit. Access to the Project for vehicles traveling north on US-101 is
provided by the S Airport Boulevard exit and underpass to the west side of the freeway. Access to
the site for vehicles traveling south on US-101 is provided by the Produce Avenue exit.
▪ Produce Avenue is a three-lane arterial east of the Project, with two southbound lanes accessing the
southbound US-101 onramp.
▪ Terminal Court is a two-lane cul-de-sac which intersects with Produce Avenue.
▪ Shaw Road is a two-lane local road south of the Project site and the Navigable Slough.
▪ San Mateo Avenue is a two-lane arterial west of the site which can provide access to Shaw Road
from the north and the south.
▪ Southline Avenue is a new east-west street that will connect Sneath Lane and San Mateo
Avenue/South Linden Avenue.
2.2 Transit Facilities and Service
The Project site is not directly served by regional rail, ferry, or bus transit services. Existing transit facilities
are shown in Figure 2-1 and described below.
Caltrain provides passenger rail service on the Peninsula between San Francisco and San José and limited-
service trains to Morgan Hill and Gilroy during weekday commute periods. The South San Francisco Caltrain
Station is approximately one mile north of the Project and is accessed from the Grand Avenue/Airport
Boulevard intersection. Caltrain provides weekday service from 5:00 a.m. to 12:30 a.m., with two trains per
hour during peak periods and hourly service during off-peak periods. In Fall 2024, Caltrain plans to complete
its electrification project to support faster and more frequent rail service on the Peninsula; draft service
plans published in October 2023 include a service increase in South San Francisco to four trains per hour
per direction during peak periods (two express trains and two local trains) along with two trains per hour
per direction during off-peak periods (local trains only).
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
6
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) provides regional rail service between the East Bay, San Francisco, and San
Mateo County, connecting between San Francisco International Airport and Millbrae Intermodal Station to
the south, San Francisco to the north, and Oakland, Richmond, Antioch, Dublin/Pleasanton, and Fremont in
the East Bay. The San Bruno Station is the closest station to the Project site, about one mile southwest
adjacent to the Tanforan Mall. The station is served by the Red Line (Richmond-Millbrae via SFO) and the
Yellow Line (Antioch-SFO). BART provides service from 5:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. on weekdays and 6:00 a.m.
to 12:00 a.m. on weekends. The Yellow Line operates at 10 minute frequencies during the day and every 20
minutes after 9:00 pm, while the Red Line operates every 20 minutes throughout the day and ceases service
after 9:00 pm.
San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) provides weekday commuter
ferry service between the Oakland/Alameda ferry terminals and the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal at
Oyster Point. The Ferry Terminal is located three miles northeast of the Project site. WETA provides three
daily roundtrips during peak periods.
San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) provides bus service in San Mateo County. SamTrans Route
292 runs from San Francisco to Hillsdale and stops along Airport Boulevard about 0.7 miles north of the
Project. Buses provide service every 30 minutes from 4:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. on weekdays and 6:50 a.m. to
6:50 p.m. on weekends.
The Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (Commute.org) provides weekday commute period first/last
mile shuttles connecting employers in the East of 101 Area with BART, Caltrain, and the WETA Ferry Terminal.
No shuttle service is present west of 101 near the Project site.
2.3 Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, trails, and pedestrian signals. Pedestrian facilities near the
Project site serve walking trips connecting to shuttle stops, the Caltrain Station, multi-use trails, and nearby
offices and businesses. Existing and proposed pedestrian facilities in the vicinity of the Project site are shown
in Figure 2-2.
The Project site is located in an industrial-focused area with challenging pedestrian conditions. Sidewalks
near the Project site are generally narrow, lack buffer zones from adjacent roadways, and are frequently
interrupted by driveways. The following pedestrian facilities exist near the Project site.
▪ San Mateo Avenue has sidewalks on both sides of the street that are approximately five feet wide.
▪ Shaw Road has sidewalks on both sides of the street that are approximately five feet wide.
▪ Produce Avenue has a sidewalk on the west side of the roadway that is approximately five feet
wide. Produce Avenue serves as a connection from South Airport Boulevard to the Project site.
There are no sidewalks on the east side of Produce Avenue due to the US-101 freeway.
▪ Terminal Court has sidewalks that are approximately five feet wide. Terminal Court connects to
Produce Avenue to the Project site. There are no marked pedestrian crossings connecting the
north side of Terminal Court to the Project site.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
7
2.4 Bicycle Facilities
Bicycle facilities consist of separated bikeways, bicycle lanes, routes, trails, and paths, bicycle parking, bicycle
lockers, and showers for cyclists. Existing and proposed bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the Project site are
shown in Figure 2-2. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recognizes four classifications
of bicycle facilities, as described below.
▪ Class I – Shared-Use Pathway: Provides a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use
of cyclists and pedestrians with cross-flow minimized (e.g., off-street bicycle paths).
▪ Class II – Bicycle Lanes: Provides a striped lane for one-way travel on a street or highway. It may
include a "buffer" zone consisting of a striped roadway between the bicycle lane and the nearest
vehicle travel lane.
▪ Class III – Bicycle Route: Provides for shared use with motor vehicle traffic; however, they are often
signed or include a striped bicycle lane.
▪ Class IV – Separated Bikeway: Provides a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel
adjacent to a roadway protected from vehicular traffic. Types of separation include, but are not
limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking.
There are no existing bicycle facilities near the Project site. The Centennial Way Trail is located
approximately 0.75 miles west of the Project site and may be accessed via Tanforan Avenue, South Linden
Avenue, and Shaw Road. The Bay Trail is located approximately 0.25 miles east of the Project site but
requires a circuitous one-mile diversion to the north via South Airport Boulevard to access the trail. Most
streets near the Project site pose barriers to bicycle use due to high volumes of auto and truck traffic.
2.5 Emergency Vehicle Access
Emergency vehicles typically use major streets through the study area when heading to and from an
emergency and/or emergency facility. Arterial roadways allow emergency vehicles to travel at higher speeds
and provide enough clearance space to permit other traffic to maneuver out of the emergency vehicle's
path and yield the right-of-way. The nearest existing fire station to the Project is Fire Station 62 at 249
Harbor Way, approximately 0.9 miles east of the Project site, via Mitchell Avenue and Produce Avenue, with
access to the Project via the driveway on Terminal Court. Alternatively, emergency vehicles can travel along
San Mateo Avenue to access the Project Site via the driveway on Shaw Road. Harbor Way has one travel
lane in each direction and a two-way center left turn lane. Mitchell Avenue and Produce Avenue have two
travel lanes with a center median. Travel time is approximately five minutes from Fire Station 62 to the
Project site, and the Project site allows for larger vehicle turning movements.
2.6 Transportation Plans and Policies
2.5.1 General Plan
The South San Francisco 2040 General Plan establishes a vision for the City’s future growth. Its Circulation
Element includes 5 goals, 13 policies, and 26 actions covering topics such as complete streets, vehicle
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
8
miles traveled, connectivity, safety, active transportation, TDM, parking, and innovations. Each goal is
presented in Table 2.1, accompanied by policies and actions that are particularly relevant the Project:
Table 2.1 South San Francisco General Plan Mobility Goals, Policies, and Actions
# Goal Project-Related Policies & Actions
1
South San Francisco prioritizes safety in
all aspects of transportation planning
and engineering.
Policy MOB-1.2: Strive to reduce vehicle speeds throughout the
city to reduce the frequency and severity of collisions.
Action MOB-1.2.1. Incorporate traffic calming treatments
into all street projects to support lower design speeds.
2
South San Francisco provides a
multimodal network with convenient
choices for everyone.
Policy MOB-2.1: Incorporate complete streets improvements into
all roadway and development projects.
Action MOB-2.1.1: Complete multimodal design and
impact analysis. Ensure that roadway and development
projects are designed and evaluated to meet the needs of
all street users, and that development projects contribute
to multimodal improvements in proportion to their
potential impacts on vehicle miles traveled.
Action MOB-2.1.3: Implement Active South City
Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan. All capital improvements and
development projects incorporate bicycle and pedestrian
improvements identified in the Active South City Plan,
such as trails, bikeways, bicycle detection at traffic signals,
high-visibility crosswalks, and pedestrian-oriented site
plans.
Action MOB-2.1.4: Implement transit speed, reliability,
and access improvements. All capital improvements and
development projects near regional transit stations or
bus/shuttle routes incorporate improvements to advance
speed, reliability, and access, such as in-lane farside bus
stops, bus-only lanes, queue jumps, and pedestrian/bicycle
gap closures.
Policy MOB-2.2: Advance more equitable transportation within
South San Francisco.
Action MOB-2.2.2: Develop free bus and shuttle service for
residents. Develop a dedicated funding source or leverage
private sector contributions to fund the South City shuttle
and free bus service for South San Francisco residents.
Policy MOB-2.3: Interaction between truck routes and
bicycle/pedestrian priority streets. When streets are designed as a
truck route and a priority street for bicyclists and pedestrians (either
in the General Plan or Active South City Plan), complete a more
detailed review and study to prioritize intersections and street
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
9
# Goal Project-Related Policies & Actions
design for active mobility and limit truck movements to the
designated truck routes.
3 South San Francisco proactively
manages traffic and parking demand.
Policy MOB-3.1: Promote mode shift among employers. Manage
the number of vehicle trips, with a focus on promoting mode shift
among employers.
Action MOB-3.1.2: Implement an East of 101 Trip Cap.
Implement an East of 101 area trip cap with triennial
monitoring and corrective actions if exceeded. Implement
project-specific trip caps for large campus developments.
Policy MOB-3.2: Optimize traffic operations on City streets.
Optimize traffic operations on City streets while avoiding widening
roadways or otherwise pursuing traffic operations changes at
expense of multimodal safety, transit reliability, or bicycle and
pedestrian comfort.
Action MOB-3.2.1: Update traffic operations metrics. Use
appropriate metrics (e.g. travel time, vehicle queues,
vehicle delay/level of service, and/or person delay) to
evaluate and advance projects that manage traffic flow in
coordination with the implementation of complete streets.
Action MOB-3.2.2: Incorporate new street connections.
Incorporate new street connections to better distribute
vehicle trips across South San Francisco’s street network,
especially in the East of 101 Area.
Policy MOB-3.3: Right-size parking supply and maximize the
efficiency of curb space.
Action MOB-3.3.1: Incorporate parking maximums.
Incorporate maximum parking requirements for new
residential and office/R&D projects that align with TDM
Ordinance trip reduction goals.
4
South San Francisco’s land use and
transportation actions reduce vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) and greenhouse
gas emissions
Policy MOB-4.1: Increase substantially the proportion of travel
using modes other than driving alone.
Action MOB-4.1.1: Use site plan review to improve
connectivity. Use the development review process to
identify opportunities to enhance bicycle, pedestrian, and
transit connectivity.
5
South San Francisco residents have
easy access to play, fitness, and active
transportation networks.
Policy MOB-5.1: Expand the low-stress bike and pedestrian
network. Capitalize on opportunities to expand the low-stress bike
and pedestrian network throughout the city.
The General Plan proposes new streets and major transportation investments. The Utah Avenue
Interchange project would create an overpass across US 101, from South Airport Boulevard to San Mateo
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
10
Avenue (via the northern edge of the Project site) connecting Lindenville to the East of 101 area. The US
101 southbound offramp and the US 101 northbound on/off ramp would be reconfigured as part of that
project. Produce Avenue would remain as the access for the US 101 south onramp and the Project
Driveway. Several other projects identified in the General Plan will impact the transit access, traffic
operations, and multimodal performance of the Project.
The Project was not included in the General Plan and therefore requires a General Plan amendment.
2.5.2 Active South City Plan
The Active South City Plan identifies priority projects and policies to improve bicycle and pedestrian
access through the city. The plan proposes an additional 50 miles of bike facilities for the network. In the
proximity of the Project, the Active South City Plan proposed the following bicycle facilities:
▪ San Mateo Avenue – Class II Bicycle Lanes
▪ Airport Boulevard – Class IV Separated Bikeway
▪ Shaw Road – Class I Shared-Use Path
▪ US-101 Bicycle & Pedestrian Bridge – Class I Shared-Use Path
▪ Utah Avenue Overpass – Class II Bicycle Lanes
The planned bicycle network in relation to the Project site is illustrated in Figure 2-2.
The Active South City Plan also identifies Airport Boulevard and San Mateo Avenue as candidates for
pedestrian improvements to enhance walkability and reduce conflicts with other modes.
2.5.3 Transportation Demand Management Ordinance
South San Francisco Zoning Code includes a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance
(Chapter 20.400). The ordinance aims to reduce VMT of new developments, manage congestion, and
promote efficient use of the existing transportation network through TDM measure adoption, and
ongoing monitoring and reporting. Each development tier is required to meet a different point value for
TDM measure adoption, trip cap, and monitoring requirements. Tier 4 projects are required to achieve at
least 50 points, conduct annual monitoring to achieve a maximum of 50 percent of employees commuting
via driving alone, and conduct annual monitoring of a site-specific trip cap. The Project’s TDM Plan is
provided as an attachment.
2.5.4 Lindenville Specific Plan
The Lindenville Specific Plan expands upon the General Plan’s vision for a mixed-use neighborhood,
employment hub, and cultural center around the Project site. The Specific Plan identifies conceptual street
layouts and circulation improvements for the Lindenville District that are generally consistent with the
General Plan and Active South City Plan. Table 2.2 summarizes mobility goals and policies included in the
specific plan.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
11
Table 2.2 Lindenville Specific Plan Mobility Goals and Policies
# Goal Project-Related Policies & Actions
MOB-
1
Multi-modal travel
options are
readily available and offer
equal levels of comfort.
Policy MOB-1.1: Establish key pedestrian-oriented streets. Transform streets with
higher density mixed use development and arts and makers uses into welcoming
pedestrian environments with street trees, lighting, and landscaping. Create a
relaxing pedestrian environment along a rehabilitated Colma Creek.
Policy MOB 1.2: Establish key low-stress bicycle routes. Facilitate seamless low-
stress bicycle connections to Lindenville via South Spruce Avenue, Centennial
Way Trail, and Tanforan Avenue, accompanied by feeder routes to access local
destinations.
Policy MOB 1.3: Establish high-quality transit facilities. Prioritize public transit
mobility and facilities on South Spruce Avenue and at shuttle hubs at major
employment centers.
Policy MOB 1.4: Facilitate vehicle access in and out of Lindenville. Accommodate
regional auto access to US-101 and I-380 via Southline Avenue, San Mateo
Avenue, South Airport Boulevard, and an extension of Utah Avenue.
Policy MOB 1.5: Prioritize safety. Prioritize safety and accessibility over speed and
vehicle flow in all streetscape and intersection projects.
Policy MOB 1.6: Plan for the future. Incorporate design choices, like flexible curb
space, that futureproof the transportation network for emerging technologies like
autonomous vehicles.
MOB-
2
There are high-quality
connections to
Downtown, El Camino,
East of 101, and regional
destinations for all
modes.
Policy MOB 2.1: Connect bicyclists and pedestrians to Lindenville. Complete low-
stress bicycle and pedestrian connections to the Centennial Way Trail, Bay Trail,
and the Colma Creek Greenbelt.
Policy MOB 2.2: Connect regional transit riders to Lindenville. Work with
SamTrans and individual employers to maintain high frequency, high-capacity
transit service with direct connections to the South San Francisco Caltrain station
and the San Bruno BART station.
Policy MOB 2.3: Provide drivers direct connections to Lindenville. Add vehicle
capacity to reach East of 101 and farther destinations by completing the Utah
Avenue interchange project including a reconfiguration of southbound US-101
ramps.
MOB-
3
Lindenville’s
transportation offerings
and streetscape design
support a vibrant mixed
use district.
Policy MOB 3.1: Apply TDM requirements. Apply and enforce the citywide
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance for new development in
Lindenville.
Policy MOB 3.2: Add new connections. Create short blocks with new streets,
alleys, and pathways to support connections for people who walk, bike, or use
other micromobility options.
Policy MOB 3.3: Prioritize pedestrian and bike access. Require property owners to
prioritize pedestrian and bicycle access in site design in the mixed use and office
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
12
# Goal Project-Related Policies & Actions
corridors and de-emphasize vehicle access using design, wayfinding, and building
amenities.
Policy MOB 3.4: Overhaul key streets, support gradual shift elsewhere. Encourage
land use transition and mode shift by overhauling the transportation experience
on select corridors (e.g., South Spruce Avenue and South Canal Street) and taking
a more gradual approach on others (e.g., South Linden Avenue and Victory
Avenue). Incremental changes might include converting some parking to parklets
and pick-up/drop-off zones and providing pedestrian bulbouts at crosswalks.
Policy MOB 3.5: Facilitate safe truck activity. Use traffic calming features and
slower speed limits to facilitate safe truck interaction with other modes in districts
zoned for industrial and commercial uses while phasing in weight limits and large
truck restrictions in the districts zoned for mixed use.
Policy MOB 3.6: Incorporate stormwater management. Integrate blue-green
infrastructure within the street right of way and curb-to-curb widths where
appropriate to meet stormwater goals.
Many streets in Lindenville are particularly narrow with limited opportunities to widen sidewalks, add
bicycle facilities, maintain parking, and add landscaping on every street. The Specific Plan uses a layered
network approach that prioritizes walking, biking, transit, truck, and auto access on specific streets. Near
the Project site, the plan identifies the following priorities:
• San Mateo Avenue and Southline Avenue are identified as auto priority streets that provide
regional access to US-101 and the future Utah Avenue overpass.
• Southline Avenue and Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard are identified as transit priority streets
to facilitate shuttle access to and from BART and Caltrain. A shuttle route through the Project site
is suggested, along with a new bus stop at the Airport Boulevard/Produce Avenue/San Mateo
Avenue intersection.
• Shaw Road and Tanforan Avenue are identified as bicycle priority streets, with connections to a
new trail crossing of US-101 along the Navigable Slough as well as a north-south bikeway along
the western edge of the Project site. These bikeways would provide parallel alternatives to San
Mateo Avenue and Utah Avenue, which would serve a high volume of auto and truck traffic.
The Specific Plan emphasizes the need to modernize local street infrastructure to accommodate changing
land uses and incorporate first/last mile shuttle services to provide connections with BART and Caltrain.
!
Existing Transit Service
Figure 2-1
SamTrans Peak Period Frequency Other Transit Service
Every 15 minutes or less
Every 20 - 30 minutes
Greater than 30 minutes
BART
Caltrain
Free South City Shuttle
Bayhill Shuttle
Project Site
ECRRAPID
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
3101
Linden Avenue
S
o
u
t
h
A
ir
p
o
r
t
B
o
u
le
v
a
r
d
C
a
mi
n
o
R
e
a
l
Harbor Wy
South Linden Avenue
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
OrangeAvenue
GrandAvenue
H
u
n
ti
n
g
t
o
n
A
v
AirportBl
ryClubDrive
DubuqueAv
U t a h A v e n u e
GatewayBl
S n e a t h L a n e
SanBrunoAve E
ProduceAv
EastG r a ndAv
C
SpruceAven
ue
MitchellAvenue
·82
%&380
North Mcdonnell Road
San Mateo Av
!
!
South
San Francisco
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
TanforanShopping Center
OrangeMemorial Park
San Bruno
140
BH
140
292
141
398
398
ECR
SSF South San Francisco
San Bruno
South San Francisco
San Bruno BART
CALTRAIN
Figure 2-1 Roa
d
CrestmoorCanyon
101
82
280
38017
24
31
20
26
25
27
18 19
11 16
28
13
10
87
2
3
1
4
30
6
Bicycle FacilitiesFigure 2-2
Project Site
Class II Bicycle Lane
Class I Shared Path Class I Shared Path
Class II Bicycle Lane
Class III Bicycle Route Class III Bicycle Route
Class IV Separated Bikeway
City Boundary
Existing Bikeways Planned Bikeways
DOWNTOWN
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
BAYHILL
TanforanShoppingCenter
OrangeMemorialPark
101
82
380
87
1
South South South South South
San FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan Francisco
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
TanforanShoppingCenter
OrangeemorialPark
N
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
15
3. Transportation Analysis
This section includes an analysis and findings of Project effects on transportation services and facilities,
including motor vehicle travel and operations, transit service, pedestrian facilities, and bicycle facilities. The
amount and distance of motor vehicle travel were analyzed using vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit impacts were qualitatively assessed.
3.1 Project Travel Demand
Project trip generation was calculated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition fitted curve
equation for R&D land use and daycare, along withreductions associated with the Project’s TDM plan,
consistent with the City’s TIA Guidelines as summarized in Table 3.1. Amenity uses are included within the
R&D trip generation given the expected high internalization rate and comparable employee densities of
these uses. Trip generation includes a 34 percent reduction associated with the Project’s TDM Plan,
consistent with the City’s TDM ordinance for a Tier 4 project. According to this trip generation analysis, the
Project would generate approximately 1,056 AM peak hour trips and 999 PM peak hour trips.
Table 3.1 Vehicle Trip Generation
Land Use1 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
In Out Total In Out Total
R&D & Amenities
(1,700,000 Square Feet) 1,261 227 1,538 232 1,221 1,453
TDM Reduction (34%)2 -429 -77 -523 -79 -415 -494
Daycare (50 Students) 22 19 41 19 21 40
Project Trip Generation 854 169 1,056 172 827 999
Notes:
1. Trip generation rates are based on ITE 11th Edition (Land Use #760 – Research and Development Center, fitted curve equation
and Land Use #565 – Daycare, fitted curve equation)
2. 34 percent trip reduction based on TDM Plan, consistent with City’s TDM policy for Tier 4 project.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
Estimated peak hour person trips and mode share is presented in
Table 3.2. Consistent with the mode share targets included in the City’s TDM Ordinance and recent survey
data at comparable sites, the Project is estimated to generate approximately 50 percent of its peak hour
travel via single occupancy vehicle, 20 percent via transit, 20 percent via telecommute, and 10 percent via
carpool, vanpool, and active transportation. These estimates are for planning purposes only; actual mode
shares may vary depending on site-specific and employer-specific characteristics as well as continued
evolution in telecommuting patterns.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
16
Table 3.2 Estimated Peak Hour Person Trips and Mode Share
Mode Mode Share AM Peak Hour Trips PM Peak Hour Trips
Single Occupancy Vehicle 50% 954 901
Carpool/Vanpool 8% 153 144
Transit 20% 381 361
Active Transportation 2% 38 36
Telecommute 20% 381 361
Total Person Trips 100% 1,907 1,803
Notes:
1. Estimates based on review of City's TDM surveys and US Census data for 2019 and 2022 conditions
2. HOV/Vanpool assumes average vehicle occupancy of 2.5 persons per vehicle
3. For planning purposes only; actual mode shares may vary depending on site-specific and employer-specific characteristics
as well as continued evolution in telecommuting patterns.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
3.2 Consistency with Plans & Policies
As previously noted in Section 1.1, the Project site is currently designated as Mixed Industrial High and
Mixed Industrial Medium under the City’s Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Code, respectively. Neither
the General Plan nor the Lindenville Specific Plan analyzed this site as Business Technology Park-High; in
order to construct and operate the proposed Project, amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and
City Zoning Code would be required.
The Project includes various design features that are consistent with the General Plan and Lindenville
Specific Plan. The Project would provide multimodal circulation improvements within the site, along its
eastern frontage, and along the frontage of the Navigable Slough. The Project is designed to separate
bicycles and pedestrians from vehicle traffic, which will circulate along the periphery of the site and
connect Terminal Court with Shaw Road. The central courtyard is designed for people walking and biking
or accessing the site via the shuttle service to/from regional transit stations. Speed humps and raised
crosswalks are included on the internal roadways to prevent high vehicle travel speeds where there may
be conflicts with other road users. These design features align with General Plan Goals MOB-1, MOB-2,
MOB-4, and MOB-5, Lindenville Specific Plan goals MOB-1, MOB-2, and MOB-3, as well as the Active
South City Plan, and the Transportation Demand Management Ordinance.
The Project complies with the measures and monitoring requirements identified in the TDM Ordinance.
The Project will implement a TDM Plan that includes an enhanced shuttle commitment to serve first-last
mile connections to the site, address active transportation gap closures, and fully subsidized transit passes
for employees. The TDM Plan is expected to achieve 50 points under the TDM ordinance and implement a
50 percent trip cap, which aligns with General Plan goals MOB-3 and MOB-4. Additionally, the Project
does not affect the potential implementation of the Utah Avenue Overpass or its connections to the
relevant roadways and ramps, as identified in the General Plan.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
17
Although the project’s site plan and TDM plan exhibit features that are consistent with goals, policies, and
actions identified in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan, the project overall remains inconsistent
as it would add 1.7 million square feet of R&D uses and amenities to the Produce Avenue corridor, an
area where additional density was not identified or studied in the Lindenville Specific Plan or General Plan.
This intensification of uses would occur in a location with insufficient access and circulation facilities,
limited transportation options, and challenging connectivity to the regional transportation network.
Therefore, the Project conflicts with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Lindenville Specific
Plan. The project’s lack of consistency with adopted plans and policies addressing the circulation system
would constitute a significant impact. As mitigation, the Project would be required to implement various
actions consistent with those identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City
Plan, described in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 below.
Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements
Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan
The Project shall implement and/or fund the following improvements identified in the General
Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan:
1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce
Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections.
The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic
operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals
shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101
on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by
changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the
City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies.
2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection
The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport
Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and
transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by
the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes
on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the
reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the
addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City.
3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via
Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue
The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport
Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain Station to the
project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain Station,
and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto
and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the
west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue,
transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
18
4. Signalization of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue Intersection:
The project shall implement a new traffic signal at the intersection of San Mateo
Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. This traffic signal would facilitate access to the project
site via Shaw Road while reducing potential for multimodal conflicts. The traffic signal shall be
accompanied by accessible sidewalk and curb ramp upgrades at the intersection, as well as
associated signal and intersection/sidewalk modifications at the adjacent San Mateo
Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection.
5. Engineering Study of a New Southbound U.S. 101 Off-ramp Connecting to the Utah Avenue
Overpass
The project shall fund an engineering study of a new southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp
connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass as envisioned in the General Plan and
Lindenville Specific Plan. The engineering study shall be led by the city. As currently
envisioned, the overpass would not include a southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp would
facilitate more direct access to the overpass and address long-term queueing concerns. The
off-ramp would be accompanied by a new street connection between Utah Avenue and
Produce Avenue north of the project site.
6. Engineering Study and Fair-Share Contribution toward a New Trail Crossing of U.S. 101 South
of the Project Site
The project shall fund an engineering study for a new Class I shared-use path crossing of U.S.
101 to connect the Bay Trail with Shaw Road. The engineering study shall be led by the city.
An engineering study of the planned U.S. 101 crossing has not yet occurred, and a preferred
alternative alignment has not been determined. The engineering study will consider potential
trail crossing alignments, incorporate the preferred alternative alignment into its site plan,
and quantify a fair share contribution toward construction of the crossing.
These mitigations shall be completed by the applicant prior to the project receiving a certificate of
occupancy. If the City implements these improvements in advance of the project’s construction,
the project shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development
implements these improvements and/or engineering studies prior to the project’s construction,
the project shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of construction costs to the
developer leading these improvements. This funding will ensure that transportation facilities
serving the project site are appropriately sized to handle multimodal travel demand associated
with the project as envisioned in each plan.
DOWNTOWN
DOWNTOWN
LINDENVILLE
BAYHILL
Sa
n
M
a
t
e
o
A
v
Sa
n
M
a
t
e
o
A
v
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
20
With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, the Project would advance offsite improvements
consistent with Actions MOB-1.2.1, MOB-2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.2.1, and 3.2.2 to adequately address its
effects on the transportation network. However, portions of this mitigation measure are under the
jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City of San Bruno, and neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding
this mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed mitigation could reduce the Project’s impact, the impact
would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its
implementation,
3.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled
The Project’s VMT was analyzed using the City of South San Francisco’s VMT thresholds established in
Resolution 77-2020 on June 10, 2020 and consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
The adopted VMT threshold for employment-generating land uses determines that a project would have a
significant transportation impact if its VMT is greater than 15 percent below the baseline for home-based
work (HBW) VMT per employee. This threshold would be set at 12.7 (15 percent below the existing regional
average of 14.9) HBW VMT per employee for office and R&D projects as shown in Table 3.3. This threshold
of 12.7 HBW VMT per employee also applies to cumulative conditions.
Table 3.3 Home-Based Work Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Employee
Location Estimated HBW VMT per Employee
Bay Area Region: Existing 14.9
HBW VMT Per Employee Threshold
(15% Below Existing) 12.7
Project 17.5
Project with TDM Mitigation
(29.5% Reduction) 12.3
Note: HBW= home-based work; VMT = vehicle miles traveled.
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023; C/CAG-VTA Bi-County Transportation Demand Model, 2022.
As shown in Table 3.3, the Project without a TDM program is expected to generate 17.5 HBW VMT per
employee under existing conditions, which is greater than the City’s significance threshold of 12.7 HBW
VMT. However, implementation of a TDM program is expected to reduce VMT to below the threshold of
significance, as detailed in the following section. Therefore, the Project’s impact to VMT would be less
than significant.
3.3.1 Summary of TDM Program and Effectiveness
Per the City of South San Francisco Zoning Code Chapter 20.400, the Project is required to implement a
combination of TDM programs, services, and infrastructure improvements as well as annual reporting and
monitoring to reduce VMT. The Project’s TDM Plan identifies several TDM measures consistent with the
City’s ordinance, including transit subsidies, participation in Commute.org programs, carpool/vanpool
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
21
programs, bicycle storage and amenities, designation of a TDM coordinator, bicycle- and pedestrian-
oriented site access, encouraging telecommuting, first/last mile shuttle services, active transportation gap
closures, onsite amenities, and bicycle repair stations.
Quantification of TDM reductions is based on the Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission
Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity by the California Air
Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) published in 2021. The Project would implement the
following measures consistent with CAPCOA guidance:
Measure T-6 (Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Mandatory Implementation and
Monitoring) defines a commute trip reduction program with mandatory implementation and
monitoring, which is consistent with several Project TDM measures defined in the City’s ordinance
along with City requirements for annual monitoring and reporting to ensure compliance. Project
TDM measures that would be included in the mandatory trip reduction program include
participation in Commute.org programs, carpool/vanpool programs and parking, bicycle storage,
showers, and lockers, designation of a TDM coordinator, and fully subsidized transit passes. The
Project would be subject to annual surveys and trip cap monitoring as described in the following
section.
Measure T-20 (Expand Bikeway Network) covers bikeway network expansion, which is consistent
with the proposed active transportation gap closure measure covering both onsite and offsite
bicycle improvements.
Measure T-25 (Extend Transit Network Coverage) covers transit network expansion consistent with
the proposed shuttle to connect the Project site with the existing BART station and Caltrain
station to provide first/last-mile connectivity for employees and the public. This will add seven
additional hours per day of transit service to the area. Prior to the expansion, there was no service
within a half-mile radius surrounding the site. The free shuttles will connect the site with existing
SamTrans, Caltrain, and BART service.
As shown in Table 3.4, the combination of these measures is expected to achieve a VMT reduction of 29.5
percent, which exceeds the 28 percent reduction needed to achieve a less-than-significant impact on
VMT.
Table 3.4 TDM Program Elements
South San Francisco TDM Ordinance Requirements CAPCOA Quantification of VMT Reductions1
TDM Measure Description Potential Points Project Points Measure Title Project Reduction
Fully Subsidized Transit
Passes 15 15
T-6
Implement Commute
Trip Reduction
Program (Mandatory
Implementation and
Monitoring)
26.0%
Participation in
Commute.org Programs 5 5
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
22
South San Francisco TDM Ordinance Requirements CAPCOA Quantification of VMT Reductions1
TDM Measure Description Potential Points Project Points Measure Title Project Reduction
Designated TDM
Coordinator 1 1
Carpool/ Vanpool
Programs and Parking 3 3
Bicycle Storage, Showers,
and Lockers 2 2
Bicycle Repair Station 1 1
Active Transportation Gap
Closure Up to 6 6 T-20 Expand Bikeway
Network 0.2%
Enhanced Shuttle
Commitment 10 10
T-25 Extend Transit
Network Coverage 4.6% Transit Capital
Improvements Up to 6 2
Bicycle and Pedestrian-
Oriented Site Access 1 1
N/A N/A N/A On-Site Pedestrian-
Oriented Amenities 3 3
Encourage Telecommuting
& Flexible Work Schedules 1 1
Total Project Points 50 Total Project Reduction 29.5%
Required Points 50 Required Project Reduction 28%
Source: City of South San Francisco TIA Guidelines and Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing
Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association, 2021)
Note: Each of the CAPCOA TDM strategies can be combined with others to increase the effectiveness of vehicle trip and VMT
mitigation; however, the interaction between the various strategies is complex. Generally, with each additional measure
implemented, a vehicle trip and VMT reduction is achieved, but the incremental benefit of vehicle trip and VMT reduction may be
less than the benefit that measure would have if it was considered on its own. Thus, the list provides the maximum reductions
expected and the effect of TDM measures should not be considered to be purely additive.
3.4 Design Hazards
3.4.1 US-101 Southbound Offramp/Produce Avenue Intersection
The Project would increase vehicle trips along southbound Produce Avenue and the southbound US-101
Produce Avenue off-ramp, which is presently a side-street stop-controlled off-ramp. The Project would
contribute a net increase of approximately 170 vehicle trips in the AM peak hour and 30 vehicle trips in
the PM peak hour to the westbound left turn movement from US-101 to Produce Avenue. The addition of
vehicle trips in a side-street stop-controlled condition is expected to increase 95th percentile vehicle
queues to spill back onto the US-101 off-ramp, which could present a hazardous condition (southbound
vehicles on Produce Avenue do not have a stop sign, so vehicles turning left onto Produce Avenue would
have to wait for gaps to turn left, and these queues are likely to block right-turning vehicles as well).
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
23
Additionally, the intersection meets AM and PM peak hour traffic signal warrants. Queueing conflicts at
this intersection would pose a potentially significant impact.
The South San Francisco General Plan EIR (Impact TRANS-4) determined that implementation of the
General Plan is likely to increase vehicle trips on City freeway ramps, which could exacerbate vehicle
queues on ramps already in excess of their storage capacity. The Project would increase the severity of the
significant impact.
As previously discussed in Section 3.2, the Project shall implement and/or fund adjacent improvements
identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan via Mitigation Measure
TRANS-1 (or reimburse the City or another developer if these improvements have already been
implemented as mentioned in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1). This includes the signalization of the US-101
Offramp/Produce Avenue intersection consistent with the conditions of approval for the Terminal 101
project. Implementation of a traffic signal and associated lane reconfigurations would reduce vehicle
queues while alleviating potential conflicts at the intersection. The Project would be responsible for
implementing the traffic signal in collaboration with the City of South San Francisco and Caltrans.
With the implementation of this improvement measure, 95th percentile vehicle queues would not spill
over onto the freeway mainline. The Project would be responsible for implementing the traffic signal in
collaboration with the City of South San Francisco and Caltrans. However, portions of this mitigation
measure are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, and the City does not have a mechanism for funding this
mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed mitigation could reduce the Project’s impact, the impact would
be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its implementation,
3.4.2 US-101 Southbound Onramp/Terminal Court/Produce Avenue Intersection
The Project would increase vehicle trips entering and exiting Terminal Court at Produce Avenue, which is
presently a side-street stop-controlled intersection. The Project would contribute approximately 730
vehicle trips in the AM peak hour and 700 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour to Terminal Court. The
substantial increase in vehicle trips exiting Terminal Court during the PM peak hour may create a
hazardous condition due to the lack of signal control and high-speed vehicle travel southbound on
Produce Avenue onto US-101. Pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Terminal Court may also encounter
conflicts with vehicles. The intersection meets the PM peak hour signal warrant with the Project.
As previously discussed in Section 3.2, the Project shall fund adjacent improvements identified in the
General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan via Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 (or
reimburse the City or another developer if these improvements have already been implemented as
mentioned in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1). This includes the addition of a traffic signal that would
address the intersection’s traffic control needs. The Project would be responsible for implementing the
traffic signal in collaboration with the City of South San Francisco and Caltrans. However, portions of this
mitigation measure are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans, and the City does not have a mechanism for
funding this mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed mitigation could reduce the Project’s impact, the
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
24
impact would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its
implementation,
3.4.3 San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue intersection
The Project would increase vehicle trips entering and exiting via Shaw Road, which is presently side-street
stop-controlled at San Mateo Avenue. The Project would contribute approximately 360 vehicle trips in the
AM peak hour and 400 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour to Shaw Road movements. The increase in
vehicle trips exiting Terminal Court during the PM peak hour may create a hazardous condition due to the
lack of signal control. The intersection meets the PM peak hour signal warrant with the Project.
As previously discussed in Section 3.2, the Project shall fund adjacent improvements identified in the
General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan via Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 (or
reimburse the City or another developer if these improvements have already been implemented as
mentioned in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1). This includes the addition of a traffic signal that would
address the intersection’s traffic control needs. The Project would be responsible for implementing the
traffic signal in collaboration with the City of South San Francisco and City of San Bruno. However,
portions of this mitigation measure are under the jurisdiction of the City of San Bruno, and the City does
not have a mechanism for funding this mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed mitigation could reduce
the Project’s impact, the impact would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San
Francisco cannot ensure its implementation,
3.4.4 Site Circulation
The Project’s site plan is not expected to pose any onsite design hazards or incompatible land uses. The
Project’s internal streets, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities would be designed consistent with
applicable design standards and do not appear to pose potential conflicts.
The Project realigns Terminal Court to remove the existing cul-de-sac, allowing the street to function as an
extension of the Project’s driveway. This realignment will improve operations and queueing capacity
entering and exiting the Project site.
In reviewing the Project’s preliminary site plan, the City identified potential conflicts associated with the
proximity of the Infinite 131 driveways in relation to Infinite 101 driveways. In response, the Project’s site
plan was amended to clarify circulation and access controls along Terminal Court, as illustrated in
Figure 3-2. Access to Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 would occur via two driveways about 200 to 300 feet
from the Terminal Court/Produce Avenue intersection, while the third driveway adjacent to the Terminal
Court/Produce Avenue intersection would be restricted for service vehicles only to limit potential conflicts.
With these updates, the Project’s site plan is not expected to present any design hazards.
Figure 3-2 Terminal Court Driveways
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
25
3.5 Emergency Access
Vehicle trips generated by the Project would represent a small percentage of overall daily and peak hour
traffic on roadways and freeways in the study area. The Project would not include features that would alter
emergency vehicle access routes or roadway facilities; fire and police vehicles would continue to have
access to all facilities around the entire City. Emergency vehicles would have full access to the Project site
from all driveways connecting to adjacent streets; each driveway would be equipped to handle all types of
emergency vehicles. Therefore, the Project would result in adequate emergency access.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
26
4. Impacts and Mitigations Summary
This section includes the evaluation of the Project’s potential impacts. This section also describes the
required associated mitigation measures that would reduce impacts of the Project.
4.1 Consistency with Plans & Policies
Impact TRANS-1: Development of the proposed Project would conflict with the General Plan
and Lindenville Specific Plan and results in a significant impact based on
lack of consistency with such plans and policies. (Significant / Significant
and Unavoidable with Mitigation)
As discussed in Section 3.2, the Project site is currently designated as Mixed Industrial High and Mixed
Industrial Medium under the City’s Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Code, respectively. Neither the
General Plan nor the Lindenville Specific Plan analyzed this site as Business Technology Park-High; in
order to construct and operate the proposed Project, amendments to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and
City Zoning Code would be required.
Although the project’s site plan and TDM plan exhibit features that are consistent with goals, policies, and
actions identified in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan, the project overall remains inconsistent
as it would add 1.7 million square feet of R&D uses and amenities to the Produce Avenue corridor, an
area where additional density was not identified or studied in the Lindenville Specific Plan or General Plan.
This intensification of uses would occur in a location with insufficient access and circulation facilities,
limited transportation options, and challenging connectivity to the regional transportation network.
Therefore, the Project conflicts with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Lindenville Specific
Plan. The project’s lack of consistency with adopted plans and policies addressing the circulation system
would constitute a significant impact. As mitigation, the Project would be required to implement various
actions consistent with those identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City
Plan.
Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements
Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan
Consistent with the improvements detailed in Section 3.2, the Project shall implement and/or fund
following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South
City Plan:
1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce
Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections.
The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic
operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals
shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
27
on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by
changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the
City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies.
2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection
The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport
Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and
transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by
the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes
on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the
reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the
addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City.
3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via
Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue
The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport
Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain Station to the
project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain Station,
and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto
and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the
west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue,
transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue.
4. Signalization of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue Intersection:
The project shall implement a new traffic signal at the intersection of San Mateo
Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. This traffic signal would facilitate access to the project
site via Shaw Road while reducing potential for multimodal conflicts. The traffic signal shall be
accompanied by accessible sidewalk and curb ramp upgrades at the intersection, as well as
associated signal and intersection/sidewalk modifications at the adjacent San Mateo
Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection.
5. Engineering Study of a New Southbound U.S. 101 Off-ramp Connecting to the Utah Avenue
Overpass
The project shall fund an engineering study of a new southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp
connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass as envisioned in the General Plan and
Lindenville Specific Plan. The engineering study shall be led by the city. As currently
envisioned, the overpass would not include a southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp would
facilitate more direct access to the overpass and address long-term queueing concerns. The
off-ramp would be accompanied by a new street connection between Utah Avenue and
Produce Avenue north of the project site.
6. Engineering Study and Fair-Share Contribution toward a New Trail Crossing of U.S. 101 South
of the Project Site
The project shall fund an engineering study for a new Class I shared-use path crossing of U.S.
101 to connect the Bay Trail with Shaw Road. The engineering study shall be led by the city.
An engineering study of the planned U.S. 101 crossing has not yet occurred, and a preferred
alternative alignment has not been determined. The engineering study will consider potential
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
28
trail crossing alignments, incorporate the preferred alternative alignment into its site plan,
and quantify a fair share contribution toward construction of the crossing.
These mitigations shall be completed by the applicant prior to the project receiving a certificate of
occupancy. If the City implements these improvements in advance of the project’s construction,
the project shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development
implements these improvements and/or engineering studies prior to the project’s construction,
the project shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of construction costs to the
developer leading these improvements. This funding will ensure that transportation facilities
serving the project site are appropriately sized to handle multimodal travel demand associated
with the project as envisioned in each plan.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, the Project would advance offsite improvements
consistent with Actions MOB-1.2.1, MOB-2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 3.2.1, and 3.2.2 to adequately address its
effects on the transportation network. However, portions of this mitigation measure are under the
jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City of San Bruno, and neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding
this mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed mitigation could reduce the Project’s impact, the impact
would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its
implementation,
4.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled
Impact TRANS-2: Development of the Project would generate HBW VMT in excess of the
City’s Threshold of Significance. (Less than Significant)
As described in Section 3.3, the Project is required to implement a TDM Plan consistent with City of South
San Francisco Zoning Code Chapter 20.400. The Project’s TDM Plan identifies several TDM measures
consistent with the City’s ordinance, including transit subsidies, participation in Commute.org programs,
carpool/vanpool programs, bicycle storage and amenities, designation of a TDM coordinator, bicycle- and
pedestrian-oriented site access, encouraging telecommuting, first/last mile shuttle services, active
transportation gap closures, onsite amenities, and bicycle repair stations. Annual reporting and
monitoring is required to document compliance with mode share and trip cap targets.
Implementation of the Project’s TDM program would reduce VMT below the City’s threshold of
significance of 12.7 HBW VMT per employee. Therefore, the Project’s impact would be less than
significant.
4.3 Design Hazards
Impact TRANS-3: Development of the Project would introduce potentially hazardous roadway
conditions along Produce Avenue and Terminal Court. (Significant /
Significant and Unavoidable with Mitigation)
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
29
As documented in Section 3.4, the Project would increase vehicle trips along Produce Avenue at the
intersections of US-101 Offramp/Produce Avenue and US-101 Onramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court.
The addition of vehicle trips along the US-101 southbound offramp would cause vehicle queues to spill
over onto US-101, while both intersections would meet peak hour signal warrants. The South San Francisco
General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan is likely to increase vehicle trips on
City freeway ramps, which could exacerbate vehicle queues on ramps already in excess of their storage
capacity. The Project would exacerbate this impact.
As mitigation, the Project shall fund the signalization of the US-101 Offramp/Produce Avenue and US-101
Onramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court intersections as previous identified in Mitigation Measure
TRANS-1. The Project’s site plan is otherwise not expected to present any design hazards.
Implementation of new traffic signals along Produce Avenue would reduce vehicle queues exiting US-101
while alleviating potential conflicts both intersections. However, as previously stated in Section 3.2,
portions of this mitigation measure are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City of San Bruno, and
neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding this mitigation. Therefore, while the proposed
mitigations could address the Project’s impact, the impact to design hazards would be significant and
unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its full implementation.
4.4 Emergency Access
Impact TRANS-4: Development of the Project would not result in inadequate emergency
access under Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions.
(Less than Significant)
The Project would provide adequate emergency vehicle access consistent with applicable design
standards. Both driveways will accommodate all types of emergency vehicles accessed via Terminal Court
and Shaw Road. The Project is not expected to introduce or exacerbate conflicts for emergency vehicles.
Therefore, the Project would not result in inadequate emergency vehicle access, and the Project’s impacts
to emergency access would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures: None required.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
30
5. Local Transportation Analysis
This section evaluates the Project’s effects on the local transportation network consistent with the City of
South San Francisco’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. This analysis is provided for
informational purposes and is not associated with CEQA thresholds of significance.
5.1 Parking
The Project provides adequate parking.
The Project’s proposed parking supply meets the parking maximums for R&D space set forth in Table
20.330.004 of the zoning code; (1.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of R&D space). The Project provides
a total of 2,976 parking spaces across two parking garages and a surface parking lot. Of these, 2388 spaces
would be used primarily for R&D uses (consistent with the City’s maximum allowable parking supply of 1.5
spaces per 1,000 square feet) and 579spaces would be used for other amenity uses. As documented in the
Project’s draft Parking Management Plan, amenity parking spaces would be designated for visitor use only
and would remain consistent with the Project’s mode share and trip cap targets.
Condition of Approval: Parking Management Plan
The Project applicant has submitted a draft Parking Management Plan. Prior to issuance of a
certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit a Final Parking Management Plan for review
and approval by the Chief Planner. If the Final Parking Management Plan identifies non-
office/research and development building square footage that is no longer accessible to the
general public, the total amount of parking provided on the site will be reduced proportionally
and replaced with open space and/or landscaping in keeping with adjacent areas.
5.2 Passenger Loading
The Project provides adequate passenger loading.
The Project provides six onsite passenger drop-off spaces located on the north side of the office building,
which connects to the building entrances via pedestrian pathways through the courtyard on the west side
of the site. The loading zone can be accessed through the surface parking on the north side of the site.
Passenger loading activities are not expected to obstruct pedestrian, bicycle, transit, or auto facilities. By
dispersing loading activity across the site, the Project is unlikely to experience queuing that would infringe
on roadways or bicycle or pedestrian facilities.
5.3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Access
Development of the Project would limit conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
31
The Project’s site plan would incorporate pedestrian and bicycle enhancements to reduce the risk of
multimodal conflicts. Pedestrian and bicycle access to the Project site would be provided via a Class I trail
connecting to Terminal Court and Shaw Road, as well as additional sidewalks connecting to Terminal Court.
The site plan includes several walkways and plazas facilitating internal pedestrian and bicycle circulation.
With implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, the Project would include more comfortable
connections to regional transit via walking and biking, including a ¾ mile connection to the South San
Francisco Caltrain Station, a ¼ mile walk to SamTrans bus stops, and a ¾ mile connection to the San Bruno
BART Station.
The Project provides adequate bicycle parking.
The Project proposes to provide short-term and long-term bicycle parking spaces consistent with City
code requirements. A total of 176 bicycle parking spaces would be provided throughout the site,
including 149 long-term bicycle parking spaces and 27 short-term bicycle parking spaces. The short-term
bicycle parking spaces would be located near the lobby entrances to the proposed buildings. The long-
term bicycle parking spaces, as well as showers, would be provided on the ground floor of the I131N and
I131S buildings and within a bicycle storage room in the parking garage.
5.4 Transit
The Project does not result in a deficiency in transit service or access.
The Project would rely heavily on BART and Caltrain ridership to meet its mode share and trip cap targets.
As described in the Project’s TDM Plan, the Project would provide a new first/last shuttle service as the
primary means of connecting to regional transit providers. A shuttle stop would be provided near the center
of the Project site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 would further enhance active
transportation access to Caltrain, BART, and SamTrans services as previously noted.
5.5 Off-Site Traffic Operations
This section provides informational analysis of traffic operations within the cities of South San Francisco and
San Bruno near the Project site.
5.5.1 Approach and Methodology
The City of South San Francsico no longer has a Level of Service (LOS) standard for auto operations. Instead,
General Plan Policy MOB-3.2 directs the City to “optimize traffic operations on City streets while avoiding
widening roadways or otherwise pursuing traffic operations changes at expense of multimodal safety,
transit reliability, or bicycle and pedestrian comfort.”
The City of San Bruno maintains a LOS D threshold at specific intersections identified in its General Plan and
illustrated in Figure 5-1.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
32
Figure 5-1 City of San Bruno LOS Standards
Study intersections were selected based on input from City of South San Francisco and City of San Bruno
staff as well as analysis of trip distribution and assignment. Sixteen study intersections were analyzed in
this study: six intersections within the City of South San Francisco and 10 intersections within the City of
San Bruno:
City of South San Francisco:
0. Airport Boulevard-Produce Avenue/South Airport Boulevard-San Mateo Avenue
1. Produce Avenue/US 101 South Off-Ramp
2. Produce Avenue/Terminal Court (side street stop controlled)
3. South Airport Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue
4. South Airport Boulevard/US 101 North Ramps
5. San Mateo Avenue/South Linden Avenue
City of San Bruno:
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
33
6. San Mateo Avenue/Tanforan Avenue/Shaw Road (side street stop controlled)
7. El Camino Real / Sneath Lane
8. Huntington Avenue / Sneath Lane
9. I-280 NB Ramps / Sneath Lane
10. I-280 SB Ramps / Sneath Lane
11. El Camino Real / San Bruno Avenue
12. Huntington Avenue / San Bruno Avenue
13. San Mateo Avenue / San Bruno Avenue
14. US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue
15. US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue
Trip distribution and assignment were performed using the C/CAG Model and City of South San
Francisco’s subarea traffic model (“City Model”). This City Model is based on a subarea extraction from the
C/CAG Travel Demand Model, which covers San Mateo County and the Bay Area region. The City Model
provides greater network detail for South San Francisco and San Bruno than the C/CAG Model. It includes
a 2019 base year and 2040 horizon year, which includes all land use and transportation changes
documented in the 2040 General Plan.
Traffic operations analysis was performed using Synchro software based on Chapter 19 of the HCM 6th
Edition. Analysis of signalized intersection operations is based on the average control delay experienced
by motorists traveling through it. Control delay incorporates delay associated with deceleration,
acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. This method uses various intersection characteristics
(such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the average control delay. Tables
4-1 and 4-2 summarize the relationship between average delay per vehicle and LOS for signalized
intersections and unsignalized intersections, respectively, according to the HCM 6th Edition.
Table 5.1 Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria
LOS Description Average Delay Per
Vehicle (Seconds)
A Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short
cycle length. ≤ 10
B Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. > 10 and ≤ 20
C Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle
lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. > 20 and ≤ 35
D
Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long
cycle lengths, or high volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratios. Many vehicles stop and
individual cycle failures are noticeable.
> 35 and ≤ 55
E Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and
high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. > 55 and ≤ 80
F Operation with very high delay values to most drivers occurring due to over saturation
poor progression, or very long cycle lengths. > 80
Source: Transportation Research Board, 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
34
Table 5.2 Unsignalized Intersection LOS Criteria
Level of
Service
Description Average Control Delay Per
Vehicle (Seconds)
A Little or no traffic delays. ≤ 10
B Short traffic delays. > 10 and ≤ 15
C Average traffic delays. > 15 and ≤ 25
D Long traffic delays. > 25 and ≤ 35
E Very long traffic delays. > 35 and ≤ 50
F Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded. > 50
Source: Transportation Research Board, 2016. Highway Capacity Manual 6th Edition
5.5.2 Analysis Scenarios
The effect of the Project on the surrounding transportation system were evaluated for the five scenarios
listed below:
• Scenario 1: Existing Conditions
• Scenario 2: Existing Conditions plus Infinite 101
• Scenario 3: Existing Conditions plus Infinite 101 and Infinite 131
• Scenario 4: Cumulative Conditions (General Plan)
• Scenario 5: Cumulative Conditions (General Plan) with Infinite 131
Existing Conditions plus Infinite 101 represents the base condition with the addition of Infinite 101, which
was previously entitled by the City. This condition represents a reasonably foreseeable near-term outlook
that incorporates the signalization of the US-101 offramp at Produce Avenue and the Produce
Avenue/Terminal Court intersection, which were identified as conditions of approval for the Infinite 101
project. Existing Conditions plus Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 represents the base condition with the full
Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 project.
Cumulative Conditions represents 2040 land use and transportation conditions consistent with the South
San Francisco General Plan as well as planned developments within the City of San Bruno (including buildout
of the Bayhill Specific Plan and Tanforan Mall redevelopment). Cumulative conditions includes completion
of the Utah Avenue overpass and associated changes to US-101 freeway ramps. Cumulative Conditions
does not include the Infinite 131 Project as it is not consistent with the General Plan. Cumulative Conditions
Plus Infinite 131 incorporates the Infinite 131 Project into the Cumulative 2040 forecasts.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
35
5.5.3 Analysis Results: South San Francisco
The Project would contribute to congested intersection operations under existing and cumulative
conditions, particularly east of US-101. As shown in Table 5.3 and Table 5.4, no intersections presently
operate at LOS F; however, with the addition of Infinite 101 and Infinite 131, three intersections will operate
at LOS F under existing plus project conditions during the PM peak period. Nearly all intersections operate
at LOS F under cumulative conditions in the PM peak period. Implementation of Mitigation Measure
TRANS-1 is included as a part of the Infinite 131 project in this analysis.
Table 5.3: South San Francisco LOS Analysis, AM Peak
Intersection
Existing (2023) Cumulative (2040)
Existing Existing +
I101
Existing +
I101 + I131 General Plan General Plan
+ I131
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
Airport Boulevard / San Mateo
Avenue / Produce Avenue 33.2 C 36.5 D 40.5 D 64.4 E 51.1 D
Produce Avenue & US 101 SB Off
Ramp 13.7 B 2.8 A 3.3 A NA 2.2 A
Produce Avenue & Terminal Court 21.4 C 6.6 A 7.0 A 11.0 B 19.3 B
Airport Boulevard & Mitchell
Avenue 37.3 D 38.0 D 37.8 D >80 F >80 F
South Airport Boulevard & US 101
NB Ramps 23.3 C 77.0 E 77.5 E 48.5 D >80 F
San Mateo Avenue & South Linden
Avenue 9.4 A 8.8 A 8.6 A 64.5 E 61.6 E
Notes:
1. For signalized intersection, average intersection delay is shown. For unsignalized intersections, worst approach delay is
shown.
2. The South San Francisco General Plan 2040 network assumes the replacement of the US-101 Southbound/Produce Avenue
offramp with a new offramp connecting to the Utah Avenue overpass. However, the I101 and I131 projects would instead
maintain and signalize this offramp in addition to the planned new offramp to Utah Avenue.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
36
Table 5.4: South San Francisco LOS Analysis, PM Peak
Intersection
Existing (2023) Cumulative (2040)
Existing Existing +
I101
Existing +
I101 + I131 General Plan General Plan
+ I131
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
Airport Boulevard / San Mateo
Avenue / Produce Avenue 77.7 E >80 F >80 F >80 F >80 F
Produce Avenue & US 101 SB Off
Ramp 20.1 C 31.0 C 31.7 C NA 9.7 A
Produce Avenue & Terminal Court 61.5 F 33.2 C 54.7 D >80 F >80 F
Airport Boulevard & Mitchell
Avenue 74.1 E 73.6 E 74.2 E >80 F >80 F
South Airport Boulevard & US 101
NB Ramps 29.2 C >80 F >80 F 65.9 E >80 F
San Mateo Avenue & South Linden
Avenue 9.8 A 10.0 B 10.2 B >80 F >80 F
Notes:
1. For signalized intersection, average intersection delay is shown. For unsignalized intersections, worst approach delay is
shown.
2. The South San Francisco General Plan 2040 network assumes the replacement of the US-101 Southbound/Produce Avenue
offramp with a new offramp connecting to the Utah Avenue overpass. However, the I101 and I131 projects would instead
maintain and signalize this offramp in addition to the planned new offramp to Utah Avenue.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
37
5.5.4 Analysis Results: San Bruno
Study intersections in San Bruno experience comparatively less traffic congestion than South San
Francisco. As shown in Table 5.5 and Table 5.6, only one intersection presently operates at a level
inconsistent with city LOS thresholds (Huntington/Sneath during the PM peak hour). With the addition of
the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 projects, no other intersections would perform at a level inconsistent with
city LOS thresholds under existing plus project conditions. Under cumulative conditions without the
Infinite 131 Project, one additional intersection performs at a level inconsistent with City LOS thresholds
(El Camino Real / Sneath Lane). The addition of the Infinite 131 Project causes a third intersection to also
perform at a level inconsistent with City LOS Thresholds (Huntington Avenue / San Bruno Avenue).
Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 is included as a part of the Infinite 131 project in this
analysis.
Table 5.5: San Bruno LOS Analysis, AM Peak
Intersection
Existing Cumulative
Existing Existing +
I101
Existing +
I101 + I131 General Plan General Plan
+ I131
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
San Mateo Avenue / Tanforan
Avenue / Shaw Road 13.2 B 20.3 C 25.5 D 37.9 D 59.1 E
El Camino Real / Sneath Lane 32.9 C 33.2 C 33.3 C >80 F >80 F
Huntington Avenue / Sneath Lane 38.0 D 36.1 D 36.4 D >80 F >80 F
I-280 NB Ramps / Sneath Lane 14.7 B 12.2 B 12.3 B 17.7 B 18.3 B
I-280 SB Ramps / Sneath Lane 19.7 B 19.3 B 18.8 B 54.4 D 50.3 D
El Camino Real / San Bruno Avenue 39.1 D 38.9 D 39.1 D 42.4 D 42.3 D
Huntington Avenue / San Bruno
Avenue 17.0 B 17.9 B 18.0 B 30.9 C 35.1 D
San Mateo Avenue / San Bruno
Avenue 24.2 C 19.9 B 20.3 C 30.6 C 38.2 D
US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue 18.2 B 18.5 B 18.7 B 22.0 C 21.8 C
US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue 21.6 C 22.0 C 22.2 C 22.3 C 22.7 C
Notes:
1. For signalized intersection, average intersection delay is shown. For unsignalized intersections, worst approach delay is
shown.
2. Bold indicates intersection performance inconsistent with City of San Bruno LOS standards.
Infinite 131
Transportation Impact Analysis
June 2024
38
Table 5.6: San Bruno LOS Analysis, PM Peak
Intersection
Existing Cumulative
Existing Existing +
I101
Existing +
I101 + I131 General Plan General Plan
+ I131
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
San Mateo Avenue / Tanforan
Avenue / Shaw Road 15.2 C 38.4 E >80 F 50.8 D >80 F
El Camino Real / Sneath Lane 43.0 D 44.1 D 46.1 D >80 F >80 F
Huntington Avenue / Sneath Lane >80 F >80 F >80 F >80 F >80 F
I-280 NB Ramps / Sneath Lane 14.5 B 14.7 B 14.6 B 25.0 C 26.0 C
I-280 SB Ramps / Sneath Lane 15.1 B 15.3 B 15.2 B 23.8 C 26.1 C
El Camino Real / San Bruno Avenue 41.5 D 41.9 D 42.0 D 43.6 D 43.7 D
Huntington Avenue / San Bruno
Avenue 18.0 B 19.5 B 20.3 C 41.2 D 56.0 E
San Mateo Avenue / San Bruno
Avenue 23.1 C 25.6 C 26.0 C 32.3 C 36.9 D
US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue 19.0 B 19.3 B 19.7 B 26.6 C 27.5 C
US 101 SB & San Bruno Avenue 30.6 C 31.4 C 32.1 C 36.8 D 36.7 D
Notes:
1. For signalized intersection, average intersection delay is shown. For unsignalized intersections, worst approach delay is
shown.
2. Bold indicates intersection performance inconsistent with City of San Bruno LOS standards.
5.5.5 Improvement Measures
As previously noted, implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 would address deficiencies
associated with unsignalized intersections and freeway ramp queueing, and as a secondary effect would
also address traffic operations needs to some extent. Limited options remain for capacity improvements or
widening near the Project site due to lack of available right-of-way. Such changes would also generally
conflict with City of South San Francisco General Plan Policy MOB-3.2 and intersection buildout conditions
identified in the City of San Bruno’s General Plan.