The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About4.M._Transportation_and_Circulation IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS IV.M TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION INTRODUCTION This section of the Draft EIR describes the transportation conditions in the study area in terms of existing roads and traffic operations, transit service and pedestrian and bicycle conditions. Excerpts and findings from the following EIRs or initial studies/negative declarations have been included in this chapter: Genentech Master Plan Revised Draft EIR (EIP Associates and Korve Engineering, as partially revised December 2006), 213 East Grand Avenue Draft EIR (Lamphier-Gregory and Crane Transportation Group, December 2007), 328 Roebling Road Draft EIR (Lamphier-Gregory and Crane Transportation Group, April 2008) and the Terrabay Phase 3 Final EIR (City of South San Francisco and Crane Transportation Group, October 2006). Where appropriate, this section provides project level analysis for the Phase 1 Precise Plan, and program level analysis for the remainder of development proposed by the Gateway Business Park Master Plan. A regulatory framework is also provided in this section describing applicable agencies and regulations related to transportation and circulation. Two comment letters related to transportation and circulation were received in response to the June 16, 2008 Notice of Preparation (NOP) and the October 22, 2009 Revised NOP circulated for the project. The NOP and comment letters are included in Appendix A of this Draft EIR. SETTING Roadways The Gateway project site is located east of Gateway Boulevard, south of Oyster Point Boulevard and north and west of existing office/light industrial development (see Figure IV.M-l). The project site is now served by two active driveway connections to Oyster Point Boulevard and two active driveway connections to Gateway Boulevard. A third driveway connection is also provided to Gateway Boulevard at the south end of the property, but is currently closed with vehicle movements prohibited by a chain across the driveway. All driveways are connected via internal parking aisles. Project access to the U.S. 101 freeway is provided by a variety of major streets with several route options available to the three interchanges that could potentially be used by project traffic. Each is briefly described below, while a schematic presentation of existing intersection approach lanes and control are presented in Figure IV.M-2. Freeways U.S.lOl is an eight-lane freeway that provides access to the project area. It extends from downtown San Francisco and northern California to Los Angeles and southern California. Within the study area, U.S.101 has northbound on-ramps at Grand A venue and at Oyster Point Boulevard; northbound off-ramps are Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-1 >. ra $: o -e ra :r: Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES . = Project 5 ite QJ > <C ::Q QJ <+= QJ ~ -' o Figure IV.M-1 Area Map ~~ 0_ "'- ~.- -0. " ~ ~~~~ - t .. ~ ....- ~H~~ t= Sister . Oyster Cities Point (1)4 ~ t r+r+ t 11= Project Site c ro 333 Oyster Point )>~ ~t~~ i'~ G ra nd r t ~tt~ (I) )>~ -a'~ ~tt~ gL San Mateo . . i a~ttr~ -=; ~ (I) "- 1- o if' = Stop Sign ~t~ = Signal 4.F~ . !th Pmje" ccess ~t~ ~ =:>"C~~ ~ ~~ " LJ.J ~ - - - . ~ +-- +-- C " E G ra nd ~:lt~ ~(j) j - - - ~ . fii~ 5 Airp:! t ~ ~ ~Chell Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES * = Shuttles only j lI1~~tt~ .~ l g o Figure IV.M-2 Existing Intersection Lane Geometries and Control City of South San San Francisco October 2009 provided at East Grand Avenue / Executive Drive and at Dubuque Avenue (just south of Oyster Point Boulevard). Southbound on-ramps are provided from Dubuque Avenue (just south of Oyster Point Boulevard), Airport Boulevard (north of Oyster Point Boulevard), and at Produce Avenue; southbound off-ramps are provided at Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard and at Airport Boulevard (just north of Oyster Point Boulevard). There are auxiliary lanes on northbound U.S.lOl both north and south of Oyster Point Boulevard and on southbound U.S.lOl south of Oyster Point Boulevard. In 2007 U.S.lOl carried an annual average daily traffic (ADT) volume of 211,000 vehicles south of Produce Avenue, 203,000 vehicles south of Oyster Point Boulevard and 203,000 vehicles just north of Oyster Point Boulevard. 1 Streets Gateway Boulevard is a four-lane major arterial street connecting East Grand Avenue with South Airport Boulevard and Oyster Point Boulevard. In the project vicinity the two north and southbound travel lanes are separated by a raised, landscaped median. All major intersections are signalized, while some minor driveway intersections are stop sign controlled and limited to right turns in/right turns out by the raised median. No on-street parking is allowed on the east or west sides of the street in the vicinity of the project. Oyster Point Boulevard is one of the primary arterial access routes serving the "East of 101 area" in South San Francisco. It has six travel lanes near its interchange with the U.S.101 freeway, four lanes east of Veterans Boulevard and two lanes near Gull Road. Bicycle lanes are provided in both directions the entire length of the roadway. On-street parking is prohibited on the north and south sides of the street in the vicinity of the project. East Grand Avenue is a major arterial street and a central access route serving the industrial/ office areas east of the U. S.l 0 1 freeway. It has six through travel lanes in the vicinity of the freeway and narrows to four through travel lanes east of the Forbes Boulevard / Harbor Way intersection. Airport Boulevard is a four- to six-lane, north-south arterial street that parallels the west side of the U.S.lOl freeway. This roadway continues north into the City of Brisbane and the City of San Francisco, where it is called Bayshore Boulevard. South of San Mateo Avenue, Airport Boulevard changes names to Produce Avenue. In the General Plan, Airport Boulevard is classified as a major arterial. South Airport Boulevard is a four-lane divided roadway extending between the Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue / Produce Avenue intersection on the north (near the U.S.l0l freeway) to the San Bruno Avenue East / North McDonnell Road intersection in the south. Most of South Airport Boulevard runs parallel to the east side of the U.S.l0l freeway. Traffic Volumes on California State Highways, Caltrans 2007. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-4 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Dubuque Avenue is a two- to seven-lane roadway running east of and parallel to the U.S.101 freeway in a north/south direction. Extending from East Grand A venue to Oyster Point Boulevard, this roadway functions as a connector street for the traffic traveling to/from the south between the U.S.lOl freeway and Oyster Point Boulevard. Dubuque Avenue has two through lanes south of its intersection with the U.S.101 northbound off- and southbound on-ramps, and up to seven lanes between the ramp intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. According to the General Plan, Dubuque Avenue is classified as a collector. Mitchell Avenue is a two-lane roadway running in an east/west direction. Mitchell Avenue connects Airport Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard on the west with Harbor Way on the east. Volumes Weekday AM and PM peak hour analysis was requested by City staff at the following 16 major intersections serving the project site. 1. Airport Boulevard / U.S.101 Southbound Hook Ramps (Signal) 2. Airport Boulevard / Terrabay Phase 3 Access (Signal) 3. Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard (Signal) 4. Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.l0l Northbound On-Ramp (Signal) 5. Dubuque Avenue / U.S.101 Northbound Off-Ramp & Southbound On-Ramp (Signal) 6. Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp (Signal) 7. Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard (Signal) 8. Oyster Point Boulevard / FedEx Driveway / 333 Oyster Point Boulevard Access Driveway 9. Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue (Signal) 10. Grand Avenue Overcrossing / Dubuque Avenue (Signal) 11. E. Grand Avenue / Grand Avenue Overcrossing (Signal) 12. E. Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard (Signal) 13. Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue / Produce Avenue (Signal) 14. Gateway Boulevard / S. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue (Signal) 15. Gateway Boulevard - Project Site North Access (Signal) Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-5 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 16. Gateway Boulevard - Project Site South Access (Signal) Existing volumes were obtained for most locations from counts conducted in March 2008 and June 2009 by TJKM Associates for the City of South San Francisco Public Works Department. In addition, new counts were conducted by Crane Transportation Group in June and August 2009 at the following locations. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard /180-200 Oyster Point Office Driveway . Oyster Point Boulevard / FedEx Driveway / 333 Oyster Point Access . Oyster Point Boulevard / Project Driveway-200 Oyster Point Office Driveway . Gateway Boulevard / project Site Driveway just south of Oyster Point Boulevard where right turns in and right turns out only are allowed . Gateway Boulevard / Both signalized project Driveway intersections Figures IV.M-3 and IV.M-4 present existing AM and PM peak hour volumes at the analysis intersections. Intersection Operation Analysis Methodology Signalized Intersections. Intersections, rather than roadway segments between intersections, are almost always the capacity controlling locations for any circulation system. Signalized intersection operation is graded based upon two different scales. The first scale employs a grading system called Level of Service (LOS) which ranges from Level A, indicating uncongested flow and minimum delay to drivers, down to Level F, indicating significant congestion and delay on most or all intersection approaches. The Level of Service scale is also associated with a control delay tabulation (year 2000 Transportation Research Board [TRB] Highway Capacity Manual [HCM] operations method) at each intersection. The control delay designation allows a more detailed examination of the impacts of a particular project. Greater detail regarding the LOS/control delay relationship is provided in Table IV.M-l. Unsignalized Intersections. Unsignalized intersection operation is also typically graded using the Level of Service A through F scale. LOS ratings for all-way stop intersections are determined using a methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB Highway Capacity Manual. Under this methodology, all-way stop intersections receive one LOS designation reflecting operation of the entire intersection. Average control delay values are also calculated. Intersections with side streets only stop sign controlled (two-way stop control) are also evaluated using the LOS and average control delay scales using a methodology outlined in the year 2000 TRB Highway Capacity Manual. However, unlike signalized or all-way stop analysis where the LOS and control delay designations only pertain to the entire intersection, in side street stop sign control analysis LOS and delay designations are computed for only the stop sign controlled Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-6 242 ? -a z g OJ 204 -L 42 o -L 210 '" 176 ~ 258 _177 Cl-107 ~ ~ .. 162 -5 .. 137 0 Sister Oyster Cities J Point 498 J ~ t ,.. 101 ~ t ,.. 626---+ 997 ---+ 27 281 274 413 412.. 38 27 .. 99 64 -L3 482 3 S~Ol~ ~ -1 ..0 11= Project o~ t ,.. c g-12 0 5 ite -0 51 c m 333 Oyster Point oyster point ? -L 67 -g _ 102 ;:+ .. 183 ~ t ,.. 35 161 337 C III Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. -L7 _2 .. 12 . arth Project Acces s 27 J ~ t ,.. 2 ---+ 22 79 8.. 254 19 ~ 299 -L8 ~O ~ 4 _1 ~ ..9 . outh Project ~cces s 80 J ~ t ,.. 1 ---+ 96 5 37 .. 267 0 c -L 35 0- -306 c .. 12 657 ? -L 177 129 ~ -L 7 50 I 142 -g -212 134 I 6 ~ _95 ~ t ~;:+.. 263 ~ t ~ ~ .. 24 San Mateo S Air art Mitchell . 50 J ~ ~ t ,.. 172 ---+ 8- 180 334 106.. ~ 42 m 37 630 Overcross ~ ,.. 672 ---+.... c ---+ 22.. ~ ~ 224 764 78 J V1 ~ t ,.. 180 ---+ ? 423 332 390.. ~ 339 CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-3 Existing AM Peak Hour Volumes -L 56 111 8 I 255 - 266 ~ t ~ C 52 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ,.. ~ 47 286 OJ 71 OJ > "; ~ -L 14 x E G ra nd t ,.. 1062 556 o 243 z OJ 337 -L 64 o -L 906 416 ~ 158 '" -720 Ci _ 625 ~ ~ .229 -5 .1002 Sister Oyster Cities J Point 178 J t ~ 63 ~ t ~ 140- ~ 301 - 388 129 41 127 268 t 100 22 t 120 39 -L2 1226 ~ 5 ~ ~ _2 5 B 101 .0 11= Project 5 ite c m 333 Oyster Point oyster point 306 .A 145 160 ~ '- 186 I I ~"8 -177 East ... t ;:+ .574 " G ra nd G ra nd Ave 165 J 49 - 76 t ~ t ~ 45 110 333 ~ 295 J t ~ 4- ~ 9 15 20 t 735 -L 18 _0 .14 . South Project Acces s 370 J ~ t ~ o - 33 8 102 t 335 163 15 I 10 ~ t ~ 67 ~ o c g- -L 40 ~ _ 1362 G ra nd -1109 .24 340 ~ 29 290 - 231 45 t 1004 ? -L 389 200 ~ -L 3 76 I 152 -g _ 178 355 I 7 ~ - 350 ~ t ~;:+. 632 ~ t ~ ~ .103 San Mateo S Airport Mitchell C III . 121 J ~~ t ~ 134 - 8- 78 191 200 t ~ 29 m Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. OJ > .'" :J ~ -L 9 E G ra nd 34 J ~ ~ t ~ 101 - -3' 494 61 342 t g 124 o ,. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-4 Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes City of South San San Francisco October 2009 approaches or individual turn and through movements. Table IV.M-2 provides greater detail about unsignalized analysis methodologies. Analysis Software All existing and future intersection operating conditions have been evaluated using the Synchro software program. A B C D E F Table IV.M-l Signalized Intersection LOS Criteria Operations with very low delay occurring with favorable progression and/or short cycle lengths. Operations with low delay occurring with good progression and/or short cycle lengths. Operations with average delays resulting from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures begin to appear. Operations with longer delays due to a combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, and/or high volume-to-capacity (VlC) ratios. Many vehicles stop and individual cycle failures are noticeable. Operations with high delay values indicating poor progression, long cycle lengths, and high V/C ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. This is considered to be the limit of acceptable delay. Operation with delays unacceptable to most drivers occurring due to oversaturation, poor progression, or very long cycle lengths. < 10.0 10.1 to 20.0 20.1 to 35.0 35.1 to 55.0 55.1 to 80.0 > 80.0 Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). Table IV.M-2 Unsignalized Intersection LOS Criteria A B C D E Little or no delays Short traffic delays Average traffic delays Long traffic delays Very long traffic delays < 10.0 10.1 to 15.0 15.1 to 25.0 25.1 to 35.0 35.1 to 50.0 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-9 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-2 Unsignalized Intersection LOS Criteria Extreme traffic delays with intersection capacity exceeded (for an all-way stop), or with approach/turn movement capacity exceeded (for a side street stop controlled intersection) Source: 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). F > 50.0 Standards The City of South San Francisco considers Level of Service D (LOS D) to be the poorest acceptable operation for signalized and all-way-stop intersections, with LOS E the poorest acceptable operation for unsignalized city street intersection turn movements. Existing Intersection Operating Conditions Table IV.M-3 shows that all 16 existing analyzed intersections are currently operating at good to acceptable (LOS D or better) Levels of Service during both the AM and PM peak traffic hours. Table IV.M-3 Intersection Level of Service Existing AM & PM Peak Hour .. ~L"''''. '" """V". AM....eaIcHOI1.. ....iVIPp>lkllour Airport Blvd./Grand Ave. (Signal) D-40.4(1) C-32.0 E. Grand Ave. OvercrossinglDubuque Ave. (Signal) A-6.5(1) A-3.4 E. Grand Ave./Grand Ave. Overcrossing (Signal) B-18.3 (1) B-13.0 E. Grand Ave./Gateway Blvd. (Signal) C-25.1 (1) C-22.6 Oyster Point Blvd./Veterans Blvd./project Entrance (Signal) B-1 1.2(1) B-1O.6 Oyster Point Blvd./Gateway Blvd./U.S.lOI SB Off-Ramp Flyover (Signal) C-30.0(1) C-22.2 Gateway Blvd./S. Airport Blvd./Mitchell Ave. (Signal) C-34.1 (1) D-44.8 Airport Blvd./San Mateo Ave./Produce Ave. (Signal) D-36.7(1) C-33.6 Oyster Point Blvd.IDubuque Ave./U.S.lOI NB On-Ramp (Signal) C-23.0(1) C-22.2 Airport Blvd./Sister Cities Blvd./Oyster Point Blvd. (Signal) C-25.5(1) C-24.3 Dubuque Ave./U.S.lOI NB Off-Ramp & SB On-Ramp (Signal) B-12.6(1) D-45.8 Airport Blvd./U.S.lOI SB Hook Ramps (Signal) C-25.5(1) C-27.0 Airport Blvd.!Terrabay Phase 3 Access (Signal) NA NA Gateway Blvd.!North Site Driveway (Signal) C-21.0(1) B-15.6 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-10 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-3 Intersection Level of Service Existing AM & PM Peak Hour Gateway Blvd./South Site Driveway (Signal) Oyster Point Blvd./333 Oyster Point Blvd. (Signal) B-12.4 (I) A-3.0 C-23.0 A-5.7 (1) Signalized level of service - vehicle control delay in seconds. NA = Project not currently completed. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group Vehicle Queuing Analysis Methodology The Synchro software program has determined year 2015 and 2035 projections of vehicle queuing on the critical approaches to three signalized off-ramp intersections evaluated in this study as well as on the approaches to adjacent and nearby intersections that need to accommodate flow from the off-ramp intersection. . U.S.101 Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp / Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard intersection . U.S.l0l Northbound Off-Ramp / Dubuque Avenue intersection, the adjacent Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U. S.1 0 1 Northbound On -Ramp intersection & the nearby Oyster Point Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Airport Boulevard intersection . U.S.I0l Southbound Off-Ramp / Airport Boulevard intersection . Grand Avenue Overcrossing / E. Grand Avenue intersection Queuing Standards The standard adopted by the City of South San Francisco and Caltrans is that the 95th percentile vehicle queue must be accommodated within available storage for each off-ramp and on the approaches to intersections adjacent to off-ramp intersections that accommodate a significant amount of off-ramp traffic. In addition, no off-ramp traffic is allowed to back up to the freeway mainline during the entire AM or PM peak traffic hour. The 95th percentile queue indicates that vehicle backups will only extend beyond this length five percent of the time during the analysis hour. Queuing analysis is presented in this study for year 2015 and 2035 Base Case and Base Case + project conditions. Off-ramp queuing has been evaluated using both the Synchro software output, which details queuing for one of the signal cycles Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-11 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 during the peak traffic hour, as well as using the SIM traffic feature of the Synchro program, which evaluates off-ramp operation and backups during the entire peak traffic hour. Freeway Operation Analysis Methodology U.S.lOl freeway segments have been evaluated based on the Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual as specified by Caltrans and the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program (CMP). U.S.l0l existing traffic conditions have been evaluated for the weekday AM and PM peak hour. Existing traffic volumes used for the analysis were derived from early June 2009 U.S.l0l mainline counts conducted by Crane Transportation Group just north of the Oyster Point interchange. Mainline volumes just south of the Produce Avenue interchange were then developed using recent (2008/2009) counts for all of the on- and off-ramps in South San Francisco. Freeway mainline analysis was performed using the HCS software based upon the HCM methodology for freeway mainlines. A description ofHCM analysis methodology is provided in Appendix H. San Mateo CMP Standards for Regional Roads and Local Streets The LOS standards established for roads and intersections in the San Mateo County CMP street network vary based on geographic differences. For roadway segments and intersections near the county boarder, the LOS standard was set as LOS E in order to be consistent with the recommendations in the neighboring counties. If the existing Level of Service in 1990/91 was F, the standard was set to LOS F. If the existing or future LOS was or will be E, the standard was set to E. For the remaining roadways and intersections, the standard was set to be one letter designation worse than the projected LOS in the year 2000. If a proposed land use change would either cause a deficiency (to operate below the standard LOS) on a CMP-designated roadway system facility, or would significantly affect (by using LOS F in the 1991 CMP baseline LOS), mitigation measures are to be developed so that LOS standards are maintained on the CMP-designated roadway system. If mitigation measures are not feasible (due to financial, environmental or other factors), a Deficiency Plan must be prepared for the deficient facility. The Deficiency Plan must indicate the land use and infrastructure action items to be implemented by the local agency to eliminate the deficient conditions. A Deficiency Plan may not be required if the deficiency would not occur if traffic originating outside the County were excluded from the determination of conformance. Existing Freeway Operation Existing Levels of Service on the freeway segments in South San Francisco were based upon analysis of year 2009 volumes. Table IV.M-4 shows a summary of existing U.S. 101 freeway operation and Table IV.M-5 shows details of the existing freeway Level of Service results. Currently, all U.S.l0l freeway Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-12 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 segments are operating at an acceptable LOS E or better during the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Conditions are generally poorer along U.S.I0l to the north of Oyster Point Boulevard, and peak in the southbound direction during the AM peak hour and in the northbound direction during the PM peak hour. Table IV.M-4 Summary Of Existing U.S.IOl Freeway Operation LOS D North of the Oyster Point interchange southbound off-ramps LOS C South of the Produce Avenue on-ramp (just north ofI-380) LOS C South of the S. Airport Blvd. off-ramp (just north ofI-380) LOS D North of the Oyster Point interchange & northbound off-ramp to Bayshore Blvd. Southbound LOS C North of the Oyster Point interchange southbound off-ramps LOS C South of the Produce Avenue on-ramp (just north ofI-380) LOS C South of the S. Airport Blvd. off-ramp (just north ofI-380) LOS E North of the Oyster Point interchange & northbound off-ramp to Bayshore Blvd. Northbound Table IV.M-5 Detailed U.S.IOl Freeway Existing Operating Conditions, May 2009 North of Oyster Point Blvd. Northbound Direction 7,634 D Southbound Direction 7,913 D North of /-380 Northbound Direction 10,058 C Southbound Direction 7,499 C 31.8 8,786 E 33.8 6,617 C 24.6 8,564 C 19.1 8,947 C 40.2 25.9 21.4 22.4 LOS = Level of Service Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile. Density is not computed when free-flow speed is less than 55 mph. Source: Crane Transportation Group 2009 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-13 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Off-Ramp Operation at Diverge From Freeway Mainline Analysis Methodology & Standards Caltrans uses an off-ramp volume of 1,500 vehicles per hour as the maximum acceptable limit that can be accommodated by a single lane off-ramp at its divergence from the freeway mainline. Existing Off-Ramp Diverge Operations Table IV.M-6 shows that currently all U.S.lOl freeway off-ramps serving South San Francisco and the East of 101 area are operating acceptably and have volumes below 1,500 vehicles per hour during the AM and PM peak traffic hours, with the exception of the northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive during the AM peak hour (with a volume of 1,624 vehicles per hour). Table IV.M-6 Off-Ramp Capacity & Volumes at Diverge from Freeway Mainline Existing, Year 2015 & Year 2035 AM Peak Hour SB Off-Ramp to Airport Blvd. 1500 207 461 461 511 511 SB Off-Ramp Flyover to Oyster 1500 1249 2099 2243 2909 3161 Point/Gateway NB Off-Ramp to E. Grand Ave. / 1500 1618 2151** 2284** 2897** 3180** Executive Drive NB Off-Ramp to Dubuque Ave. 1500 716 1507 1556 1680 1730 PM Peak Hour SB Off-Ramp to Airport Blvd. 1500 419 548 548 633 633 SB Off-Ramp Flyover to Oyster 1500 154 361 358 524 538 Point/Gateway NB Off-Ramp to E. Grand 1500 536 712** 727** 910** 944** Ave./Executive Drive NB Off-Ramp to Dubuque Ave. 1500 494 786 768 959 945 * Caltrans desired volume limit that can be accommodated by a single off-ramp lane connection to the freeway mainline. ** Second off-ramp lane connection to U.S.l0l mainline programmed for both locations by 2015. Capacity increased to more than 2,200 vehicles per hour. Existing Volumes = TJKM Associates Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-14 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-6 Off-Ramp Capacity & Volumes at Diverge from Freeway Mainline Existing, Year 2015 & Year 2035 Volumes Existing Year 2015 Year 2035 Capacity* Base Base Case Base Base Case U.S. 101 Off-Ramp (VehJHr) case + Proj. Case + Proj. Year 2015 & 2035 Volumes = Crane Transportation Group Bolded results = significant project impact. Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group ON-RAMP OPERATION Analysis Methodology & Standards On-ramp operation has been evaluated using planning level methodology contained in the Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (page 25-4/Exhibit 25-3). Capacity is dependent upon the free flow speed of on-ramp traffic. For single lane diamond on-ramps with higher speeds, capacity has been set at 2,200 vehicles per hour, while for single lane button hook or curving on-ramps, capacity has been set at 2,000 vehicles per hour. Existing On-Ramp Operations Table IV.M-7 shows that currently, all U.S.l0l freeway on-ramps serving South San Francisco and the East of 101 area are operating acceptably and have volumes well below capacity during the AM and PM peak hours. Table IV.M-7 On-Ramp Capacity & Volumes Existing, Year 2015 & Year 2035 Volumes Existing Year 2015 Year 2035 Capacity* Base Base Case Base Base Case U.S. 101 on-ramp (VEWHR) Case + Proj. Case + Proj. AM Peak Hour SB On-Ramp from Dubuque Ave. 2000 495 728 737 936 960 SB On-Ramp from Produce Ave. 3300 1026 1159 1159 1288 1291 NB On-Ramp from Grand Ave. 2000 650 755 755 890 890 NB On-Ramp from Oyster Point 2200 746 1047 1056 1302 1323 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-15 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-7 On-Ramp Capacity & Volumes Existing, Year 2015 & Year 2035 Blvd./Dubuque Ave. PM Peak Hour SB On-Ramp from Dubuque Ave. 2000 1263 1901 2032 2175 2381 SB On-Ramp from Produce Ave. 3300 1836 2500 2550 3256 3409 NB On-Ramp from Grand Ave. 2000 842 1353 1353 1450 1450 NB On-Ramp from Oyster Point Blvd./Dubuque Ave. 2200 1184 2366 2513 3234 3521 * Caltrans desired volume limit that can be accommodated by single or double on-ramp lane connections to the freeway mainline. Existing Volumes = TJKM Associates Year 2015 & 2035 Volumes = Crane Transportation Group Bolded results = significant project impact. Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group Transit & Shuttle Service Transit service in the study area includes local bus service, shuttle service and regional rail service. Figure IV.M-5 shows bus/shuttle service east of the U.S.lOl freeway in the project vicinity, while Table IV.M-8 lists the type and frequency of transit service provided to South San Francisco and the project area and Table IV.M-9 lists the Alliance Shuttle Service shuttles and schedule. Bus Service The San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) provides bus servIce to South San Francisco. However, currently there is no SamTrans service east of the U.S.l0l freeway. Bus service running just west of the freeway is as follows. Route 34: Tanforan Shopping Center-Geneva operates along Bayshore Boulevard and Airport Boulevard between Brisbane and the San Bruno BART station in the study area. This route operates during midday only on weekdays with headways of about two hours. Route 130: Daly City/Colma BART-South San Francisco operates along Linden Avenue and Grand Avenue in the study area. It connects central South San Francisco with the Colma BART station and Daly Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-16 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 City. It operates with 20-minute peak period headways and 30- to 60-minute non-peak headways on weekdays, 30-minute headways on Saturdays and 60-minute headways on Sundays. Route 132: Airport/Linden-Arroyo/El Camino operates along Hillside Avenue and Grand Avenue connecting to the South San Francisco BART station. It operates on 30-minute peak period headways and 60-minute non-peak headways on weekdays and 60-minute headways on Saturdays. Route 292: San Francisco-SF Airport-Hillsdale Shopping Center operates along Airport Boulevard. It operates with 20- to 30-minute peak headways and 25- to 60-minute non-peak headways on weekdays and 30- to 60- minute headways on Saturdays and Sundays. Caltrain Caltrain provides train service between Gilroy, San Jose and San Francisco. There is a station located on the corner of Dubuque Avenue and Grand Avenue Overcrossing in South San Francisco. Trains operate every 15 to 20 minutes during commute periods and hourly during midday. CaltrainlBART Shuttles Van shuttles are provided between the South San Francisco Caltrain station and employment centers east ofU.S.l0l during commute hours. Separate shuttles provide service to/from the Colma BART station. A shuttle stop is provided at the south end of the project site along Gateway Boulevard. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-17 CALTRAIN SHUTTLE MAP Gateway Area Caltrain Shuttle = P reject Site E Forbes Blvd . Building 4 . Buildings 10,11,12 · Building 24 SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CALTRAIN STATION BART SHUTTLE MAP Gateway Area BART Shuttle Hills ide/S is te r Cities * = P reject Site SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BART STATION · Building 4 G enentech · Building 24 o Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-5 Existing Bus and Shuttle Service City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-8 Transit Service-South San Francisco ,., Route i I"PlIk ;,."'... Area Served " """'" AirportJLinden-Daly City and Co1ma BART 20/20 30 Airport Blvd./Linden Ave. Stations (130) South SF BART 30/30 50 Airport Blvd./Linden Ave. Station (132) SamTrans AirportJLinden- 30/30 60 Airport Blvd./Linden Ave. Serramonte (133) Palo Alto-Daly City 30/30 30 South SF BART Bay 3 (390) Redwood City-Co1ma 15/30(a) 15(a) E1 Camino Real/South SF BART Station (391) BART Station San Mateo-SF (292) 15/15(a) 30 Airport Blvd./Baden Ave. Caltrain Gilroy-SF 30/30 60 South SF Ca1train Station Pittsburg-Da1y City 15/15 15 Daly City BART Station Fremont-Daly City 15/15 15 Daly City BART Station BART Richmond-Daly City 15/15 - Daly City BART Station Dublin- Millbrae 15/15 15 South SF BART Station Gateway Area 30/30 - Genentech Bldgs B9, B5 Caltrain Shuttle Oyster Point Area 30/30(a) - Gull/Oyster Point and 384 Oyster Point to SSF Station Sierra Point Area 30/30(a) - 5000 Shoreline Ct. Utah-Grand Area 30/30(a) - Cabot! Allerton BART Shuttle Sierra Point Area 35/35 - 5000 Shoreline Ct. to SSF Station Gateway Area 20/20 - 1000 Gateway Genentech 15/15 - Genentech Bldgs. B5, B54 Oyster Point Area 23/23 (a) - Gull/Oyster Point and 384 Oyster Point Utah-Grand Area 23/23 (a) - Cabot! Allerton Frequency of transit service is presented in minutes. SF = San Francisco (a) = average frequency period. Source: Metropolitan Transportation Commission (511.org), San Mateo County ALLIANCE (commute.org) Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-19 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-9 Alliance Shuttle Service-South San Francisco " A.reaSf'I'\If'i1 ~t:IVt:U BART eight AM & nine PM trips Oyster Point Blvd., Gull Rd., Oyster Point Caltrain seven AM & seven PM trips Eccles Ave., Forbes Blvd., Veterans Blvd. BART nine AM & nine PM trips E. Grand Ave., Utah Ave., Utah-Grand Caltrain seven AM & seven PM trips Harbor Way, Littlefield Ave. BART ten AM & twelve PM trips Gateway Blvd.-BART Gateway Area Caltrain six AM & five PM trips Gateway Blvd., Genentech Office-Caltrain BART four AM & four PM Sierra Point Sierra Point, Shoreline Caltrain four AM & four PM trips Both shuttles alternate between 15- and 30-minute headways during both peak hours. Source: San Mateo County ALLIANCE (Commute.org) The Gateway Area/Genentech Shuttle (BART and Caltrain) provides servIce on Gateway Boulevard, Oyster Point Boulevard, Forbes Boulevard, Grandview Drive and East Grand Avenue. There are 15 morning trips and 15 afternoon trips on the BART shuttle, and six morning trips and five afternoon trips on the Caltrain shuttle. The Utah-Grand Shuttle (BART and Caltrain) serves over 20 employers in the Utah/Grand/Littlefield area. It provides service on Harbor Way, East Grand Avenue, Cabot Court, Grandview Avenue, Littlefield Avenue, Haskin Way and Utah Avenue. There are nine trips in the morning and nine trips in the afternoon on the BART shuttle, with nine morning and eight afternoon trips on the Caltrain shuttle. All shuttle service is fixed-route, fixed-schedule and is provided on weekdays during the commute periods. The shuttles are free to riders. The operating costs are borne by the Joint Powers Board (JPB), SamTrans, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District, and the City/County Association of Governments (75 percent) and sponsoring employers (25 percent). Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Sidewalks are in place along the west (non-project) side of Gateway Boulevard in the project vicinity. In addition, they are provided on the north side and selectively on the south side of Oyster Point Boulevard in the project vicinity. A Class II bicycle lane is designated along Oyster Point Boulevard east of Gateway Avenue. Bike lanes are also provided along East Grand Avenue east of Littlefield Avenue, Sister Cities Boulevard, Gull Road, and Gateway Boulevard (south of East Grand Avenue). Bike routes are designated on South Airport Boulevard and on East Grand Avenue between Executive Drive and the East Grand Overcrossing. Bike paths are available along Executive Drive, and along the shoreline. Future Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-20 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 bike lanes are planned along Gateway Boulevard south of Oyster Point Boulevard, East Grand Avenue, Allerton Avenue, and Forbes Boulevard (east of Allerton Avenue). Future Class III bike routes are planned along Forbes Boulevard (west of Allerton Avenue), while a future bike path is planned along the Caltrain right-of-way. The proposed future bike lanes, routes, and paths are designated in the General Plan Transportation Element. City of South San Francisco Transportation Demand Management Program The City of South San Francisco requires that all nonresidential development expected to generate 100 or more average daily trips, based on the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) trip generation rates or a project seeking a floor area ratio (FAR) bonus implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce vehicle traffic (Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management) (refer to the Appendix H). The purposes of the TDM ordinance are as follows: . Implement a program designed to reduce the amount of traffic generated by new nonresidential development, and the expansion of existing nonresidential development pursuant to the City's police power and necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. . Ensure that expected increases in traffic resulting from growth in employment opportunities in the City of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated. . Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of services, incentives, and facilities. . Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that new developments are designed in ways to maximize the potential for alternative transportation usage. . Establish minimum TDM requirements for all new nonresidential development. . Allow reduced parking requirements for projects implementing the requirements of this chapter. . Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that the measures are implemented. The analysis prepared for the General Plan Amendment includes the assumption that a moderate TDM program will reduce peak hour traffic generation by an additional 9.5 percent compared to existing traffic generation rates, while an intensive TDM program will reduce peak hour traffic generation by an additional 20 percent. The objective ofTDM programs is to reduce vehicle trips at commercial/residential developments by incorporating project components such as encouraging increased transit use, carpooling, and providing facilities for bicyclists and pedestrians. South San Francisco has a "menu" of potential TDM programs, each with a specific number of points that relate to the program's effectiveness. Examples ofTDM programs include bicycle racks and lockers, free carpool parking, shuttle services, and on-site amenities. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-21 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Future Base Case (Without project) Conditions The proposed project's traffic impacts have been evaluated in relation to both year 2015 and year 2035 Base Case conditions. Year 2015 reflects a horizon year that the Gateway project would be about half completed, while year 2035 reflects the most distant horizon year currently utilized by the City Public Works Department and Caltrans for analysis purposes. The project would be expected to be completely constructed and fully occupied by 2020. This section details the process to determine Base Case traffic operation for year 2015 and 2035 conditions. Year 2015 Base Case Development Scenario The year 2015 Base Case conditions include traffic generated by approved and proposed development in the study area, as well as traffic generated by projects that are under construction. Projections have been developed for a list of specific projects provided by City Planning staff. Projects and their associated trip generation are provided in Appendix H. Year 2015 peak hour Base Case (without project) conditions were developed by adding traffic expected to be generated by all the approved and proposed developments in the greater East of 101 Area to the existing traffic network. Year 2015 projections include traffic from several recently approved background projects such as 213 E. Grand, Lowe's, Home Depot, Terrabay, a ferry terminal and the Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan, as well as traffic from the proposed 328 Roebling Road development. The number of trips generated by future developments is provided in Table IV.M-I0. In addition to trip generation from specific developments, at City direction an additional 0.5 percent per year growth rate in traffic was also incorporated into the projections to reflect potential development of other empty parcels in the East of 101 area or redevelopment of existing warehousing/manufacturing parcels into higher trip generating uses. Also, traffic growth to/from Brisbane along Bayshore Boulevard as well as to/from west of the U.S.lOl freeway was projected using current C/CAG traffic modeling projections for the South San Francisco area. Freeway segment traffic volumes for 2015 Base Case (without project) conditions were developed assuming growth of existing volumes as determined utilizing C/CAG's most recent countywide traffic model projections. The growth in on- and off-ramp volumes within South San Francisco was based on the anticipated traffic increases generated by the approved and proposed development projects east of the U.S.lOl freeway, two specific developments in South San Francisco just west of the freeway and C/CAG traffic model growth projected for Brisbane and other areas in South San Francisco west of the freeway. On- and off-ramp traffic growth exceeded projections observed in the C/CAG traffic model results. Year 2015 Base Case (without project) AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are presented in Figures IV.M-6 and IV.M-7. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-22 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-I0 Approved & Planned Developments by 2015 East of the U.S.101 Freeway or Just West of the U.S.I0l Freeway Contributing Significant Traffic to U.S.I01 Interchanges in South San Francisco NET NEW TRIP GENERATION (AFTER TDM REDUCTIONS AND ELIMINATION OF ANY EXISTING SITE TRAFFIC) AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT USE SIZE (SQ.FT.) IN OUT IN OUT Genentech Master Plan * * 881 108 146 760 Home Depot Retail 12,500 99 84 161 186 Lowe's & West Marine Retail 155,339 88 69 135 182 333 Oyster Point R&D 315,444 238 49 40 226 180 & 200 Oyster Point R&D 186,288 123 25 20 113 R&D 690,000 Oyster Point Redevelopment Office 460,000 806 140 144 756 283,562 250-270 E. Grand Ave. R&D (net new) 162 34 26 142 213 E. Grand Ave. R&D 786,606 328 Roebling Rd. 249 E. Grand Ave. Office 145,817 595 103 97 548 494 Forbes Blvd. R&D 326,020 244 50 41 234 Caltrain Station Site Retail 23,960 21 16 34 38 Genentech Triangle - Oyster R&D 620,000 Point / Gateway Hotel 350 Rooms 530 169 174 413 Terrabay Office 697,000 625 85 117 571 GSA Building-Linden Warehouse 573,000 292 90 92 314 TOTAL 4704 1022 1227 4483 * See Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan EIR, half total development projected by 20 IS Project List Source: City of South San Francisco Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-23 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Year 2015 Base Case Operating Conditions Roadway Improvements Planned by 2015 The City's East of 101 capital improvement program funds certain roadway and intersection improvements in the City's East of 101 area through the collection of lawfully adopted impact fees. In accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act, impact fees are imposed on and collected from development projects in the East of 101 area, held in a separate account, and used to fund improvements benefiting the area and the projects from which the fees were collected. Like other projects in the East of 101 area, the Gateway Master Plan will pay a proportionate share towards these improvements. The City is in the process of updating their capital improvement program list for the East of 101 area; a new list is expected to be available in 2010. Based on currently available funding, projected growth rates, and the pending update, the City of South San Francisco Public Works division expects that the following intersection improvements will be funded and constructed by 2015. Accordingly, the improvements have been factored into for the year 2015 Base Case analysis. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Airport Boulevard . Stripe a second left turn lane on the northbound Airport Boulevard approach. . S. Airport Boulevard / U.S.I0l Northbound Hook Ramps / Wondercolor Lane . Add a second northbound off-ramp right turn lane. . Oyster Point Boulevard / U.S.I0l Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp / Gateway Boulevard . Restripe the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound approach to provide two through lanes and an exclusive right turn lane. . Gateway Boulevard / E. Grand Avenue . Restripe the northbound shared through / right turn lane to an exclusive right turn lane. . Add a second westbound left turn lane. . Add an exclusive eastbound right turn lane. . Airport Boulevard / Produce Avenue / San Mateo Avenue . Restripe the Airport Boulevard westbound approach to provide two exclusive left turn lanes, a shared through / left turn lane and an exclusive right turn lane. Also, reconfigure the southbound departure on Produce Avenue to provide three departure lanes. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-24 33 C\ -L 7 657 ? -L 180 1 OJ 92 145 -a 200 ~ 6 fij _ 164 I I I Q - 271 .J ~ ~ .L 24 +' t ~ - .L 391 '< "'. San Mateo "' S Airport Mitchell . 62 J -::.: ~ t,.. 86 J V1 ~ t ,.. 224 - 8-237 342 215 _ ? 478 549 111.. ~ 42 410.. ~ 485 ~ t 386 319 ? -a g z OJ o -L 395 '" Ci -195 ~ .. 282 220 210 I 419 .J t ~ Sister Cities 204J 1351- 71 .. -L372 -274 .. 1900yster ~ Point 570J ~ t ,.. 973- 41 364 591 '- 129 , 199 671 3 .J ~ ~ 5 B 101 Onramp 141'!J 0_ 93.. NB 101 Offramp ~ t ,.. 641 839 82 ? -L 85 -a -141 o ;:+ .. 192 ~ t ,.. 36 184 349 C fO V1 Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. ,.. o 27 J 2 - 8 .. 333 Oyster Point ~ t ,.. 22 79 C\ 547 OJ ~ -L 8 ~-1 ..9 . outh P reject ~cces s 353J ~ t ,.. 1 - 5 38.. 99 287 Project 5 ite 433 206 I 4 .J t ~ 11= 43 .J o c g- -L 47 c _610 m G ra nd _422 .. 15 -L 58 114 8 363 - 381 .J ~ ~ C 111 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ,.. fij 48 433 ~ 76 Overcross ~ ,.. 1404 _.... c 22 .. ~ ~ 235 990 72 1332 - Il.J > '; u <IJ *10 x ~ -L 54 E G ra nd * = Shuttles only t ~02 849 o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-6 Year 2015 Base Case (WID Project) AM Peak Hour Volumes 45 1097 ~ t Terrabay 303 J ~ 268 .-3' ~ 368 - 530 1 467 ~ t l. Sister C ities ~ 71 ...J 429 - 26 . t 277 z OJ o -L 1795 '" Ci - 883 -5.1561 -L 156 _1035 .L 303 , Oyster ~ Point 374 J ~ t ~ 234- 98 159 447. 122 ~ t ~ 611 248 197 236 1767 1 5 ~ t l. 5 B 101 Onramp -L2 -2 .0 675 J o~ t ~ g.. 132 0 o - c 379 NB101 111,--g Offramp ,m 333 Oyster Point 323 ~ -L 261 1781233-3'_319 ~ t l. g .612 G ra nd 173 J 91 - 78 . ~ t ~ 48 118 359 PROJECT 110 SITE ~ ~ ~ 30 ~ -L 48 245 ~ _ 3 9 45 37 ~~l.\j .41 . North Project Acces s 213 J ~ t ~ 2 - 7 10 20 . 724 -L 18 -0 .14 . South Project Acces s 400 J ~ t ~ o - 34 8 105 . 323 281 15 1 10 ~ t l. 11= Project 5 ite o c g- -L 50 c _ 1952 m G ra nd _1683 .35 -L 98 454 12 122 _1635 ~ ~ l. C 378 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ~ fir 71 85 ~ 46 67 375 Overcros s 353 46 . ~ ~ - 1006 ? -L 400 21 5 ~ -L 3 96 155 -a 682 17m -715 I 1 I ~ - 235 ~ t l. ~ .116 +' t ~ - .L 1273 '< . San Mateo'S Airport Mitchell . 149 J ~~ t ~ 35 J ~ ~ t ~ 198-093 194 111- ::;'511 71 221. ~ 29 401. 3. 157 c ro Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. I!J > '; u -L 37 <IJ *10 x l. E G ra nd Q. t ~ E ro 599 en i: 113 Z 0 * = Shuttles only o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-7 Year 2015 Base Case (WID Project) PM Peak Hour Volumes City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Figure IV.M-8 provides a schematic presentation of year 2015 intersection approach lanes and control. Intersection Level of Service All intersections with year 2015 Base Case volumes would be operating at acceptable Levels of Service with the following exceptions (see Table IV.M-ll). . Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.IOl Southbound (Flyover) Off-Ramp (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F PM Peak Hour: LOS F . E. Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS E . Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.IOl Northbound On-Ramp (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS F . Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS F . Gateway Boulevard / So. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS F . Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F . E. Grand Avenue / Grand Avenue Overcrossing (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS E Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-27 ~H Terrabay ~? ~tt -a g~ ~ ~ It~~ L t r Oyster Point ())~ ~~t~~ -. 11= Project 5 ite ~~ .Jt~~ ~.~ Grand - r ~~ 0_ "'- ~f:- -or ~ ~ ~4~~ - -7 c m 333 Oyster Point oyster point J ~tt~ t()) ?_ C\ .. ~ ~ ~ .Jtt~gt .Jt~lr San Mateo r S Airport Mitchell . i ~~t tr~ =; ~ ()) C III VJ Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. i; -" ~ ;:;: = Stop Sign = Signal o ~~ - .J~c- m G ra nd Overcros s J - - - * = Shuttles only o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-8 Year 2015 Intersection Lane Geometries and Control City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-ll Intersection Level of Service Year 2015 AM & PM Peak Hour ."A.M".PPllk.RI1III'." PeakRI1IIl' '. Airport Blvd./Grand Ave. (Signal) F-1Ol(1) F-103 D-41.6 D-41.6 E. Grand Ave. OvercrossinglDubuque Ave. A-5.S(1) A-5.S A-S.2 A-S.3 (Signal) E. Grand Ave./Grand Ave. Overcrossing E-64.S(1) E-65.5 B-1 1.3 B-11.4 (Signal) E. Grand Ave./Gateway Blvd. (Signal) E-76.7(1) E-76.4 C-30.5 C-32.0 Oyster Point Blvd.Neterans Blvd./project D-35.9(1) F-70.l F-126 F-16S Entrance (Signal) Oyster Point Blvd./Gateway Blvd./U.S.10l SB F-206(1) F-245 F -104 F-14l Off-Ramp Flyover (Signal) Gateway Blvd./S. Airport Blvd./Mitchell Ave. C-33.6(1) C-33.9 F-1OS F-12l (Signal) Airport Blvd./San Mateo Ave./Produce Ave. C-29.4(1) C-29.4 D-3S.5 D-39.S (Signal) Oyster Point Blvd.IDubuque Ave./U.S.1Ol NB C-20.3(1) C-20.9 F-27l F-30S On-Ramp (Signal) Airport Blvd./Sister Cities Blvd./Oyster Point C-30.6(1) C-30.7 D-50.3 D-50.4 Blvd. (Signal) Dubuque Ave./U.S.1Ol NB Off-Ramp & SB C-24.7(1) C-23.5 D-51.0 D-4S.S On-Ramp (Signal) Airport Blvd./U.S.1Ol SB Hook Ramps (Signal) C-20.S(1) C-21.6 C-23.2 C-23.3 Airport Blvd.!Terrabay Phase 3 Access (Signal) B-1 1.6(1) B-11.7 B-13.4 B-13.4 Gateway Blvd.!North Site Driveway (Signal) A-9.2(1) A-9.2 B-14.l B-16.5 Gateway Blvd./South Site Driveway (Signal) C-30.3(1) C-30.3 C-20.5 C-21.0 Oyster Point Blvd./333 Oyster Point Blvd. A-9.0(1) A-5.S B-13.l B-13.2 (Signal) (1) Signalized level of service - vehicle control delay in seconds. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-29 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Vehicle Queuing The following off-ramps and/or approaches to adjacent intersections would have 95th percentile year 2015 Base Case queuing exceeding available storage as determined using the Synchro software program (see Table IV.M-12) Table IV.M-12 95th Percentile Vehicle Queues*-Year 2015 Intersections at or Near U.S. 101 Interchanges Potentially Impacted by the Gateway project with Signal Timing for Optimized Level of Service ..Pp.>lk..lJoll".. I'MPp.>lk no n , no n. ..........~-..y..~-.. ,,'"J''''' '. ..~.. Airport Blvd./Grand A venue SB Left Turn 300 584 584 224 224 SB Through 300 521 521 169 169 SB Right Turn 300 22 22 40 40 Oyster Point Blvd./Dubuque Ave. EB Through 250 282 373 132 133 WE Through 840 72 72 338 352 WE Left 840 141 143 1250 1360 WE Right 550 73 80 2855 3146 NB Left Turn 175 195 194 586 624 NB LeftfThrough 270 196 197 598 631 NB Right Tum 240 81 101 52 40 Dubuque Ave.IU.S.101 SB On/ NB OfFRamps Off-Ramp/LeftfThrough 975 478 507 403 431 Oyster Point Blvd./Gateway Blvd.IU.S.1 01 SB OfFRamp/ Commercial Access SB Off-Ramp Through 3350 1255 1408 186 191 SB Off-Ramp Right Turn Lane 400 601 547 88 72 EB Through 900 1280 1392 235 229 Airport Blvd./SB 101 On-Off Ramp * SB Off-Ramp Left Turn 950 158 158 210 222 Airport Blvd./Terrabay Entrance SB Through 450 160 164 192 192 SB Right Turn 300 32 32 12 12 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-30 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 E. GrandAve.lGrandAve. Overcrossing NB E. Grand Right Turn Lane 800 1207 1207 245 245 NB E. Grand Left Turn Lane 800 146 146 58 58 Airport Blvd./Sister Cities Blvd.lOyster Point Blvd. WB Left Tum 140 71 71 159 161 WB Through 250 94 108 332 325 WB Right Turn 250 NA NA NA NA Bolded results = significant project impact. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to vehicle queuing for any other approach lane or lanes experiencing unacceptable Base Case 95th percentile queuing as project traffic contributions would be less than 1 percent of the total. * Storage and queues-in feet per lane. Synchro software usedfor all analysis unless noted Source: Crane Transportation Group . Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue AM Peak Hour: The Airport Boulevard southbound approach left turn and through movements would have 95th percentile queue demands greater than available storage. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.IOl Northbound On-Ramp AM Peak Hour: The Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound approach through movement would have 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. PM Peak Hour: The Dubuque Avenue northbound approach left and through turn movements would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. The Oyster Point Boulevard westbound approach left and right turn movements would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.IOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp AM Peak Hour: The flyover off-ramp approach right turn movement and the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound approach through movement would have 95th percentile queue demands greater than available storage. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-31 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . E. Grand Avenue / Grand Avenue Overcrossing AM Peak Hour: The E. Grand Avenue northbound approach right turn movement would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. The following off-ramps would have year 2015 Base Case queuing extending back to the U.S.l0l mainline one or more times during the peak traffic hours as determined using the SIM traffic software program (unless noted). . U.S.IOl Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. PM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. . U.S.IOl Southbound Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. . U.S.IOl Southbound Off-Ramp to Airport Boulevard AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. Off-Ramp Operation at Diverge from Freeway Mainline The following off-ramps would have year 2015 Base Case volumes exceeding 1,500 vehicles/hour on a one-lane off-ramp connection to the freeway mainline or 2,200 to 2,300 vehicles/hour on a two-lane off- ramp connection to the freeway (see Table IV.M-6). . U.S.IOl Southbound (Flyover) Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: 2,099 vehicles per hour using off-ramp. . U.S.IOl Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue AM Peak Hour: 1,507 vehicles per hour using off-ramp. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-32 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 On-Ramp Operation The following on-ramp would have year 2015 Base Case volumes exceeding 2,200 vehicles/hour on a one-lane on-ramp connection to the freeway mainline (see Table IV.M-7). . U.S.IOl Northbound On-Ramp from the Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue Intersection PM Peak Hour: 2,366 vehicles per hour using on-ramp. U.S.lOl Freeway Mainline Level of Service The following mainline freeway segment with year 2015 Base Case volumes would be operating at unacceptable Levels of Service (see Table IV.M-13). . U.S.IOl Northbound (North ofthe Oyster Point On-Ramp) PM Peak Hour: LOS F operation. Year 2035 Base Case Development Scenario The year 2035 Base Case conditions include traffic generated by all development detailed in the 2015 analysis plus the last half of the Genentech master plan as well as 1,150,000 square feet of office and research & development construction, a 350-room hotel and 40,000 square feet of retail and quality restaurant uses at the east end of Oyster Point Boulevard. This will be the remaining phase of development at the east end of Oyster Point Boulevard. The initial 1,150,000 square feet of R&D and office development are scheduled for completion by 2015. The peak hour trip generation potential of this development is presented in Table IV.M -14. In addition to this specific development, traffic on Airport Boulevard to/from Brisbane to the north as well as on Sister Cities Boulevard and other surface streets to the west of the U.S. 101 freeway were projected to grow from 2016 to 2035 at rates projected in the C/CAG regional model (after allowance for traffic to/from new development east of the 101 freeway). The total number of trips generated by specific future developments between 2008 and 2035 is provided in Table IV.M-15. U.S.lOl freeway segment traffic volumes for 2035 peak hour future conditions were developed utilizing C/CAG year 2005 and 2030 traffic model growth trends and then adjusting mainline volumes to reflect projected 2035 on- and off-ramp volumes through South San Francisco. Year 2035 Base Case (without project) AM and PM peak hour intersection volumes are presented in Figures IV.M-9 and IV.M-I0. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-33 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-13 Year 2015 U.S. 101 Freeway Operating Conditions ri Fi ..... ...uJ....... '" VoL LOS "" .. Vol LOS"" AM Peak Hour North of Oyster Point Blvd. Northbound Direction 8055 D 34.3 8064 D 34.3 Southbound Direction 9331 E 43.3 9475 F - North of 1-380 Northbound Direction 12106 D 32.0 12221 D 32.5 Southbound Direction 7654 C 19.5 7663 C 19.5 PM Peak Hour North of Oyster Point Blvd. Northbound Direction 10025 F - 10162 F - Southbound Direction 6743 D 26.5 6740 D 26.5 North of /-380 Northbound Direction 8607 C 21.5 8604 C 21.5 Southbound Direction 10320 C 25.5 10501 D 26.1 Bold results = significant project impact. The proposed project would result in significant impacts to this freeway segment experiencing Base Case LOS F operation as project volume increases would be more than 1 percent. * unacceptable freeway segment operating conditions. LOS = Level of Service Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-34 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-14 Trip Generation Summary East of U.S.I0l Freeway Background Growth 2016-2035 Oyster Point R&D 690,000 SQ.FT. 806 140 144 756 Redevelopment Office 460,000 SQ.FT. Hotel 350 Rooms 142 102 118 122 Restaurant 20,000 SQ.FT. 12 4 100 50 Retail 20,000 SQ.FT. 14 10 31 39 TOTAL 974 256 393 967 Genentech Master Plan * * 881 108 146 760 GRAND TOTAL 1855 364 539 1727 * See Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan EIR, half of total Master Plan development projected from 2016 to 2035. Trip Rate Source: Trip Generation, 8th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2008. Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group Table IV.M-15 Trip Generation-Approved & Planned Local Area Development 2009-2035 (Without Gateway project) 6559 1386 7945 1766 6210 7976 Year 2035 Base Case Operating Conditions Roadway Improvements Planned by 2035 At City Public Works Department direction, all roadway improvements currently listed in the City's July 2007 Traffic Impact Fee Study Update2 for the East of 101 Area were assumed to be built and in operation for year 2035 Base Case and Base Case + Project evaluation. Figure IV.M-ll provides a schematic presentation of year 2035 intersection approach lanes and control. 2 Mum Financial. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-35 ~ 1 46 C\ -L 8 696 -. -L 193 270 7 ~ 182 99 153 -a m _ I I I 3. - 291 ~ ~ ~ ~ .. 27 ~ t ~ .L 474 '< . San Mateo'S Air art Mitchell . 68 J -0 ~ 249 - 8- 250 118 t ~ 683 t z OJ o -L 549 '" Ci - 269 -5 .. 407 230 260 I 483 ~ t ~ Sister Cities 354J 1676- 107 t -L 390 _327 .. 2100yster ~ Point 660 J ~ t ~ 1243 - 47 428 684 l. 129 , 215 873 I 3 ~ t ~ 5 B 101 Onramp ~ t ~ 658 996 93 -L3 _1 ..0 1580J 0_ 100 t NB 101 Offramp ~~ t ~ g- 62 0 -0 164 c m c '" Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. o -L7 _2 .. 12 arth Pro 'ect Acces s 28 J 3_ 8 t 333 Oyster Point ~ t ~ 22 79 C\ 857 OJ fi) -L 8 :;: ~_1 .. 9 . outh Project 1\cces s 407 J ~ t ~ o - 111 5 40 t 543 Project 5 ite 500 256 4 ~ ~ ~ 11= 47 ~ o c g- -L 52 ~ - 715 G ra nd _494 .. 17 -L 65 9 126398 _ 449 ~ ~ ~ C 173 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ~ fi) 53 603 ~ 97 Overcross ~ ~ 79 1876 _.... c 1798 - 25 t ~ ~ 273 1333 *10 ~ OJ * Shuttle :6 buses ::J ~ -L 54 E G ra nd o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-9 Year 2035 Base Case (WID Project) AM Peak Hour Volumes 735 t 45 1 288 ~ t Terrabay 303 J ~ 268. -3' o 368 ;:+ 700 I 488 ~ t ~ Sister Cities ... 79 ...J 503 - 31. t 322 -L187 -1294 .376 Oyster Point 394J ~ t,.. 323 - 118 175 449. 128 C III en Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. 1066 ~ -L 450 230 ~ -L 3 104 167 -3' 1160 I 8 fij _ 980 I I I ~ - 284 ~ t ~ ~ . 120 ~ t ~ - .L 1956 '< . San Mateo'S Airport Mitchell . 160 J ~ ~ t,.. 38 J ~ ~ t ,.. 221 - 8- 99 210 125 _ -3' 550 78 234. ~ 31 435. g 200 259 2032 I 5 ~ t ~ 5 B 101 Onramp 179 J 126 - 83. z OJ o -L 2620 '" Ci - 1149 -5 .1847 ~ t ,.. 708 332 220 -L2 _2 .0 c m 333 Oyster Point ? -L 294 -g - 500 ;:+ .685 ~ t ,.. 48 131 379 ,.. 207 J ~ t ,.. 2 - 7 851 10 20. 386 -L 18 30 10 _0 ~ ~ ~ . 10 . South Project Acces s 449 J ~ t ,.. 0_ 37 8 169. 401 11= Project 5 ite 149 ~ o c g- -L 55 c _ 2369 m G ra nd o _ 2027 .38 589 -L 125 8 140 _ 1979 ~ ~ ~ ~ 668 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ,.. ~ 78 127 OJ 50 Overcross ~ ,.. 75 441 _.... c 51 ::8 ~397 391 465 - . LJ..I <.:J *10 ~ t ,.. 167 743 Figure IV.M-1 0 Year 2035 Base Case (WID Project) PM Peak Hour Volumes CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES ~H Terrabay (I)~h ~tt .i ~ +- ....- ~II~~ .- H Oyster (1)3 .,.,tf~nt t ~ ~~t~~ - t .. ~~~ sa 101 Onramp II = Project Site 333 Oyster Point / oyster point ~ ~ tf- = Signal ~ t ~ I touth Project Access ~t~ tJ~ l5- c: ....- ~~c:+- (I) Grand j Overcross - - - hL ~t ~~ if: Grand r J ~tt~ t(l) ....- +- ....- .- =: _ c: ~ tt -? ~ ~ , LU (!) J - ~ G) III ....- (j) ....- ~~ t ~ ~ ....- S Airport r Mitchell r~ ~tt ~ San Mateo i - l Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES * = Shuttles only en ~~t t~ h {j' o o Figure IV.M-11 Year 2035 Intersection Land Geometries and Control City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Intersection Level of Service All intersections with year 2035 Base Case volumes would be operating at acceptable Levels of Service with the following exceptions (see Table IV.M-16). Table IV.M-16 Intersection Level of Service Year 2035 AM & PM Peak Hour ,{lv........ftIZBour PM......."IZHClU.. ...~' Base Case Base Case ri T'C ,* R""p("""p ." "~ Airport Blvd./Grand Ave. (Signal) F-1l4(1) F-1l6 D-48.3 D-48.8 E. Grand Ave. OvercrossinglDubuque Ave. (Signal) A-5.3(1) A-5.4 B-lO.l B-lO.l E. Grand Ave./Grand Ave. Overcrossing (Signal). D-46.0(1) D-46.4 B-19.l B-19.2 E. Grand Ave./Gateway Blvd. (Signal) F*(1) F* C-31.3 D-36.5 Oyster Point Blvd./Veterans Blvd./Project Entrance F-150(1) F-21O F-287 F-424 (Signal) Oyster Point Blvd./Gateway Blvd./U.S.lOl SB Off- F-38l(1) F-428 F-142 F-189 Ramp (Signal) Gateway Blvd./S.Airport Blvd./Mitchell Ave. (Signal) C-35.8(1) C-36.0 E-61.3 E-67.3 Airport Blvd./San Mateo Ave./Produce Ave. (Signal) C-31.l (1) C-31.l E-70.5 F -81.5 Oyster Point Blvd.IDubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB On- C-28.7(1) C-33.0 F -196 F-254 Ramp (Signal) Airport Blvd./Sister Cities Blvd./Oyster Point Blvd. D-48.2(1) D-53.4 E-59.5 E-62.5 (Signal) Dubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB Off-Ramp & SB On-Ramp C-20.8(1) C-22.3 D-36.2 E-56.5 (Signal) Airport Blvd./U.S.lOl SB Hook Ramps (Signal) C-31.3(1) C-31.9 C-32.8 C-34.2 Airport Blvd.!Terrabay Phase 3 Access (Signal) B-ll.8(1) B-12.5 B-14.l B-14.l Gateway Blvd.!North Site Driveway (Signal) A-6.l(1) A-8.6 B-15.5 D-40.9 Gateway Blvd./South Site Driveway (Signal) C-28.3(1) D-46.l C-25.3 C-32.8 Oyster Point Blvd./333 Oyster Point Blvd. (Signal) F-1l7(1) F-1l8 F-167 F-169 (1) Signalized level of service - vehicle control delay in seconds. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-39 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS E . Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.I0l Southbound (Flyover) Off-Ramp (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F PM Peak Hour: LOS F . Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.I0l Northbound On-Ramp (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS F . Gateway Boulevard / So. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS E . Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue / Produce Avenue (Signal) PM Peak Hour: LOS E . East Grand Avenue / Gateway Boulevard (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F . Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F . Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard / 180-200 Oyster Point Offices Driveway (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F PM Peak Hour: LOS F Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-40 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . Oyster Point Boulevard / 333 Oyster Point Access / Project Site Driveway (Signal) AM Peak Hour: LOS F PM Peak Hour: LOS F Vehicle Queuing The following off-ramps and/or approaches to adjacent intersections would have 95th percentile year 2035 Base Case queuing exceeding available storage as determined using the Synchro software program (see Table IV.M-17). Airport Boulevard / Grand Avenue AM Peak Hour: The Airport Boulevard southbound approach left turn movement would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.IOl Northbound On-Ramp AM Peak Hour: The Dubuque Avenue northbound approach right turn movement as well as the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound through movement would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. PM Peak Hour: The Dubuque Avenue northbound approach left turn movement and the Oyster Point Boulevard westbound left and right turn movements would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. . Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S. Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp AM Peak Hour: The U.S.lOl southbound off-ramp right turn and the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound through movement would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. . Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard AM Peak Hour: The Oyster Point Boulevard westbound approach left and right turn lanes would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. PM Peak Hour: The Oyster Point Boulevard westbound approach left turn and through movement would have a 95th percentile queue demand greater than available storage. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-41 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-17 95th Percentile Vehicle Queues *- Year 2035 Intersections at or Near U.S. 101 Interchanges Potentially Impacted by the Gateway project with Signal Timing for Optimized Level of Service Year P.."lrll".... ..IVII-"Plll< ri A , ...... "'... ~~'''C'~~' '~. "C'~. tCase ...... Case ...... .,1VI"''-. Ie '., Airport Blvd./Grand A venue SB Left Turn 300 560 560 137 137 SB Through or Southbound 300 210 210 227 227 Through/Right Turn Oyster Point Blvd./Dubuque Ave. EB Through 250 441 449 177 187 WE Through 840 110 110 413 436 WE Left 840 218 239 1270 1479 WE Right 840 43 43 1892 2167 NB Left Turn 270 221 211 426 442 NB LeftfThrough 270 44 42 224 225 NB Right Turn 240 308 350 144 109 Dubuque Ave.IU.S.101 SB On/NB OfFRamps Off-Ramp/LeftfThrough 975 538 574 468 511 Oyster Point Blvd.lGateway Blvd.IU.S.1 01 SB Flyover OfFRamp/ Commercial Access SB Off-Ramp Through 3350 1879 2034 280 285 SB Off-Ramp Right Turn Lane 400 736 352 95 101 EB Through 900 1650 1756 344 336 Airport Blvd.lSB 101 On-Off Ramp * SB Off-Ramp Left Turn 950 213 213 246 262 Airport Blvd./Terrabay Entrance SB Through 450 187 195 237 237 SB Right Turn 300 31 31 12 12 E. Grand A ve.lGrand Ave. Over crossing NB E. Grand Right Turn Lane 800 225 225 419 419 NB E. Grand Left Turn Lane 800 786 786 38 38 Airport Blvd./Sister Cities Blvd.lOyster Point Blvd. WE Left Turn 140 237 231 486 512 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-42 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 WE Through WE Right Turn 250 250 111 298 111 299 738 o 777 o Bolded results = significant project impact. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to vehicle queuing for any other approach lane or lanes experiencing unacceptable Base Case 95th percentile queuing as project traffic contributions would be less than 1 percent of the total. * Storage and queues-in feet per lane. Synchro software usedfor all analysis unless noted Source: Crane Transportation Group The following off-ramps would have year 2035 Base Case queuing extending back to the U.S.10l mainline one or more times during the peak traffic hours as determined using the SIM traffic software program. . U.S.101 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. PM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. . U.S.101 Southbound Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. . U.S.101 Southbound Off-Ramp to Airport Boulevard AM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. PM Peak Hour: Backups to mainline. Off-Ramp Operation at Diverge from Freeway Mainline The following off-ramps would have year 2035 Base Case volumes exceeding 1,500 vehicles/hour on a one-lane off-ramp connection to the freeway mainline or 2,200-2,300 vehicles/hour on a two-lane off- ramp connection to the freeway (see Table IV.M-6). Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-43 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . U.S.101 Southbound (Flyover) Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: 2,909 vehicles per hour using off-ramp. . U.S.101 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue AM Peak Hour: 1,680 vehicles per hour using off-ramp. . U.S.101 Northbound Off-Ramp to East Grand Avenue / Executive Drive AM Peak Hour: 2,897 vehicles per hour using two-lane off ramp. On-Ramp Operation The following on-ramps would have year 2035 Base Case volumes meeting or exceeding 2,000 to 2,200 vehicles/hour on a one-lane on-ramp connection to the freeway mainline or 3,300 vehicles per hour on a two-lane on-ramp connection to the freeway (see Table IV.M-7). . U.S.101 Southbound One-Lane On-Ramp from Dubuque Avenue PM Peak Hour: 2,175 vehicles per hour using on-ramp. . U.S.101 Northbound One-Lane On-Ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue Intersection PM Peak Hour: 3,234 vehicles per hour using on-ramp. U.S.lOl Freeway Mainline Level of Service The following mainline freeway segments with year 2035 Base Case volumes would be operating at unacceptable Levels of Service (see Table IV.M-18). . U.S.101 Southbound (North ofthe Oyster Point Interchange) AM Peak Hour: LOS F operation. . U.S.101 Northbound (North ofthe Oyster Point On-Ramp) PM Peak Hour: LOS F operation. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-44 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-18 Year 2035 U.S. 101 Freeway Operating Conditions .... '" Base Case ...... '~. "C'~. ... "J "". " ..... y AM Peak Hour North of Oyster Point Blvd. Northbound Direction 8845 E 40.9 8866 E 41.1 Southbound Direction 10381 F - 10633 F* - North ofI-380 Northbound Direction 13861 E 42.2 14193 E 44.9 Southbound Direction 8053 C 20.3 8080 C 20.3 PM Peak Hour North of Oyster Point Blvd. Northbound Direction 11220 F - 11510 F* - Southbound Direction 7211 D 29.1 7261 D 29.4 North ofI-380 Northbound Direction 9306 C 22.9 9377 C 23.1 Southbound Direction 11525 D 29.6 11933 D 31.3 Bold results = significant project impact. The proposed project would result in significant impacts to this freeway segment experiencing Base Case LOS F operation as project volume increases would be more than 1 percent. * unacceptable freeway segment operating conditions. LOS = Level of Service Density is shown in passenger cars per lane per mile. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Significance Criteria Standards of Significance have been measured based on CEQA, City of South San Francisco and C/CAG Guideline thresholds. Therefore, project impacts would be significant if they result in any of the following conditions: a. The project would exceed 100 net new peak hour trips on the local roadway system (C/CAG criteria only). Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-45 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 b. Signalized intersection operation and all-way-stop operation would change from Level of Service (LOS) A, B, C or D to LOS E or F and total volumes passing through the intersection would be increased by at least two percent. c. Uncontrolled turn movements or stop sign controlled approaches at side street stop sign controlled intersections would change from LOS A, B, C, D or E to LOS F and total volumes passing through the intersection would be increased by at least two percent. Side street criteria are applicable only for stop sign controlled approaches with more than 25 trips during any peak traffic hour. d. Project traffic would increase Base Case volumes at an unsignalized intersection to meet peak hour volume signal warrant criteria levels, or to meet pedestrian/school crossing signal warrant criteria levels. e. The proposed project would increase total volumes passing through an intersection by two percent or more with signalized or all-way stop operation already at a Base Case LOS E or F, or when the intersection is side street stop sign controlled and the stop sign controlled Base Case operation is at LOS F (and there are more than 25 vehicles on the stop sign controlled approach). f. The proposed project would increase traffic entering an unsignalized intersection by two percent or more with Base Case traffic levels already exceeding peak hour volume signal warrant criteria levels. g. Project traffic would increase acceptable Base Case 95th percentile vehicle queuing on all freeway off-ramps and also on the approaches to adjacent intersections leading away from off-ramp intersections to unacceptable levels (as determined by the Synchro software program), or if Base Case 95th percentile queuing on the freeway off-ramps or on the approaches to adjacent intersections leading away from off-ramp intersections is already projected at unacceptable lengths, the project would increase queuing volumes by one percent or more. h. Project traffic results in queues exceeding off-ramp storage capacity based upon SIM traffic software evaluation for the entire peak hour of operation. If base case traffic already exceeds the storage capacity of the off-ramp, then a one-percent addition in traffic due to the project is considered a significant impact. 1. Project traffic would degrade operation of the U.S. 101 freeway or freeway ramps from LOS E to LOS F with at least a one percent increase in volume, or would increase volumes by more than one percent or on a freeway segment or a freeway ramp with Base Case LOS F operation. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-46 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 J. If on-site circulation would be confusing to drivers and result in excessive traffic flow through various parts of the project site. k. Project parking would not meet City criteria. 1. Project development or project traffic would produce a detrimental impact to local transit or shuttle service. m. If, in the opinion of the registered traffic engineer conducting the EIR analysis, a significant traffic, pedestrian or bicycle safety concern would be created or worsened. Project Trip Generation Table IV.M-19 shows that by 2015,604,800 square feet of office uses (about one half the total proposed project) would be likely to generate 529 inbound and 72 outbound trips during the AM peak hour, with 100 inbound and 490 outbound trips during the PM peak hour. By 2035, a 100 percent completed project with up to 1,231,000 square feet of development would be likely to generate 958 inbound and 130 outbound trips during the AM peak hour, with 198 inbound and 962 outbound trips during the PM peak hour (see Table IV.M-20). These projections assume a 20 percent reduction in peak hour trips due to an intensive City mandated TDM program. As shown in Table IV.M-19, in 2015 with half project development and after elimination of traffic associated with existing uses on the project site that will be removed, the proposed project would result in 402 inbound and 10 outbound net new trips on the local circulation system during the AM peak hour, with a reduction of 16 inbound and an increase of 373 outbound net new trips on the local circulation system during the PM peak hour. As shown in Table IV.M-20, in 2035 with total project development and elimination of traffic associated with existing uses on the project site that will be removed, the proposed project would result in 720 inbound and 44 outbound net new trips on the local circulation system during the AM peak hour, with 31 inbound and 749 outbound net new trips on the local circulation system during the PM peak hour. Table IV.M-19 Year 2015 Gateway Trip Generation Summary (604,800 Sq.Ft. Office) Trips Before TDM TDM Reduction (I) Total After TDM 661 ( -132) 529 ( -127) 492 90 ( -18) 72 ( -62) 10 125 ( -25) 100 ( -116) ( -16) 613 ( -123) 490 ( -117) 373 Existing Trips Eliminated Net New Trips (1) 20% reduction due to City mandated TDM program. Source: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-47 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-20 Year 2035 Gateway Trip Generation Total Project Buildout (1,231,000 Sq.Ft. Office) A.M ....If.AK HIIIIK TRTP~ ....1"1 ....~'.A. K 1 J:Ur~ ~ . . ~ .. . ~ . . ~ .. . Trips Before TDM 1198 163 247 1203 TDM Reduction (I) ( -240) ( -33) ( -49) (-241 ) Total After TDM 958 130 198 962 Existing Trips Eliminated ( -238) ( -86) ( -167) (-213) Net New Trips 720 44 31 749 (1) 20% reduction due to City mandated TDM program. Source: Crane Transportation Group Project Trip Distribution Project traffic was distributed to the regional roadway network based upon East of 101 development traffic patterns contained in the April 2001 Draft SEIR for the South San Francisco General Plan Amendment and Transportation Demand Ordinance and the 2008 Genentech Corporate Facilities Master EIR (see Table IV.M-23) as well as traffic distribution patterns at driveways already serving development on the project site. It is likely that project drivers destined to/from the U.S.lOl freeway either north or south would choose to access the freeway via several routes and interchanges. Year 2015 AM and PM peak hour project traffic is shown distributed to the local roadway network in Figures IV.M-12 and IV.M- 13, while Figures IV.M-14 and IV.M-15 present resultant year 2015 AM and PM peak hour Base Case + project volumes. Year 2035 AM and PM peak hour project traffic is shown distributed to the local roadway network in Figures IV.M-16 and IV.M-17, while Figures IV.M-18 and IV.M-19 present resultant year 2035 AM and PM peak hour Base Case + project volumes. Trip generation projections for the Gateway project have been developed using Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation - 8th Edition3 fitted curve equations for all analysis and including the adjacent 180 and 200 Oyster Point Boulevard R&D buildings as part of the Gateway campus. Resultant year 2015 traffic operation details are presented in Table IV.M-21, while 2035 traffic generation details are presented in Table IV.M-22. 3 2003. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-48 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-21 Gateway + 180 & 200 Oyster Point Campus Trip Generation (2008-2015) AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND INBOUND OUTBOUND USE SIZE RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL Office (76.5%) 604,800 SQ.FT. * 661 (I) * 90(1) ** 125(1) ** 613(1) R&D (23.5%) 186,288 SQ.FT. *** 154 (1) *** 31 (I) **** 25(1) **** 141(1) Total 791,088 SQ.FT. 815 121 150 754 TDM Reduction(2) (-163 ) ( - 24) (-30) (-151) Total After TDM 652 97 120 603 Existing Gateway Site Trips to be Removed ( -127) ( -62) ( -116) ( -117) Net New Trips 525 35 4 486 (1) Results are based upon fitted curve equations of entire 791,088 square foot campus. Fitted curves were applied to the entire site as office and then to the entire site as R&D. 76.5% of office results for the entire campus were utilized for the office (all Gateway) component of development, while 23.5% of R&D results for the entire campus were utilized for the R&D (180 & 200 Oyster Point) component of development. (2) 20% reduction due to City mandated TDM program. * AM Ln(T) ~ .80 Ln(X)+ 1.55 (88% in/12% out) T ~ Trips ** PM T ~ 1.12 (X)+78.81 (17% in/83% out) X ~ Size in 1,000 SQ.FT. *** AM Ln(T) ~ .86 Ln(X)+0.93 (83% in/17% out) Ln ~ Natural Log **** PM Ln(T) ~ .82 Ln(X)+ 1.09 (15% in/85% out) Trip Rate Source: Trip Generation, 8th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2008. Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group Table IV.M-22 Gateway + 180 & 200 Oyster Point Campus Trip Generation (2008-2035) AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND INBOUND OUTBOUND USE SIZE RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL RATE VOL Office (87%) 1,231,000 SQ.FT. * 1198(1) * 163(1) ** 247(1) ** 1203 (1) R&D (13%) 186,288 SQ.FT. *** 140(1) *** 29(1) **** 22(1) **** 127(1) Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-49 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Total 1,417,288 SQ.FT. 1338 192 269 1330 TDM Reduction(2) ( -268) ( -38) (-54) ( -266) Total After TDM 1070 154 215 1064 Existing Trips to be Removed ( -238) ( -86) ( -167) (-213) Net New Trips 832 68 48 851 (1) Results are based upon fitted curve equations of entire 1,417,280 square foot campus. Fitted curves were applied to the entire site as office and then to the entire site as R&D. 87% of office results for the entire campus were utilized for the office (all Gateway) component of development, while 13% of R&D results for the entire campus were utilized for the R&D (180 & 200 Oyster Point) component of development. (2) 20% reduction due to City mandated TDM program. * AM Ln(T) ~ .80 Ln(X)+ 1.55 (88% in/12% out) ** PM T ~ 1.12 (X)+78.81 (17% in/83% out) *** AM Ln(T) ~ .86 Ln(X)+0.93 (83% in/17% out) **** PM Ln(T) ~ .82 Ln(X)+ 1.09 (15% in/85% out) Trip Rate Source: Trip Generation, 8th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2008. Compiled by: Crane Transportation Group T ~ Trips X ~ Size in 1,000 SQ.FT. Ln ~ Natural Log Table IV.M-23 Year 2015 Project Traffic Distribution South Sun US.101 North/San Francisco 34 US.101 South (I) 47 South San Francisco (central area) 5 Daly city/colma via Sister Cities Blvd. 6 Brisbane & Daly city/colma via Guadalupe Parkway 4 Airport Area via South Airport Blvd. 2 Local East of US. 101 2 TOTAL 100% (1) Also includes use of S. Airport Blvd to/from 1-380 interchange. Source: City of South San Francisco, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, South San Francisco General Plan Amendment and Transportation Demand Management Ordinance, April 2001 and Genentech Central Campus Master Plan EIR. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-50 orth Project Acces s NB 101 t ~ Offramp (-58) 220 C\ OJ 333 Oyster fir :;: Point OJ '< . outh Project ~cces s 133J t 29 0 ~ c 0- -a c g G ra nd G ra nd 7 ---+ ~ 9 ---+ 9 2 5 Ban/off Ramps 16 t 16 t ? -a g z OJ o ~ -L9 OJ -5 .- 9 16 ~ Sister Cities 23 ---+ Oyster Point ~ 49 ~ 9 48 ---+ 9 ~ Project Access SITE 11= Project 5 ite -L8 9J C\ I!J ? > OJ ~ -a fir ::J g :;: u I!J OJ X '< Mitchell San Mateo 5 Airport E G ra nd . t r::: 4J V1 t 0 '" -0 VJ 4 ---+ 0 ? 8 D- -a 133 c n g m Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-12 Year 2015 Project Increment AM Peak Hour Volumes (-1) t (-1) t ~ 5 g z OJ -L5 o -L 147 '" (-1) -15 Ci _ 27 ~ .7 -5 .131 Sister Oyster ~ Cities Point (-2) ---+ ,.. (-4) ---+ ,.. (-1) (-18) 131 .J 5 B 101 Onramp <- ::,0 ~ ,:;:- "'*"\ (-90) PROJ ECT t ~ (-110) SITE 9 It.:.- ............ (-12) ............,.. ~ (-30) fir :;: OJ '< -L 20 .66 . North Project Acces s (-10) (-12) ~~ NB 101 Offramp c m t ~ (-18) 333 Oyster 66 Point ~ . South Project Acces s 15 J t 2 11= Project 5 ite 60 5 -1 1 ~ .J ~ G ra nd Overcros s ( -1) ---+ ,.. C\ (IJ ~ 5 > OJ "5 -3' _5 55 ~ fir u g .J :;: (IJ .50 OJ x San Mateo 5 Airport '< Mitchell E G ra nd . t c -0 t 0 III ~ en (3 D- -a 2 15 c g n m Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-13 Year 2015 Project Increment PM Peak Hour Volumes 33 C\ -L 7 657 ? -L 180 1 OJ 92 145 -a 200 I 6 fij - 164 ~ ~ ~ g - ~:11 ~ t ~ ~ .-:- 24 San Mateo · S Air art Mitchell . 62 J ~ ~ t ~ 228 - 8-237 342 111. ~ 42 Z OJ 220 -L372 o -L 404 '" 210 ~ 435 _274 Ci -195 ~ ~ .. 1900yster -5 .291 Sister Cities Point 570J ~ t ~ 204J ~ t ~ 1021_ 641 888 1374- 41 373 591. 82 129 71. 199 -L3 ~O ~ 3 ~ 5 B 101 Onramp 146:V o~ ~ 0_ c 0 g- 56 93. -0 145 c NB 101 m Offramp 333 Oyster Point / oyster point ? -L 85 -g _141 ;:+ .192 ~ t ~ 36 186 349 c '" Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. 623 -L 14 52 ~ 46 ~ ~ 28 J ~ t ~ 2 - 22 308 8 . C\ 489 OJ 433 fij -L 8 :;: ~6 ~ 4 ~_1 ~ .9 11= Project . outh Project 7\cces s 5 ite 486J ~ t ~ 4 - 99 325 5 38. 43 ~ o c g- -L 47 c -610 m G ra nd -422 .15 114 Overcross ~ ~ 1413 _.... c 22 . ~ ~ 235 990 72 1341 - I!J > .~ u I!J *10 x ~ E G ra nd * = Shuttles only o -L 54 90 J V1 ~ t ~ 215 - ? 478 549 410. 3. 493 0.. E I1l CCltt: ZO t ~02 982 CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-14 Year 2015 Buildout AM Peak Hour Volumes 45 1096 ~ t Terrabay 303 j ~ 268 .-3' ~ 368 - 530 1 466 ~ t ~ Sister Cities & 71 .J 427 - 26. t 282 Z OJ o -L 1942 '" Ci_910 -5 .1692 -L 161 -1050 .310 Oyster Point 374 j ~ t ~ 230- 98 158 447. 122 ~ t ~ 611 230 197 236 1898 I 5 ~ t ~ 5 B 101 Onramp -L2 _2 .0 c m 333 Oyster Point 323 & 178 233 ~ '- 261 I 1 ~ -g - 320 ..-t ;:+.612 G ra nd ~ t ~ 48 119 359 ~ PROJECT o SITE ~ Cl ~ OJ 0 fir -L 68 245 ~ 9 35 25 '< - 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ .107 . North Project Acces s 213 j ~ t ~ 2 - 7 46 20 . 703 oyster point -L 18 -0 .14 . South Project Acces s 415 j ~ t ~ o - 34 8 105 . 323 Project 5 ite 348 15 1 10 ~ t ~ 11= o c g- -L 50 ~ _ 1953 G ra nd _1684 .35 -L 98 514 13 1127 -1635 ~ t ~ ~ 378 ~ E G ra nd ~~ t ~ ~ 71 85 OJ 48 67 375 353 _.... c ~ ~ OJ> '" 46 . ~.:5 319 321 - 1006 ? -L 400 220 Cl-L3 OJ > OJ .; 96 ~ 155 ~ -240 737 ~ 7 fir -715 ~ ~~ .116 u -L 37 ~ - . 1323 ~ OJ *10 x San Mateo 5 Airport Mitchell ~ E G ra nd * = Shuttles . 149 j ~~ t ~ 35 j ~~ t ~ 0.. t ~ only E 198- 8- 93 194 '" 111- -3' 511 71 CCltt: 599 0 221. c 29 128 n 401. g 159 ZO m c '" Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-15 Year 2015 Buildout PM Peak Hour Volumes 32 t 90- ,.. 50 Project Acces s 32 t ~ -a g Sister Cities 44- ,.. 14 Oyster Point z OJ o -L 21 ~ _2 -5 .. 24 ~ 32 ~ -L1 _1 PROJECT SITE 24 .J <- ::,0 ~ ,:;:- 5 B 101 Onramp NB 101 Offramp c m 333 Oyster Point / oyster point t~ C\ (-58) OJ fir :;: OJ '< ..2 . outh Project ~cces s 11= Project 5 ite 183J 98- t (-12) ,.. 50 10- ,.. 3 o c 0- c c _1 m G ra nd Overcros 5 _1 3 .J t -L9 15- 15J ~ E G ra nd t 19 c ro Vl C\ <IJ ? OJ > -a 3 fir '5 g :;: u .J <IJ OJ X '< San Mateo Mitchell E G ra nd -0 V1 t t 0 5- 0 ? D- -a 14 283 c n g m Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-16 Project Increment Year 2009 to Year 2035 AM Peak Hour Volumes 1 t 1 t ~ 9 -a z g OJ -L9 o -L 287 1 _38 ~ _58 l. .11 Oyster -5 . 206 Sister Cities Point ~ (-12) 2 ---+ 1 ---+ (-14) 206 .J (-14)J ~ 0- c -0 NB 101 ~ Offramp 333 Oyster Point -L3 _8 .2 ~ 2 (-1~\ Project Access PROJECT SITE <- ::,0 ~ ;;:- 17 (-12) l. lj t ~ (-18) 47 C\ OJ fi) :;: OJ 139 '< t .60 . outh Project ~cces s 35 J t ~ 3 ---+ 8 (-6) 0 c 0- c c _13 _13 m G ra nd Overcros s 3 ---+ 3 11= Project 5 ite 173 13 8 .Jtl. ~ E G ra nd t 3J 4 C\ (IJ ~ 12 OJ .?: -3' _8 161 fi) :J t u g :;: (IJ OJ X '< San Mateo Mitchell E G ra nd c V1 t t ro -0 0 Vl 0 ~ D- -a 4 38 c n g m Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-17 Project Increment Year 2009 to Year 2035 PM Peak Hour Volumes 715 z OJ o -L 570 '" Ci - 271 3 "0 .. 431 t 964 59 t Terrabay 45J 41. 230 260 I 515 .J t ~ Sister Cities 354J 1720- 107. -L 391 _328 .. 2100yster Point 660 J ~ t ~ 1333_ 47 442 684 l. 129 ,. 215 897 I 3 .J t ~ 5 B 101 ~ t ~ 658 1046 93 -L3 1630J 0_ 100 . NB 101 Offramp ~ o oyster point 84 ~ o 740 -L 42 50 198 _2 .J ~ ~ .. 12 . arth Project Acces s 28 J ~t ~ 3_ 308 8 . C\ 799 OJ 500 fir -L 8 :;: 256 4 ~_1 .J ~ ~ .. 11 11= Project . outh Project ~cces s 5 ite 590J ~ t ~ 98_ 40. 111 55 531 ? -L 95 0 c -g _ 182 47 g- -L 52 ;:+ .. 220 .J ~ - 716 G ra nd ~ t ~ 79 40 214 1813 - 349 696 ~ -L 146 C\ -L 8 99 153 -3' 193 273 7 ~ _ 182 .J ~ ~ g - 291 .J ~ ~ ~ .. 27 San Mateo .. 4775 Air art '< Mitchell . 68 J ~ ~ t ~ 254 - 8- 250 361 118. ~ 45 g C III Vl Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. -L 74 129 10 398 _ 449 .J ~ ~ C 173 ~ E G ra nd C\~ t ~ ~ 53 603 OJ 116 _495 .. 17 ~ ~ 1333 w * 5 huttle > buses "" :J U -L 54 *10 w x ~ E G ra nd o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-18 Year 2035 Buildout AM Peak Hour Volumes t 45 1289 ~ t Terrabay 303 J ~ 268. -a' o 368 ;:+ 700 I 489 ~ t ~ Sister Cities ... 79.J 504 - 31. t 331 z OJ o -L 2907 '" Cl-1207 -5 ,- 2053 -L196 -1332 .L387 " Oyster Point 394J ~ t ~ 325 - 118 175 449. 128 ~ t ~ 708 318 220 259 ... 2238 I 5 '- 2 ~ t ~ -2 SB10l ,-0 Onramp c m 333 Oyster Point / oyster point PROJECT SITE ~ 207 J ~ t ~ 2 - 7 833 57 20. 525 -L 18 30 10 _0 ~ ~ ~ ,- 70 11= Project . South Project Acces s 5 ite 484J ~ t ~ 3_ 37 16 169. 395 ? -L 297 0 -L 125 c 762 -g - 508 g- -L 55 _ 2040 21 148 _1979 149 c _ 2382 ,- 38 ~ ~ ~ ~ 668 ;:+ ,- 687 ~ m G ra nd ~ E G ra nd 179 J t ~ Overcros s ~ ~ ~~ t ~ ~ 75 444 _ '-' c 127 - 48 133 468 - 51. ::8 ~ 397 391 ~ 78 127 379 LJ..I<.:J OJ 54 83. 1066 ? -L 450 242 ~ -L 3 104 167 -3 1321 I 8 fij _ 980 I I I ~ - 292 ~ t ~ ~ .L 120 ~ t ~ - ,- 2109 '< ". San Mateo S Air art Mitchell . ~~ t ~ 8- 99 210 c 31 n m c '" V1 160J 221 - 234. Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. *10 ~ .~ * 5 huttle '" buses u ~ -L 37 E G ra nd 38 J ~ ~ t ~ 125 _ ". 550 78 -0 435. g 204 t ~ 205 743 o CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IVM-19 Year 2035 Buildout PM Peak Hour Volumes City of South San San Francisco October 2009 YEAR 2015 IMPACTS C/CAG Trip Generation Limits Impact IV.M-1: Project Trip Generation Exceeds 100 Trips During Peak Hours The half-developed project would generate more than 100 net new trips during the AM and PM peak hours (412 two-way [inbound + outbound] trips during the AM peak hour and 357 two-way trips during the PM peak hour [see Table IV.M-21]). The San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Agency Guidelines for the implementation of the 2003 Draft Congestion Management Program ("C/CAG Guidelines") specifies that local jurisdictions must ensure that the developer and/or tenants will mitigate all new peak hour trips (including the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by the development. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-1 Transportation Demand Management Program The project sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. The C/CAG guidelines specify the number of trips that may be credited for each TDM measure. The project's TDM program is included in Appendix H and will generate trip credits to offset the 412 total AM peak hour and 357 PM peak hour net new trips generated by the project by the year 2015. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Intersection Operation Impact IV.M-2: Project Impacts to Intersection Level of Service The following intersections would receive a significant level of service impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-ll). Impact IV.M-2A: Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S. 101 Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 5.0 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 5.2 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-59 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-2A 2015 Intersection Level of Service at Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.101 Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover Intersection (see Figure IV.M-20 and Table IV.M-24) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. . Add a fourth through lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. In conjunction with this measure, provide an additional westbound departure lane, which should extend to the Dubuque Avenue / U.S.10l Northbound On-Ramp intersection. . Restripe the right turn lane on the U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp intersection approach to also allow through movements. In conjunction with this measure, provide a third eastbound departure lane. . Resultant Operation: . AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-195 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F-206 seconds control delay) . PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS E-65.9 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F -104 seconds control delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-60 Provide second onramp lane connection to freeway mainline PROJ ECT SITE ~ ~w[ill o ..- +-- ~ -+--....- 31= L ~-o, f:, Oyster ~ ~4~~ Point - t SB 101 t Onramp ~.J~ C\ OJ iii :E OJ '< = Signal .J+~ = Existing Lanes 9) ~ ~) = Mitigated Lanes I I I I I ~ I I I I ~ Provide second offramp I lane connection to I freeway mainline I NB 101 Offramp [ill = Fair S hare Contribution :> <:( o J!j '" ~ c '" Vl = Added Freeway Onramp or Offramp Lane 333 Oyster Point / Provide second onramp lane connection to freeway mainline Grand Av 9)~~) ~~ .J+~ j .. S Airport Mitchell en ~~t t( J t ~ "- -3' , g o Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES Figure IV.M-20 Year 2015 Mitigations City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-24 Mitigations for Intersection Level of Service Year 2015 AM & PM Peak Hour Oyster Point Blvd.!Gateway Blvd./lJ.S.101 SB Off-Ramp Flyover Intersection (Signal) . Add fourth through lane on the westbound Oyster Point Blvd. approach. In conjunction with this measure, provide an additional westbound departure lane which should extend to the Dubuque Ave. / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp intersection. . Restripe the right turn lane on the Southbound U. S.lO 1 Flyover Off-Ramp approach to also allow through movements. In conjunction with this measure provide a third eastbound departure lane.. Oyster Point Blvd.Neterans Blvd./Project Driveway Intersection (Signal) . Restripe the northbound two-lane driveway approach to provide a left turn lane and a combined left / through / right turn lane. . Add a third through lane on the westbound Oyster Point approach - extend this lane to the Dubuque intersection. . Add an exclusive right turn lane to the eastbound Oyster Point approach. Gateway Blvd.!So. Airport Blvd./Mitchell Ave. Intersection (Signal) . Add a second right turn lane on the southbound Gateway Blvd. approach. Oyster Point Blvd.!Dubuque Ave./lJ.S.I0l NB On-Ramp Intersection (Signal) . Add a second right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Blvd. approach. NA = No significant impact during this time period * Delay is less than Base Case operation. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group F 195* E 65.9* c E 67.6* 29.1 NA NA E 59.1 * c F 87.3* 21.5 Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-62 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-2B: Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard / Project Entrance AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 7.9 percent at a location where unacceptable LOS D Base Case operation would be degraded to unacceptable LOS E operation. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 9.9 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-2B 2015 Intersection Level of Service at Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard / Project Driveway Intersection (see Figure IV.M-20 and Table IV.M-24) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. . Add one additional through lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach (and continue to the Dubuque Avenue intersection). . Restripe the northbound two-lane driveway approach to provide a left turn lane and a combined left/through/right turn lane. . Add an exclusive right turn lane on the eastbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS C-29.1 seconds control delay, which is acceptable operation PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS E-67.6 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F -104 seconds delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-2C: Gateway Boulevard / So. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 2.1 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-63 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-2C 2015 Intersection Level of Service at Gateway Boulevard / S. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue Intersection (see Figure IV.M-20 and Table IV.M-24) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. . Provide a second right turn lane on the southbound Gateway Boulevard approach. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS E-59.1 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F-I08 seconds delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-2D: Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 4.5 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-2D 2015 Intersection Level of Service Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp Intersection (see Figure IV.M-20 and Table IV.M-24) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. . Add a second right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard intersection approach. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-87.3 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F-271 seconds control delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-3: Project Impacts to Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Software Evaluation The following intersections would receive a significant queuing impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-12). Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-64 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-3A: Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque A venue / U.S. 1 01 Northbound On-Ramp AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 4.9 percent in the through lanes on the eastbound Oyster Point intersection approach where Base Case volumes would already be exceeding available storage. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 8.3 percent and 8.2 percent in the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach left and right turn lanes, where Base Case volumes would already be exceeding available storage. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-3A 2015 Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Evaluation at Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.lOl Northbound On-Ramp Intersection-Eastbound Approach (see Figure IV.M-20) See Mitigation Measure IV.M-2D Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will reduce 95th percentile vehicle queuing in the eastbound approach through lanes to 268 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 282 feet. PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will reduce 95th percentile queuing in the westbound approach right turn lane to 1,418 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 2,855 feet, and 95th percentile queuing in the westbound approach left turn lane would be 1,192 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 1,250 feet. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-3B: Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off- Ramp AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 7.1 percent in the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound approach through lanes, where Base Case volumes would already be exceeding available storage. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-65 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-3B 2015 Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Evaluation (see Figure IV.M-20) at Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.lOl Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover Intersection- Off-Ramp Right Turn Lane See Mitigation Measure IV.M-2A. Resultant Operation: . AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will reduce 95th percentile queuing in the Oyster Point Boulevard eastbound approach through lanes to 1,271 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 1,280 feet. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-4: Project Impacts to Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline During Peak Traffic Hours - SIM Traffic Evaluation The following off-ramps would receive a significant impact with backups extending to the freeway mainline sometime during at least one peak hour due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes. Impact IV.M-4A: U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 6.9 percent, with year 2015 Base Case off-ramp traffic occasionally backing up to the freeway mainline. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-4A 2015 Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline - SIM Traffic Evaluation (see Figure IV.M-21) at U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection The proposed project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. See Mitigation Measure IV.M-2A. In addition, add an exclusive right turn lane to the flyover off-ramp approach for a total of four lanes. Stripe as three through lanes and one exclusive right turn lane. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. Also, this measure is not currently included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee list. Further, as an improvement to a freeway ramp, the measure is not within the City's jurisdiction, but rather would require approval of Caltrans. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-66 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Adjust signal timing to provide more green time to flyover off-ramp and Oyster Point eastbound movements. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would eliminate the 95th percentile southbound flyover off-ramp queue extending to the freeway mainline. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented. While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT REMAINS SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-4B: U.S. 101 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 3.3 percent, with year 2015 Base Case off-ramp traffic occasionally backing up to the freeway mainline. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-4B 2015 Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline - SIM Traffic Evaluation (see Figure IV.M-21) at U.S. 101 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection The proposed project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measures. . Widen the off-ramp approach to provide three exclusive left turn lanes and a combined through / right turn lane. In addition, lengthen the off-ramp lanes to provide an additional 600 to 700 feet of storage. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. This measure is not currently included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee list. . Provide an additional lane on northbound Dubuque Avenue extending from the freeway ramps to Oyster Point Boulevard. Stripe the five-lane approach to Oyster Point as two lefts, one through and two right turn lanes. . On the Oyster Point Boulevard overpass of the U.S.lOl freeway, reconfigure the westbound lanes on the approach to Airport Boulevard to have one combined through / right turn lane, one through lane and one exclusive left turn lane extending the full length between Dubuque A venue and Oyster Point Boulevard. In conjunction with this measure, have both eastbound left turn lanes on the approach to Dubuque Avenue-Northbound On-Ramp extend the full length between Airport Boulevard and Dubuque Avenue. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-67 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . Adjust signal timing. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will eliminate the 95th percentile northbound off-ramp queue extending to the freeway mainline. These measures would also eliminate the 95th percentile southbound off-ramp queue on the approach to Airport Boulevard extending to the freeway mainline. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT REMAINS SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-5: Project Impacts to Off-Ramp Operation at Mainline Diverge The following off-ramp diverge locations from the U.S.lOl freeway mainline would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-6). Impact IV.M-5A: U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 6.9 percent (from 2,099 up to 2,243 vehicles) with Base Case volumes already exceeding 1,500 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-5A 2015 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection No improvements are feasible to mitigate project-specific impacts. The spacing of southbound off-ramp connections to Airport Boulevard and to Oyster Point Boulevard precludes the possibility of providing a second off-ramp lane connection to southbound U.S.lOl to serve the Oyster Point Boulevard southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp lane connection would require a long (i.e., 1,000-foot or longer) deceleration lane, however, due to existing development in the area, only 300 feet of space is available. There is no room for provision of this lane. Without feasible measures to mitigate this impact, the impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-68 H~ Remove partial length left turn lane ..~ .. i ~ -a' ..~ o .. ~H~~ ,~ ., O"ster Point ~t 0..- ::l ..- ~F(J) SisterCities.::t ~~t,..,.. t ~4,.,. (J) ~ ____t tr;; t . ; , ; 1~~t((1 , Provide two full length left turn la nes ~~~~ =1 o~~ J t(J)T I I S B 101 I Onramp I I I I I I I I NB 101 Offramp ~ ~ ~ = Lanes required for 2015 Level of Service and S ynchro 95th percentile queue mitigation = Added Onramp or Offramp lane connections to Freeway ma in line for 2015 merge/diverge mitigations I)) ~ ~I = Additional mitigations required to preventYear 2015 backups to Freeway mainline (based upon S I Mtraffic analysis) Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. o ys te r Point PROJ ECT SITE C\ OJ iii :E (J) = Timing to be adjusted to accomodate specific queueing issues as opposed to optimizing intersection level of service o Figure IV.M-21 Year 2015 Additional Mitigations Required to Eliminate Offramp Backups Extending to Freeway Mainline SIMtraffic Evaluation CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-5B: U.S. 101 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 3.3 percent (from 1,507 up to 1,556 vehicles) with Base Case volumes already exceeding 1,500 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-5B 2015 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection (see Figure IV.M-20) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measure. . Provide a second off-ramp lane connection to the U.S.101 mainline. Off-ramp diverge capacity would be increased to at least 2,200 vehicles per hour, which would accommodate the Base Case + project AM peak hour volume of 1,556 vehicles per hour. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. Also, this measure is currently not included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee list. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-5C: U.S. 1 01 Northbound Off-Ramp to East Grand A venue / Executive Drive Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 6.2 percent (from 2,151 up to 2,284 vehicles) at a location where the two-lane off-ramp diverge capacity would be 2,300 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-5C 2015 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp to East Grand A venue / Executive Drive Intersection Planned provision of a second off-ramp lane would increase diverge capacity to 2,200 to 2,300 vehicles per hour. This could accommodate the projected off-ramp volume of about 2,284 vehicles per hour. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-70 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-6: Project Impacts to On-Ramp Operation The following on-ramps to the U.S.10l freeway would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-7). Impact IV.M-6A: U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp from the Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue Intersection PM Peak Hour: The project would increase on-ramp volumes by 6.2 percent (from 2,366 up to 2,513 vehicles) with Base Case volumes already exceeding 2,200 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-6A 2015 On-Ramp Operation to U.S.lOl Mainline at U.S.lOl Northbound On-Ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measure. Provide a second on-ramp lane connection to the U.S.lOl mainline. On-ramp capacity would be increased to at least 3,000 vehicles per hour, which would accommodate the Base Case + project PM peak hour volume of 2,513 vehicles per hour. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. Also, this measure is currently not included on the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee list. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-6B: U.S. 101 Southbound On-Ramp from Dubuque Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase on-ramp volumes by 6.9 percent (from 1,901 up to 2,032 vehicles) and increase Base Case volumes above the 2,000 vehicle/hour capacity limit. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-6B On-Ramp Operation to U.S.lOl Mainline at U.S.lOl Southbound On- Ramp from Dubuque Avenue The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measure. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-71 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Provide a second on-ramp lane connection to the U.S.lOl mainline. On-ramp capacity would be increased to at least 3,000 vehicles per hour, which would accommodate the Base Case + Project PM peak hour volume of 2,032 vehicles. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. Also, this measure is currently not included on the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee list. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-7: Project Impacts to Freeway Mainline Operation The following freeway segments would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2015 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-13). Impact IV.M-7A: U.S. 101 Southbound (to the north of the Oyster Point interchange) AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 1.5 percent (from 9,331 to 9,475 vehicles per hour) at a location where acceptable LOS E year 2015 Base Case operation would be degraded to unacceptable LOS F operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-7A 2015 Freeway Mainline Operation at U.S.lOl Southbound (North of the Oyster Point Boulevard interchange) Mitigation of this impact would require widening the current freeway or construction of a new freeway. Given the location of the mainline freeway and its close proximity to surrounding development, such mitigation is not feasible. Additionally, such mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the types of land uses it would benefit. Given these specific concerns, mitigation of Impact 7 A is not feasible as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished...taking into account economic...and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City in this matter has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21 081. subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, ~15021. subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21081. subd. (a)(3).) IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-72 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-7B: U.S. 101 Northbound (to the north of the Oyster Point interchange) PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 1.4 percent (from 10,025 to 10,162 vehicles per hour) at a location with unacceptable LOS F year 2015 Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-7B 2015 Freeway Mainline Operation at U.S. 101 Northbound (North of the Oyster Point Boulevard interchange) Mitigation of this impact would require widening the current freeway or construction of a new freeway. Given the location of the mainline freeway and its close proximity to surrounding development, such mitigation is not feasible. Additionally, such mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the types of land uses it would benefit. Given these specific concerns, mitigation of Impact 7B is not feasible as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished...taking into account economic...and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City in this matter has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21 081. subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, ~15021. subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21081. subd. (a)(3).) IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. YEAR 2035 CUMULA TIVE IMPACTS Impact IV.M-8: Project Trip Generation Exceeds 100 Trips During Peak Hours The totally developed project would generate more than 100 net new trips during the AM and PM peak hours (764 two-way (inbound + outbound) trips during the AM peak hour and 780 two-way trips during the PM peak hour (see Table IV.M-22)). The San Mateo City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Agency Guidelines for the implementation of the 2003 Draft Congestion Management Program ("C/CAG Guidelines") specifies that local jurisdictions must ensure that the developer and/or tenants will mitigate all new peak hour trips (including the first 100 trips) projected to be generated by the development. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-8 Transportation Demand Management Program The project sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.120 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. The C/CAG guidelines specify the number of trips that may be credited for each TDM measure. The project's TDM program is included in Appendix H and will generate trip Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-73 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 credits to offset the 764 total AM peak hour and 780 PM peak hour net new trips generated by the project by the year 2035. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Intersection Operation Impact IV.M-9: Cumulative Project Impacts to Intersection Level of Service The following intersections would receive a significant level of service impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-16). Impact IV.M-9A: Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 3.4 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS E Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9A 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) . Add a second right turn lane on the southbound Airport Boulevard approach. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS D-50.0 seconds control delay, which is acceptable operation. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-9B: Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S. 101 Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 6.2 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 7.7 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-74 ~ ~ ~' s;,:~:\~~~ -~ ~ Oy,re. Cities J Point J ~~t,.,. - - t S B 101 O"""'p .J.J~ + (j) o<ot-CI) I I I I I ~ I I I I ~ Provide second offramp I lane connection to I freeway mainline I NB 101 Offramp Provide second onramp lane connection to freeway mainline Source: Crane Transportation Group, 2009. Provide second onramp lane connection to freeway mainline ~~~ o+- J Jr I ~ ~~t,.,. - t .. o ys te r Point PROJ ECT SITE C\ OJ iii :E OJ '< = Signal ~ + ~ = Existing Lanes ~) ~ 0 = Mitigated Lanes (j) = Timing to be adjusted to accomodate specific queueing issues as opposed to optimizing intersection level of service ~ = Fair S hare Contribution = Added Freeway Onramp or Offramp Lane 8~~9 ~++ ~ (j) i~CI) ~ f Mitchell ~~ -,+- ! f ~~ + ~ r S Airport . i a~t tr,. -g- --. ~ San Mateo ..J - i en ~~t t,. ~ -a" g o Figure IV.M-22 Year 2035 Mitigations CHRISTOPHER A. JOSEPH & ASSOCIATES City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Table IV.M-25 Mitigations for Intersection Level of Service Year 2035 AM & PM Peak Hour Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Blvd.!Oyster Point Blvd. (Signal) . Add a second right turn lane to the southbound Airport Blvd. approach.. NA NA D 50.0 Dubuque Ave.!U.S.I0l Northbound Off-Ramp-Southbound On-Ramp (Signal) . Adjust signal timing. NA NA C 30.9 Oyster Point Blvd.!Gateway Blvd./lJ.S.101 SB Off-Ramp Flyover Intersection (Signal) . Provide 2015 mitigations. F 318* F 138* Oyster Point Blvd.Neterans Blvd.!project Driveway Intersection (Signal) . Provide 2015 mitigations. F 130* F 186* Gateway Blvd.!So. Airport Blvd./Mitchell Ave. Intersection (Signal) . Provide 2015 mitigations & adjust signal timing. NA NA D 39.6 Airport Blvd.!San Mateo Ave./Produce Ave. Intersection (Signal) . Restripe the southbound Airport Blvd. right turn lane to also allow through movements. NA NA D 54.9 Oyster Point Blvd.!Dubuque Ave./lJ.S.I0l NB On-Ramp Intersection (Signal) . Provide 2015 mitigations. . Adjust signal timing. NA NA F 223** NA = No significant impact during this time period * Delay is less than Base Case operation. · · Delay not less than Base Case operation. Impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology Source: Crane Transportation Group Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-76 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-9B 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S.lOl Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) . Same mitigations as for 2015. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-318 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F- 381 seconds control delay) PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-138 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F- 142 seconds control delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-9C: Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard / Project Entrance AM Peak Hour: The project traffic would increase volumes by 5.7 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 7.2 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9C 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard / Project Entrance Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) . Same mitigation as for 2015. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-130 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F- 150 seconds control delay) PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-186 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F- 289 seconds control delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-77 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-9D: Gateway Boulevard / So. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 4.5 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9D 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Gateway Boulevard / S. Airport Boulevard / Mitchell A venue Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) Same mitigation as for 2015 and adjust signal timing. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS D-39.6 seconds control delay. Operation is improved to an acceptable level. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-9E: Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue / Produce Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 3.2 percent at a location where unacceptable LOS E Base Case operation would be degraded to unacceptable LOS F operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9E 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Airport Boulevard / San Mateo Avenue / Produce Avenue Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) Restripe the Airport Boulevard southbound approach exclusive right turn lane to also allow through movements. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS D-54.9 seconds control delay, which is better than Base Case operation (LOS F -141 seconds control delay) Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-9 F: Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque A venue / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 6.7 percent at a location with unacceptable LOS F Base Case operation (resultant operation would be LOS F-254 seconds control delay). Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation PagelVM-78 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9F 2035 Intersection Level of Service Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) . Same mitigations as for 2015. In light of economic, environmental, and technological concerns, there are no other financially feasible measures (as identified by the Public Works Department) that would provide any increased capacity. Provision of additional lanes on any of the intersection approaches would require either widening of bridge structures across the U. S.l 0 1 freeway and/or the Caltrain rail line and possibly roadway diversion around the supports for the Southbound Flyover off-ramp. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS F-223 seconds control delay, which is not better than Base Case operation (LOS F-196 seconds control delay). IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-9G: Dubuque Avenue / U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp-Southbound On-Ramp Intersection PM Peak Hour: Project traffic would degrade acceptable LOS D Base Case operation to unacceptable LOS E operation. Mitigation Measure IV.M-9G 2035 Intersection Level of Service at Dubuque Avenue / U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp-Southbound On-Ramp Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22 and Table IV.M-25) Adjust signal timing. Resultant Operation: PM Peak Hour: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which will improve operation to LOS C-30.9 seconds control delay Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-IO: Cumulative Project Impacts to Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Software Evaluation The following intersections would receive a significant queuing impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-17). Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-79 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Impact IV.M-IOA: Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S.lOl Northbound On-Ramp Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 7.2 percent in the through lanes on the eastbound Oyster Point intersection approach where 95th percentile Base Case queuing would already extend beyond available storage. In addition, the project would increase volumes by 5.0 percent in the Dubuque Avenue northbound right turn lane, where Base Case 95th percentile queues would already be exceeding available storage. PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 11.0 percent in the right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard intersection approach, where 95th percentile Base Case queuing would already extend beyond available storage; and by 11.2 percent in the left turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard intersection approach, where 95th percentile Base Case queuing would already extend beyond available storage. These would be significant impacts. Mitigation Measure IV.M-IOA 2035 Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Evaluation at Oyster Point Boulevard / Dubuque Avenue / U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22) . Same mitigations as for level of service (Mitigation Measure IV.M-9F). In light of economic, environmental, and technological concerns, there are no other feasible measures that would provide any increased capacity. Provision of additional lanes on any of the intersection approaches would require either widening of bridge structures across the U. S.1O 1 freeway and/or the Caltrain rail line and possibly roadway diversion around the supports for the Southbound Flyover off-ramp. Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: . Eastbound Approach Through Movement = The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 432 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 444 feet. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. . Northbound Right Turn = The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 336 feet, which is longer than Base Case 308-foot queue. Impact would not be reduced to a less than significant level. AM IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. PM Peak Hour: Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-80 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . Westbound Approach Right Turn: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 2,095 feet, which is longer than Base Case queuing of 1,892 feet. Impact would not be reduced to a less than significant level. . Westbound Approach Left Turn: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 1,396 feet, which is longer than Base Case queuing of 1,270 feet. Impact would not be reduced to a less than significant level. PM IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-IOB: Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S. 101 Southbound Flyover Off- Ramp Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 5.7 percent in the eastbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach through lanes, where Base Case 95th percentile queues would already be exceeding available storage. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-IOB 2035 Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Evaluation at Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard / U.S. 101 Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22) Same mitigation as for level of service (Mitigation Measure IV.M-9B). Resultant Operation: AM Peak Hour: Oyster Point Boulevard Eastbound Through Lanes: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queue to 1,633 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 1,650 feet. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-IOC: Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard Intersection PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 2.9 percent in the left turn lane and by 10.6 percent in the through lanes on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard intersection approach where Base Case 95th percentile queues would already be exceeding available storage. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-IOC 2035 Vehicle Queuing - Synchro Evaluation at Airport Boulevard / Sister Cities Boulevard / Oyster Point Boulevard Intersection Same mitigation as for level of service (Mitigation Measure IV.M -9 A) Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-81 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 PM Peak Hour: Oyster Point Boulevard Westbound Through Lanes: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 701 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 738 feet. Oyster Point Boulevard Westbound Left Turn: The proposed mitigation will provide additional capacity and reduce delay, which would reduce 95th percentile queuing to 411 feet, which would be better than Base Case queuing of 486 feet. Impact reduced to a less than significant leveL Impact IV.M-ll: Cumulative Project Impacts to Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline During Peak Traffic Hours - SIM Traffic Evaluation The following off-ramps would receive a significant impact due to project traffic with backups extending to the freeway mainline sometime during at least one time during the peak hour due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes. Impact IV.M-llA: U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 8.7 percent, with year 2035 Base Case off-ramp traffic backing up to the freeway mainline. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-llA 2035 Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline - SIM Traffic Evaluation at U.S. 1 01 Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection In light of economic, environmental, and technological concerns, there are no other feasible measures that would provide any increased capacity beyond those recommended for 2015 conditions that would reduce 95th percentile queues within available off-ramp storage. Provision of additional lanes would potentially require acquisition of additional righty-of-way along Oyster Point Boulevard. Also, provision of additional eastbound lanes on the Oyster Point and Flyover off-ramp intersection approaches would not be feasible due to the complexity of merging the departure lanes on the eastbound (departure leg) of the intersection. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-IIB: U.S. 1 01 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque A venue Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 3.0 percent, with year 2035 Base Case off-ramp traffic occasionally backing up to the freeway mainline. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-82 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-llB 2035 Off-Ramp Queuing to Freeway Mainline - SIM Traffic Evaluation at U.S. 1 01 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection There are no other feasible signal timing or lane addition measures as identified by the Public Works Department beyond those recommended for 2015 conditions that would reduce 95th percentile AM peak hour queues within available off-ramp storage. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-12: Cumulative Project Impacts to Off-Ramp Operation at Mainline Diverge The following off-ramp diverge locations from the U.S.lOl freeway mainline would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-6). Impact IV.M-12A: U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 8.7 percent (from 2,035 up to 3,161 vehicles) with Base Case volumes already exceeding 1,500 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-12A 2035 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Southbound Flyover Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard Intersection No improvements are feasible to mitigate project-specific impacts. The spacing of southbound off-ramp connections to Airport Boulevard and to Oyster Point Boulevard precludes the possibility of providing a second off-ramp lane connection to southbound U.S.lOl to serve the Oyster Point Boulevard southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp lane connection to the freeway mainline would require a long (l,OOO-foot or longer) deceleration lane with only 300 feet of available space. There is no room for provision of this lane. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-12B: U.S. 1 01 Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque A venue Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 3.0 percent (from 1,680 to 1,730 vehicles) with Base Case volumes already exceeding 1,500 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-83 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-12B 2035 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue Intersection (see Figure IV.M-22) Same mitigation as for 2015. (Add a second off-ramp lane connection to the U.S.101 mainline.) Off- ramp diverge capacity would be increased to at least 2,300 vehicles per hour, which would accommodate the Base Case + project volume of 1,730 vehicles per hour. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-12C: U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp to East Grand Avenue / Executive Drive Intersection AM Peak Hour: The project would increase off-ramp volumes by 9.8 percent (from 2,897 up to 3,180 vehicles) at a location where the two-lane off-ramp diverge capacity would be 2,300 vehicles per hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-12C 2035 Off-Ramp Operation at U.S.lOl Mainline Diverge at U.S.lOl Northbound Off-Ramp to East Grand A venue / Executive Drive Intersection Planned provision of a second off-ramp lane would increase diverge capacity to about 2,200 to 2,300 vehicles per hour. This could not accommodate the projected off-ramp volume of about 3,180 vehicles per hour. There are no additional physical measures acceptable to Caltrans that would be feasible to increase capacity. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-13: Cumulative Project Impacts to On-Ramp Operation The following on-ramps to the U.S.10l freeway would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-7). Impact IV.M-13A: U.S. 101 Southbound One-Lane On-Ramp from Dubuque Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase on-ramp volumes by 9.5 percent at a location where Base Case volumes would already be exceeding the ramp capacity limit of 2,000 vehicles per hour (up to 2,381 vehicles per hour). This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-84 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-13A 2035 On-Ramp Operation to U.S. 101 Mainline at U.S. 101 Southbound On-Ramp from Dubuque Avenue (see Figure IV.M-22) The project should provide a fair share contribution as determined by the City Engineer to the following measure. Provide a second on-ramp lane connection to the U.S.lOl freeway. On-ramp capacity would be increased from 2,000 up to 3,000 vehicles per hour, with a Base Case + project PM peak hour volume of about 2,381 vehicles per hour. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. It should be noted that because the improvement is within Caltrans' jurisdiction, the City of South San Francisco, as lead agency for the project, cannot guarantee that the mitigation will be implemented While it is likely that Caltrans will implement the measure, thereby reducing the impact to a less than significant level, because the measure is beyond the lead agency's jurisdiction, for CEQA purposes, this impact is considered to be significant and unavoidable. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-13B: U.S. 101 Southbound Two-Lane On-Ramp from Produce Avenue PM Peak Hour: The project would increase on-ramp volumes by 4.7 percent at a location where project traffic would increase Base Case volumes above a two-lane on-ramp capacity limit of 3,300 vehicles per hour (from 3,256 up to 3,409 vehicles per hour). This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-13B 2035 On-Ramp Operation to U.S. 101 Mainline at U.S. 101 Southbound On-Ramp from Produce Avenue A second on-ramp lane is already provided at the Produce Avenue on-ramp, providing a capacity of :t3,300 vehicles per hour. There are no other physical improvements possible to accommodate the Base Case + proj ect volume of about 3,410 vehicles per hour. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-13C: U.S. 1 01 Northbound One-Lane On-Ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard PM Peak Hour: The project would increase on-ramp volumes by 8.9 percent at a location where project traffic would increase Base Case volumes above 2,200 vehicles per hour (from 3,234 up to 3,521 vehicles per hour). This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-85 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-13C 2035 On-Ramp Operation to U.S. 101 Mainline at U.S. 101 Northbound On-Ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard Provision of a second on-ramp lane (as recommended for 2015) would increase capacity to about 3,000 to 3,100 vehicles per hour. This measure will require the approval of Caltrans. There are no other physical improvements possible acceptable to Caltrans to accommodate the Base Case + project volume of about 3,521 vehicles per hour. IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-14: Cumulative Project Impacts to Freeway Mainline Operation The following freeway segments would receive a significant impact due to the addition of project traffic to year 2035 Base Case volumes (see Table IV.M-18). Impact IV.M-14A: U.S. 101 Southbound (to the north of the Oyster Point interchange) AM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 2.4 percent (from 10,381 to 10,633 vehicles per hour) at a location with unacceptable LOS F year 2035 Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-14A 2035 Freeway Mainline Operation at U.S.lOl Southbound (North of the Oyster Point Boulevard interchange) Mitigation of this impact would require widening the current freeway or construction of a new freeway. Given the location of the mainline freeway and its close proximity to surrounding development, such mitigation is not feasible. Additionally, such mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the types of land uses it would benefit. Given these specific concerns, mitigation of Impact 14A is not feasible as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished...taking into account economic...and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City in this matter has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21 081. subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, ~15021. subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21081. subd. (a)(3).) IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-14B: U.S. 101 Northbound (to the north of the Oyster Point interchange) PM Peak Hour: The project would increase volumes by 2.6 percent (from 11,220 to 11,510 vehicles per hour) at a location with unacceptable LOS F year 2035 Base Case operation. This would be a significant impact. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-86 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 Mitigation Measure IV.M-14B 2035 Freeway Mainline Operation at U.S.lOl Northbound (North of the Oyster Point Boulevard interchange) Mitigation of this impact would require widening the current freeway or construction of a new freeway. Given the location of the mainline freeway and its close proximity to surrounding development, such mitigation is not feasible. Additionally, such mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the types of land uses it would benefit. Given these specific concerns, mitigation of Impact 14B is not feasible as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished...taking into account economic...and technological factors.").) under CEQA, the City in this matter has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21081. subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, ~15021. subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code ~21081. subd. (a)(3).) IMPACT WOULD REMAIN SIGNIFICANT AND UNA VOIDABLE. Impact IV.M-15: On-site Parking A total of 3,544 on-site parking spaces would be required at full project development based upon City code criteria, while a total of3,IOO spaces is proposed. The Code-required parking is based upon a rate of 2.88 spaces per 1,000 square feet and a maximum project size of 1,230,570 square feet. At the project's lowest proposed size, 970,000 square feet, a total of 2,794 spaces would be required by code. At or near the project's maximum development potential, proposed on-site parking would not meet City code requirements. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-15 On-site Parking Limit total project development to 1,076,390 square feet. The proposed 3,100 on-site parking spaces will meet code requirements (of 2.88 spaces per 1,000 square feet) for this development level. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-16: Pedestrian Circulation A wide variety of pedestrian walkways are proposed as part ofthe project. They would include: . A central pedestrian spine, which would be the major thoroughfare for pedestrian movements through the campus. It would be wide enough to also serve as an emergency vehicle route. . A secondary network of walkways connecting to the central spine. . Direct connections between the parking structures and the central spine. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-87 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 . Direct connections between the street and the internal campus. . A new public sidewalk along the project's Gateway Boulevard and Oyster Point Boulevard frontages that will connect to the existing sidewalk system along Gateway Boulevard at the south end of the campus and to the sidewalk system to be provided by the 180 and 200 Oyster Point buildings. The project's new street frontage sidewalk will be utilized to provide access to two additional shuttle stops, which are being proposed along the site frontage (one along Oyster Point Boulevard and one near the north end of Gateway Boulevard). . An existing walkway about 30 feet from Gateway Boulevard (called the perimeter walk) that is located between hedges of Poplar trees and will be maintained and utilized primarily by employees. While the proposed walkway system will provide acceptable pedestrian circulation within the majority of the campus, all drivers using any of the four large parking structures along the east edge of the campus will be required to cross the main internal circulation road to access any of the project buildings. At full buildout, from 200 to 500 vehicles per hour may be on various segments of the internal street providing access to the garages. While speed table and pedestrian crossings of materials other than asphalt are being considered to slow traffic and highlight locations with significant pedestrian crossings, the proposed location of the main internal road (on the west rather than the east side of the garages) could lead to significant pedestrian/auto conflicts. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-16 Pedestrian Circulation Consider relocating the internal roadway running along the west side of the parking garages to the east side of the garages along the project boundary. This will eliminate thousands of pedestrian crossings ofa busy internal roadway as employees walk between the garages and the office buildings. An emergency access roadway may still be required between the garages and offices to meet fire department requirements. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Impact IV.M-17: Site Access and Internal Vehicle Circulation Primary project vehicle access would be provided via an existing signalized intersection along Oyster Point Boulevard (about 850 feet south of Oyster Point Boulevard and now being used for access to the project site) as well as via the south leg of the existing signalized Oyster Point Boulevard / Veterans Boulevard intersection. The south leg of the Veterans Boulevard intersection would also be used for access to the 180 and 200 Oyster Point Boulevard buildings, which are about to be completed but are not part of the Gateway project. Both major entrances would connect to an access lane, which would run along the west side of the project's proposed four parking garages. Two secondary signalized entrances would also be provided to the site. One would be located along Oyster Point Boulevard at the easterly Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-88 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 project boundary, opposite the entrance to the 333 Oyster Point Boulevard development and in the location of the existing FedEx driveway. The other would be located along Gateway Boulevard at the south end of the project frontage at an existing signal. Both secondary entrances would also connect to the access lane running adjacent to the project's four garages. Supplemental (right turn in/right turn out) access points would also be provided along the project's Oyster Point Boulevard frontage (one supplemental access) and Gateway Boulevard frontage (one supplemental access). These would provide limited pick up/drop off access to buildings not adjacent to the internal access lane as well as access to subsurface parking for the Gateway building on the corner of the Oyster Point Boulevard / Gateway Boulevard intersection. Speed tables are being considered along all internal streets at major pedestrian crossings in order to slow speeds. Paving would also be interrupted with contrasting materials at pedestrian crossings and internal intersections to increase pedestrian safety. Overall, the proposed project circulation system appears that it will function acceptably for employees, who will quickly learn which is the most convenient driveway to use for their assigned parking garage. However, given the size of the project, its numerous buildings and garages as well as the variety of driveway connections to Gateway and Olympic boulevards, unless frequent, large and clear signing is provided, visitors may experience confusion in regards to finding appropriate parking closest to their final destination. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure IV.M-17 Access and Internal Vehicle Circulation Provide building addresses that can be read easily by drivers on Gateway Boulevard and Oyster Point Boulevard. Provide easy-to-follow directions for visitors from the access driveway intersections along Gateway Boulevard or Oyster Point Boulevard and along the internal driveways to the specific garage associated with each office building. Impact reduced to a less than significant level. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-89 City of South San San Francisco October 2009 This page intentionally left blank. Gateway Business Park Master Plan Draft Environmental Impact Report IVM Transportation and Circulation Page IVM-90