Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 316-08TO: FROM: City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE: SUBJECT: JULY 21, 2008 CMR: 316:08 POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF CITY’S POSITION ON SOUTHBOUND HIGHWAY 101 RAMP METERING PROJECT RECOMMENDATION The Policy and Services Committee and staff recommend that the Council: 1.Continue support for the existing Council position on ramp metering as detailed in the May 29, 1996 letter from Mayor Wheeler to Caltrans, and 2. Recommend that Santa Clara County implement a Memorandum of Understanding with Caltrans for this issue similar to the one in place for San Mateo County, which would specify the responsibilities of Caltrans and the local agencies in the oversight and monitoring of the operations of the ramp metering program, and 3.Direct staff to convey the City’s position to VTA and Caltrans and report back to the City Council. BACKGROUND On June 30, 2008 staff presented a review of eleven regional transportation issues to the Policy and Services Committee, including the Southbound Highway 101 Ramp Metering project (CMR:267:08). The full report from the Policy and Services Committee will be brought forward to the City Council after the summer break. However, in order to provide timely input to the Valley Transportation Agency (VTA) and Caltrans on the ramp metering project, staff is bringing the Committee recommendation forward for Council approval at this time. Staff will also bring forward a report to Council on the VTA Governance issue prior to the Council break. VTA is the lead agency for the activation of ramp metering on the southbound ramps on Highway 101 from Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto to De La Cruz Blvd. in San Jose. The ramps to be metered in Palo Alto include the Oregon and Embarcadero southbound on-ramps. The project schedule calls for completion of the ramp metering plans in the fall of 2008, initiation of ramp metering by the end of the year and project evaluation in early 2009. Staff has identified a number of issues related to ramp metering and its impact on Palo Alto. These include the project’s impact on traffic on surface streets and the need for establishment of CMR:316:08 Page 1 of 3 a formal process between VTA/Cgltrans and the local agencies for monitoring and resolving any problems that arise in the future. (See Attachment A, CMR 267:08 with Ramp Metering attachments only). The City Council last considered the issue of ramp metering in April 1996. The Council endorsed the position that the ramp metering lights should not be turned on until such time as there is a formal agreement between Caltrans and the local agencies detailing the operational aspects of the project and the responsibilities and process for .addressing operational concerns in the event ramp metering had impacts on local streets. A copy of the letter from Mayor Wheeler to Caltrans is included in Attachment A. Caltrans and the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) created such a Memorandum of Understandingfor the implementation of ramp metering in San Mateo County (Attachment B). The MOU designates the C/CAG Board of Directors as the policy body for policy decisions related to the implementation of ramp metering. The MOU further establishes a Technical Committee comprised of representatives from Caltrans, C/CAG and all the public agencies in the county. The Technical Committee is charged with monitoring and overseeing the program, providing guidance and making all technical decisions with regard to operational strategies and parameters of ramp metering. VTA staff has indicated that this is not contemplated by VTA and that, at present, no VTA Board action is anticipated before the ramp metering is turned on. COMMITTEE REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS On June 3rd, the Policy and Services Committee voted 3-0 (Barton absent) to forward staff’s recommendation to support the existing (1996) Council position on ramp metering, but added a recommendation that Santa Clara County implement a Memorandum of Understanding with the local agencies on this issue similar to the one in place in San Mateo County. The action minutes from the P&S Committee meeting are provided as Attachment C. Upon Council action, staff will draft an updated letter to Caltrans and VTA for the Mayor’s signature, reflecting Council direction. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This recommendation is consistent with existing Council policy and Comprehensive Plan transportation policies. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW VTA is the lead agency for this project and will need to complete the appropriate environmental analysis prior to implementation of the ramp metering. ATTACHMENTS A:CMR 267:08, with Ramp Metering exhibits only B:Memorandum of Understanding between C/CAG and Caltrans C:Action Minutes from the Policy and Services Committee meeting of June 3, 2008 CMR:316:08 Page 2 of 3 PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: GAYLE EIKEN~ Transportation Manager CURTIS WILLIAMS Interim Director of Planning and Communit3 KELLY MORARIU / STEVE EMSLIE . Deputy City Managers CMR:316:08 Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT A TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL ATTN:POLICY AND SERVICE COMMITTEE FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY’ ENVIRONMENT JUNE 3, 2008 CMR: 267:08 REVIEW OF REGIONAL TRANSPORATION RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review and comment on the regional transportation issues discussed in this report and recommend to Council to: o Refer the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center project, the Caltrain/ California High Speed Rail and the Comprehensive County Expressway Study to the Planning and Transportation Commission for review and recommendations to the City Council. Continue support for the existing Council position on ramp metering as detailed in the May 29, 1996 letter from Mayor Wheeler to Caltrans and direct staff to convey the Council position to VTA and Caltrans and report back to the City Council. Direct staff to prepare a recommendation to the City Council on anticipated Valley Transportation Agency (VTA) Governance structure prior to scheduled action by the VTA Board of Directors this summer. BACKGROUND On May 19, 2008, the City Council voted to refer the matter of regional transportation initiatives, projects and studies as they relate to and could have impacts for Palo Alto to the Policy and Services Committee for discussion and review. Since Council members also sit on policy advisory boards and committees for some of these transportation studies, the Policy & Service~ Committee was the appropriate body to develop updates, review past Council positions, determine next steps, and recommend potential policy position to the full City Council. DISCUSSION This report provides background on eleven regional transportation initiatives of interest to both the Council and the community. These projects, independently and cumulatively will have implications for Palo Alto and the mid-peninsula. Specific issues discussed in this report are following: 1.2020 Peninsula Gateway Corridor Study CMR:267:08 Page 1 of 4 o 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Highway 101 Auxiliary Lanes/101 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Project Highway 101 Ramp Metering Project Dumbarton Rail & HOV Buses Santa Clara County Comprehensive Expressway Study Update VTA Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2035 California High Speed Rail (HSR) Caltrain Electrification Grand Boulevard Initiative and E1 Camino/Stanford Avenue project Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center VTA Governance There are City Council adopted policies in the Comprehensive Plan or developed directly by Council for several of the above issues, while others are new issues that have not been discussed by the City Council. These projects can be classified into three general categories: (1) projects requiring City Council policy direction; (2) projects to be referred to the Planning and Transportation Commission for further review prior to Council action; and (3) projects to be monitored by staff and brought forward for policy direction at a later time when the projects progress to a stage that sufficient information is available for a policy decision. The attached materials present an overview and status of each of these projects. Staff will continue to monitor all of these projects, prepare more detailed reports for policy direction on individual items where appropriate, and forward issues to the Planning and Transportation Commission and Council for review and recommendations. RESOURCE IMPACT There is no City resource impact associated with these recommendations. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendations in this report are consistent with existing stated Council policies and Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element policies, including: Policy T-7: Support plans for a quiet, fast rail system that encircles the Bay, and for intra-count and transbay transit systems that link Palo Alto to the rest of Santa Clara County and adjoining counties. Program T-14: Pursue development of the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Station conceptual plan based on the 1993-94 design study Program T-17: Support Caltrain electrification and its extension to Downtown San Francisco. Policy T-25: When constructing or modifying roadways, plan for usage of the roadway space by all users, including motor vehicles, transit vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. CMR:267:08 Page 2 of 4 Policy T-49: Lead and participate in initiatives to manage regional traffic. Policy T-52: Where appropriate, support the conversion of existing traffic lanes to exclusive bus and high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes on freeways and expressways, including the Dumbarton Bridge. Policy T-53: Participate in seeking a regional solution to improved roadway connections between Highway 101 and the Dumbarton Bridge without construction of a southern connection across environmentally sensitive baylands. Policy T-54: Support efforts by Caltrans and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on area freeways. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Receiving an update on these regional transportation issues does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS A. Project Matrix B. 2020 Peninsula Gateway Corridor Study C. Highway 101 Auxiliary Lanes/101 High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lanes Project D. Highway 101 Ramp Metering Project E. Dumbarton Rail & HOV Buses F. Santa Clara County Comprehensive Expressway Study update G. VTA Valley Transportation Plan (VTP) 2035 H. California High Speed Rail (HSR) I. Caltrain Electrification J. Grand Boulevard Initiative and E1 Camino/Stanford Avenue project K. Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center L. VTA Governance COURTESY COPIES Planning and Transportation Commission Chamber of Commerce PREPARED BY: GAYLE LIKENS Transportation Manager CMR:267:08 Page 3 of 4 DEPARTMENT HEAD: CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: CURTIS WILLIAMS In{erim Director of Planning and Community Environment Deputy City Managers EMSLIE CMR:267:08 Page 4 of 4 Attachment A w w g o 123 o .~ ~ o~ g ~_o-~ o o._~ZOu-! o o ,~ o 5 Attachment D SOUTHBOUND HIGH~vVAY 101 RAMP METERING PROJECT Proj ect Description: Activation of ramp metering on the southbound ramps on Highway 101 from Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto to De La Cruz Blvd. in San Jose. The ramps to be metered in Palo Alto include the Oregon and Embarcadero southbound on-ramps. Lead Agency: VTA with Caltrans support Cost: MTC made $2.051 million available to VTA to implement ramp meeting on 3 freeways including Highway 101. The other two corridors were southbound State Route 87 and Southbound State Rote 85. Timeline: Tentative schedule is to complete ramp metering plans in the fall, implement ramp metering by the end of the year and complete evaluation in early 2009. Existing Council Position: The City Council last considered the issue of ramp metering in April 1996. A copy of a letter from Mayor Wheeler to Caltrans dated May 29, 1996 is attached. The Council endorsed the position that the ramp metering lights would not be turned on until a formal agreement between Caltrans and the local agencies governing the operational aspects of ramp metering was reviewed and approved by the City. Comprehensive Plan Policy: Transportation Policy T-54: Support efforts by Caltrans and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Congestion Management Program to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow on area freeways. Issues for Palo Alto: In 1996, a number of issues associated with ramp metering were raised by Palo Alto including the absence of ramp metering in San Mateo County, the impact on local streets, and the need for establishment of a formal process of monitoring and resolving problems. Without ramp metering upstream in San Mateo County, traffic would be free flowing before reaching Palo Alto. This issue has been resolved as ramp metering of the southbound ramps in San Mateo County between Highway 92 and University Avenue has now been implemented. VTA and Caltrans staff have included in their work scope conducting before studies on selected local streets to establish base lines for potential impacts of traffic diversion from the freeway. The parallel routes identified include Middle field, Alma and Louis Road. A second operational concern is the length of the queues created on the on-ramps and possible spill back onto Embarcadero Road and Oregon Expressway. Ramp metering can be timed to release cars at intervals between 4 seconds (900 vehicles per lane per hour) and 15 seconds. In the earlier dialogues with Caltrans, City staff questioned whether metering could be reduced to less than 4 seconds or if two vehicles could be released per green light per lane, or if the HOV on-ramp lane could be metered at a faster rate than non-HOV lane if queues or traffic diversion to parallel routes occur. The need for closed circuit television cameras at the head of the ramps was also identified. CCTV is not included in this project but is planned by Caltrans as a separate project. The City advocated for the establishment of a formal agreement between Caltrans and the local agencies related to the ramp metering which would detail the responsibilities and process for addressing operational concerns in the event the ramp metering had impacts on local streets. Caltrans and the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) as created for the implementation of ramp metering in San Mateo County. VTA staff have indicated that this is not contemplated by VTA and that at present no VTA Board action is anticipated before the ramp metering is turned on. Staff Recommendation: staff recommends the Council reaffirm its stated position to VTA and Caltrans. Staff will return to Council with a full report when the ramp metering plan is defined later this year. Links/Resources: www.vta.org May 29, 1996 Paul Hensley Districl Division Chief Department of Transportation Callrans - Districl 4 111 Grand Avenue Oakland, CA 94612 Dear Mr. Hensley: First, I would like to express our sincere appreciation to you for atlending our. Council meeting on April 15, 1996 and parlicipaling in the discussion regarding ramp metering. We found the discussion to be helpful and informative, and we particularly appreciated the very straightforward and conslructive manner in which you responded to the questions and concerns. At your suggestion, we are following UP with this lelter which reflects our underslanding -of Caltrans’ posilion on several issues lhat are of particular interesl and concern Io the City of Palo Alto..Our underslanding is as follows Caltrans intends to proceed with the installation (construction) of the equipmenl tha~ is needed for ramp melering laler this year. However, the melering lights themselves will nol be turned on (operations) unlil such time that lhere-is an approved wrilten agreement to do.so.. Callrans intends to establish a process thai will include represenlalives from the various jurisdiclions along Route 101, as well as the Congeslion Management Agency, to work through the necessary steps to develop a formal agreemenl for the operational aspecls of ramp metering along the.Rou~e 101 Corridor. The-approach followed in the "Agreement for Cooperalive Managernenl of the 1-880 Corridor" (i.e. CMA Policy body, SIeering Commitlee and Technical Working Group) may be a useful model for the Route 10,1 Corridor. The Palo Alto City Council willhave an opportunity tc~ f~rmally review any such agreement before it is approved and/or the melering lighls are turned on. Once an agreement has been established for ’operation of ramp meterir]g’ Callrans will monitor the effecls on local slreets and will respond to specific problems that arise. CalI~ans inlends to have a regional or sub-r~gional entily, such as the CMA] serve as the body for resolulion of disputes, ralher than Callrans itself. P.O. Box 10ZS0 PaJo Alto, CA 94303 4 l 5.329.24/-7 415,328. ?-631 Mr. Paul Hensley May 29, 1996 Page 2 Recognizing thai the congestion corridor along Route 101 does not arbitrarily end at the County line, Caltrans will evaluate the need for ramp metering in San Mateo County. This will determine the northern end of the congestion corridor and include appropriate sections of Route 101, north of the Santa Clara County line into the operationagreem~nt before the metering lights are turned.on. The interchanges al University, Willow and Marsh are the most obvious candidates. Caltrans will include evaluation and consideration of the air quali~y effects of ramp metering on Palo Alto residenlial areas that are Iocaled in proximity to the metered ramps, as well as the effect oin University Avenue traffic, if ramp metering is not extended into San Mateo County. After you have had a chance to review these items, we would appreciate a response from you indicating your concurrence with our understanding, or providing further clarification. Finally, you offered to provided some refererice information that demonstrates the ovdrall benefits of ramp metering here in the Bay Area and elsewhere. We would appreciate any such information that would add to our understanding of ramp melering. Again, thank you. We look forward to working with Caltrans in a positive and parlicipatory manner; and we feel that the discussion we recently had at the Council meeting, along with this letter, are important steps toward that end. Sincerely, LAN1E WHEELER Mayor cc: City Council PALO ALTO 0 Iz Project Limits MOU~NNVIEW CAMPBELL SAN JOSE Locatior~ Map SB US 101 Ramp Metering Implementation - Metering Locations Direction & Route: On-Ramp Location Embarcadero Road Embarcadero Road Oregon Expressway Rengstroff Avenue Old Middlefield Way Shoreline Boulevard Moffett Boulevard Ellis Street SR 237 Mathilda Avenue Mathilda Avenue Fair Oaks Avenue Fair Oaks Avenue Lawrence Expressway Lawrence Expressway Great America Parkway Great America Parkway Montague Expressway Montague Expressway De La Cruz Boulevard De La Cruz Boulevard Type of Ramp Loop Diagonal CD-Diagonal Diagonal Diagonal Collector Diagonal Diagonal Diagonal Loop Diagonal Loop Diagonal Loop Diagonal Loop Diagonal Loop Diagonal Loop Diagonal **Indicates that the need for a cursory check of traffic conditions to determine if ram Southbound US 101 AM Peak Period** 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 "3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 6-9 3-7 metering plans need to be developed. PM Peak Period ATTACHMENT B CiCAG Memorandum of Unders~nding ~IOU) befween he City/County A~sociation of ~vernmea~ (C/CAG) of San Ma~e~ County and the California Depa~ent of Tran~rtafion (CaRrans) District The I~plementation of a Ramp M~tering Program in San Marco on US 101 from Santa Clara Coun~ Line to San Frandsco Coaaty Line and on 1-280 from L380 to San Franc~co Court Goal Governance ’The aFpm,,r~ of @m C/CAO Ptm:ap M~ring Teckm,.~¢~ Comi~ttee ~#ATC) vd!! k~ a:~! oversee ~ie p~o~am. C/CAG Operating Principles ~d F~y, exzep~ ~br ~e esmblished Sta~e holi&?’s. Metering m~es ~.l! be set ~o contain met~mg ~ue~ue wi~in d~e on-mrap and Oe toc~ sUeet ]~es specifically dedida~ed for ~e ~eeway e~u~y. ~)P~or to m=pl~m~nt~mn, Cal~mos willp~rovide tln.e RMTC w’i[h an analysis of ramo. :netermg rates~ ~d ~em. lengths. Prior to-~..:).mmcn*,at~on, R2,ATC wil! r~°bw ,’and approve Caln~s’ prop~al %r bd~qat met,~ng raves. P -lmse t -US 101 (~rom Santa Clm~a Cenng~ 1Lne to Ron*e 92) Phase 2 - US 101 (~om Rome 92 to San Franeiaco County line) Phase 3 - b280 North {f~om L380 ,o San Fr~cisco Couaqty line} Tm~ing on of r~mp me~er si~!s wi!] de.~nd on pbj’aical readine~. NcIuding a!l necessary ~Nuipment, appropriate si~dr4g and strip.g, and notice to the p~bl~c. Capital Improvements and CiCAG vdlt be re~por~ible to pro,g’am ~derai, state, and o~er available fim~ in ~e ye~ pos~ibIe to fina~c capi~=d projects m rinsed1 me~,~mg ~nipmen~ ~d o~.er rdated fi~provem~mt~ needed for ~mp meter.~g, Page 2 of 5 C/CAG -CM~:ans ,~I! ha~e the ~gity ~o ~mke sh-ort-t~.~pa~ de~isio~ ~o ch~ge me~r.~.g m~ea if *~:ar~ aad CiCAG, t1~o~h Pd~C, ~tI work mg~iaer to tLne.-~e M. Vreeland Jr., Chairman Cit-y/Coun~" Association of Government.s of San Matzo Coun~ California Deparm~ent of~’Fra~portation District 4, Traffic Operation~ Date Date C/CAG Attachment A Ramp Metering Technical Committee San Marco County 2005 (RMTC) Page 4 of 5 !~/~n~, C/CAG Agreements: Before metering is implemented, agreement0a) be¢:,#~e~ C/CAG and Caltrans. as developed and recommended by the RaMTC, need to be ~+¢d. S~d: agreement(s) may include mutually agreed specific metering parameters, ~me~z~acy ~:~c~d~e~.~ a~ ~e~a~e procedures, etc, Monitoring: Ramp Metering Technical Committee (RMTC) COMPOSITION RMTC consists of staffdesignated by each agency. Current members include: San Carlos (Parviz Mokhtari) DESIRED OUTCOMES The goals of the RMTC a~: to d~:~’elc~p :~ Ramp- ~:~>.g P~-~+~#~a by "~;g2=g making decisions based on consensus. The Ramp Metering Program. should me:*~g ~bj~ve~ w~:die ensuring acceptable level MeN ~.affic operations.. transportation objectives. Board decides to implement metering, ,,,~ ~ake recommendations regarding ATTACHM~ENT C Special Meeting June 03, 2008 Chairperson Kishimoto called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present:Drekmeier, Kishimoto (chair), Espinosa Absent:Barton 1. Oral Communications None. Review of Regional Transportation Issues and Recommendations to City Council MOTION: Council Member Espinoza moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Drekmeier, that the Policy and Services Committee recommend that the City Council:l) Refer the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center project, the Caltrain/California High Speed Rail and the Comprehensive County Expressway Study to the Planning and Transportation Commission for review and recommendations to the City Council; 2) Continue support for the existing Council position on ramp metering as detailed in the May 29, 1996 letter from Mayor Wheeler to Caltrans with a recommended modification that Santa Clara County implement a Memorandum of Understanding on this issue similar to the one in place for San Mateo County, and direct staff to convey the Council position to VTA and Caltrans and report back to the City Council; 3) Direct staff to prepare a recommendation to the City Council on anticipated Valley Transportation Agency (VTA) Governance structure prior to scheduled action by the VTA Board of Directors this summer; 4) Direct staff to prepare letter of support to MTC on the Dumbarton Rail and Caltrain Electrification projects; and 5) Direct staff to prepare a Resolution adopting guiding principles on the Grand Blvd. project. MOTION PASSED 3-0 Barton absent Discussion of Upcoming MeeLing Dates and Topics. 3uly 8th, 2008 aL 7’00 p.m. AD_]OURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at5:50 p.mo