HomeMy WebLinkAbout0186.093I
I
l' .1 c, c
~.
. " -~'. . ..•...
.' .
Karch 18, 1993
HON0RABLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alto, Califcrnia
Members of the Council:
REPORT :ur BR:IU
12
The california Department of Transportation (Caltrans} has proposed
a project that '",i11 make ~ertain operational improvements along
U.S. Route 101 (San Mateo County line to Route 880). The proposed
changes in Palo Alto, as illustrated in Figures 1 and 2, include
the following items:
construction of a nC·wr scuthbQund entrance ramp to Route 101
from San JL1tonio Road~ in conjunction vith:
the concurrent
Charleston Road
interchange,
closure of a~ existing southbound
entr~nce ramp at the Re.ngstorff Avenue
• the installation of a traffic si~nal at the new
intersection of the neW' freeway entrdnce ramp and San
Antonio Road, and
CMR:186:93
the minor widening of charleston Road to provide two
southbound left-turn lanes onto San Antonio Road.
•
---------
Installation of ramp IT'.~tering (including High
Vehicles (HOVJ preference at some locations) on
entrance ramps ~o Route 101 at:
Occupancy
southbound
Embarcadero Road,
• Oregon Expressway, and
San Antonio Road (new entrance ramp)
In order for Cal trans to pt:"cceed with the new on-ramp at San
Ant~nio Read (part A), Caltrans needs and has requested that the
city of Palo Alto approve a new Freeway Agreement, as well as two
Utility Agreements. ROTo{sver, regarding ramp metering (Part B).
Caltrans' position is that it aiready has th.e necessary authority
to fully implement ramp metering; therefore, cal trans has not
req'..iested formal approval or agreement.s with the Cit:,.' of Palo Alto,
or other similarly affected cities (Mountain View, S~nta Clara I and
Sunnyvale). The City Attorney agrees that Caltral'ls does not
speCifically need Palo Alto's approval for the ramp meterin9
project. ROlro'ever. the Attorney's office has requested I and
Caltrans has agreed, that the tlriO agencies also enter into a
Cooperative Agreement that would supplement the Freeway Aqreement
by delineating the rights and reSpOn$ibilities of each party with
respect to the on-ramp project and the r~mp metering project. The
Cooperative Aqreement does not mandate that either project be done.
The purpose of this report is to r6commend, .ith respect to Part A
(construction of a new southbound entrance ramp to Route 101 from
San Antonio Road, and related Changes to Charleston Road). that the
Council:
(1) .find that Part A of the proposed Caltrans project is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan~ and the Negative
Declaration prepared by Cal trans is adeq~atei
(2) approve Part A of the proposed Caltrans project;
(3) approve a resolution (Attachment 1) authoriz.ing the Mayor
to sign a Cooperative Agreement (Attachment 2) and a new
Freeway Agreement (Attachment 3) with the State of
California for Route 101 within the City of Palo Alto;
(4 )
(5)
authorize the Mayor to sign a Utility Aq!"~~:,.~:it "",ith the
state of California for relocation of electric faci 1i ties
{Attachment 4)j and
authorize the Mayor to sign a Utility Agreement with the
State of california for relocation of gas facilities:
(Attachment 5).
CHR:186:93 3 [18/93
page 2
"In(t '**
-•
-
staff al$o reco~~ends, with respect to Part B (inst~llation of ramp
metering, including nov preference, on southbound entrance raillps to
Route 101) t tha~ the Council:
(6) underscore the importance of a commitment by Ca1tra~s to
(a) ongoing monitoring of the operations; (b) a thorough
otlf!t"ational evaluation, inclusive of before and after
conditions; and (c) remedial actions/projects to address
any adverse impacts on local city streets.
BACXGROUND AND DBSCRIPTION 07 PROJBCT
In 19S2~ Caltra~s proposed a set of operational improvements for
southbound Rout.e 101 that iI-'as referred to as t.ha "Congest';'on Relief
project-4 The City revie~ed and approved that project ~subject to
several conditions); ho~ever, Caltrans never impleroented the
project, -due to a number of fa.:;tor6. The current proposed project
includes, essentially, the same operational ilt.provernents previously
proposed in the earlier Congestion Relief project, and incorporates
measures that address the conditions raised by the City of Palo
Alto~ during the review of the earlier proposed project.
Purposg of New San Antonio Road Entran~e Ramp (Part A)
The purpose of closing the existing southbound Charleston Road
entrance ramp and replacinq it with a new entrance ramp at San
~~tonio Road is to reduce the repetitive delays and conflicts at
the Rengstortf interchange. The congestion at this location is
caused by vehicles entering Route 101 fro1Jl Charleston Road and
exiting Route 101 to Rengstorff AVenue (compounded by the close
proximity of another entrance ramp f~om Rengstorff Avenue and the
re.lative1y high volumes ot traffic making these c:!an~l.Jvers) 4
Closure of the Charleston Road entrance ramp will significantly
reduce the weaving maneuvers and conflicts that p~esently occur at
this location, thereby improving traffic flo~ in the through travel
lanes, as well as the enti:'ance and exit ramps of Route 101. The
proposed ne",,' southbound entrance ramp at San Antonio Road wi 11
serve much the same traffic as the existirlg Charleston Road
entrance ramp, without many of the operational shortcomings and
negative impacts.
The closure of the Charleston Road entrance ramp at Rengstorff and
the addition of the new ramp at san Antonio Road will cause a re
orientation of sOlJthbou:nd traffic, that will create the 'need for a
second left-turn lane on the southbound Charleston Road approach to
San Antonio Road.
CMR:186:9J )/1 8/9)
Page 3
•
_~ --JIll
' .
~>-.' ~ ,< :
. ~i'H":~y ,; .
, ,~:.~.~~~,-?~~; -~ . :
-... ~/, :--_ .. --.. __ .
Purpo~e of Ramp Metering_'Part S\
When ttoe traffi.:; volu.me on a free~ay is lo;.:-to-:Iloderate~ the
intrusi.o:t of traffic from f:r·ee .... ·ay ramps has little or ~o adversg
impact on the overall flo ... of traffic. Hc ... 'ever, during the periods
of peak traffic flo''';, as the traffic volume on freeways approaches
the capacity of the rOadway, the intrusion of traffic entering from
freevay ramps becomes increasingly noticeable. .As the volu.llle of
entering traffic increases I the effect on free'w"a::,' traffic flow
becomes increasingly pronounced to a point where e~teri~g traffic
can, and often does~ cause freeway traffic flo~ to deteriorate to
a stop a~d go condition. This reduces the actual volume of traffic
th2!it the freeway can s!!rv~ to a level ... ell belo'l.' its potential
capacity.
The primary purpose of ramp metering is to regulate the fluw of
ramp traffic entering the freeway traffic strea~ curing the period
of pEak traffic flow, so that it has a minimal effect on the
ability of the freeway to cperate at its full capacity. By
converting platoons of traffjc into individual units, the merging
proc~ss can be accomplished more efficiently ~ith less disruption
to traffic flow or. the freeway, which pr-eserves the full capacity
of the. fr-eeW"ay and reduces accidents and delay normally encountered
in congested stop and go ~onditions~
Actual experience wit~ ramp metering in Denver has ~esulted in a 10
to 15 percent increase in the volume-carrying capability of the
freeway. In Minneapolis, ramp metering has resulted in a 26
percent reduction in travel time and a )8 percent reduction in the
accident rate.
Hore Detailed pepcription of Proposed Project ,p~rts A and Bl
A March 20, 1992 staff report to the Planning Co~~ission
{Attachment 6} provides useful back;round information, as ..... ell as
a more detailed description and discussion of the various
co~ponents of the current propos~d Caltrans project.
PLAlQrIlfG COlOiISSIOlf REVI""
The previous project (1982) received extensive revie. by the
Planning Commission. since the current proposed project will widen
an existing road~ay and is c~nsidered to have some effect on the
physical development of the City, it 'Was brougfJt before the
Plar~ing Commission for its review and co~~ents in accordance with
Section 19.04.050 of the Pal~ Alto Municipal Code.
The proposed C2IIltrans project was review-ed by the Planning
Commission on March 25, 1992 (minutes included as Attachment 7).
The Planning Commission passed a motion (7-0), finding that the
project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the negative
CMR:185:9J
."
3/18193
Page"
R i
-
declaration is adequate, and recommE--ndirlg approval of the project
to the city council. The motion also inclucied the importance of a
commitment by C31trans to: (a) ongoing Monitoring of operations,
(b) a thorough operational evah.::ation, inclusive of before and
after conditions, and {c) re~.edial actions/projects to address any
adverse impacts on local city streets. }'inally, the Ce!1'uTli ssion
added a condition that caltrans work with City staff, along ~ith
Planning commissioner Tony Carras::o, to explore additional
landscaping along Charleston Road.
LANDSCAPING p~
At the time of the Planning cor1"lission review, the prcject, as
proposed, requirad the removal of a total of 11 trees (4 mature
tree~ (10-13 inches] and 7 young trees [2-3 inches]), all along
Charleston Road~ The proposed plan \rIas to plant 12 new trees
~ithin the private, adjacent landscaped area belonging to Sun
Microsystems. Figure 3 illustrates the locatio~s of trees that are
to be removed and the location of the new trees.
The Planning Commission discussion reflected a strong interest in
having additional trees included as part of the propesed project,
including the possibility of a landscaped median. The action of
the Planning Commission WSIS to ask Caltrans, city stafi and
commissioner Carrasco (having expressed an interest), to 'Work
together to explore ~ddjtional landscaping possibilities~
On April 2, 1992~ City staff (Tr.anspcrtation Division, city
Arbori5t, and a staff representative of the Architectural Revie'W
Board) :met with Commissiofler Carrasco at th-e Charleston Road site,
to discuss what would be an appropriate landscape tre~tment tor the
sec~ion of Charleston Road between San Antonia Read and Fabian way~
The individuals present reached the follo~ing conclusions:
1. The; provision of a lar.ds.-:aped medial:, albeit desirable, is not
practical I d~e to through la~e off-sets, dual turning lanes,
and right-ot-way limitations~ and
2. A total of 26 new trees should be planted along Charleston
Road, as illustrated in Figure 4. The tree replacement plan
includes the planting of 16 pistachio trees, 9 si~camore trees,
and 1 oak tree {at locations that are compatible with existing
trees which 'Will not be removed} as part of the roadway
widening project.
Caltrans has approved a request to incorporate the 26 tree
replacement plan (Figure 4) as part of the overall caltrans
project, rather than the previous proposed plan (Figure 3). The
project plans and specifications have been modified accordingly.
C)!R: 186:93 3/18/93
Page 5
-
NEW FREEWAY AGREEMENT
caltrans has an establishej practice of executing a free ..... ay
aqrcement ',lith eactt juris.-:._ctiOTl. through -which its freeways
traverse. The agreement. IS a general statement of intent by
app~opriate p~rties regarding local streets, costs, and rights-of
way as they relate to a particular freeway alignment and
cOl"lfiql.lration J including interchanges and ramps.
The existing Freeway Ag~eernent tor the portion of Route 101 within
the City of Palo Alto is dated May 12-, 1958. At that time,
portions of Route 101 ...... ere .outside the tr.en existing corporate
limitE of the city of Palo Alto and \oIithin the juriscUcti"OTl cf
Santa Clara. County. 1'herefore, there presently exists a similar
free~ay agree'ment bet'""een the St~te and the county, da<;.gd
September .17, 1958, covering the portion of Route 101 which, at
that ~ime! f~~l within the jurisdic~icn of Santa clara county.
In order for Caltrans to proceed ~ith the portion of the proposed
project that involves the neW' sonthbound entrance ramp from san
Antonio Road to Route 101, Cal trans is requesting that the City of
Palo Al to execute a ne",' Free\lt,'ay J.,greement. The new Freeway
Aq~eement ~ould ~upersede the existing Qgreement executed in 1958
betveen the state and the City, as well as the onE: between the
State and the County, since intervening annexation has caused
portions of Route 1.01 previously within the County to now lie
within the jurisdiction of the City of Palo Alto. The new Freeway
Agreement incorporates a configuration (or Route 101 and its
interchanges and ramps, similar to .,.hat exists today, with the
inclusion of a new freeway entrance ramp at San Antonio Road," A
copy of the pr-oposed new Freeway Agreement is iilcluded as
Attacl1l!lent J.
COOPERATlVl!l JlGREEI<ENT
During discu5sivns bet~een Caltrans and Cjty staff regarding tbe
rree~ay Agreement, city staff raissd sev~ral issues ~hich, due to
limita~ions on format and con~ent imposed by Caltrans, could not be
tully resolved within the Free~ay Agreement document itself.
Therefore, a Cooperative Agreement between Caltrans and the Ci~y
vas developed, as a ~eans to resolve palo Alto's concerns. A copy
of the Cooperative Agreement is included as Attachment 2.
As part of the minor modifications to Charleston ~oad, there is a
need for relocation of existing above and belo~ grcund utilities.
1..& part of this proposed project. the City of Palo Alto 'Will
perform the necessary work to relocate electric and gas utilities;
and Ca!trans will reimburse the City for all costs related to such
work. other utility work will be done by the project contractor to
the 6pecifications and approval of the City of Palo Alto,
0IR:1B6:9J
c
J ....... ·'c" "
~.
~ ---------.~-------
-
The estimated costs for the utility "work to be done b}' the City,
a:1d fully reimbursed by Caltrans, is appro>::imately $62,000 and
$5, 000 for electric and gas facilities~ respectively~ A copy of
the Utiliti'-AgreEment for electric related work is included as
Attachment 4, and i!I copy of the Utility Agreement fo:-gas re-lat,ed
work is included as Attachment 5.
STATUS OP PROJECT
The plans and specifications for this proje-:=t haVe heen fully
prepared by caltrans and the project is ready for implementation.
HOllrever, due to a ner...· Ifpost-CEQA" req'.1ireme:r:t from the Metropolitan
Tran,c;portation Commission rMTC) Cal trans is currently preparing
supplemental air quality analyses end information fC)r the project.
This -will eventually be 6ub:!litted to MTC for its review and
approval. In the meantime, iurther major progress on project
implementation is on hold.
Once Caltran~ makes 3 tir~ decision to procec~ ~ith the project,
Palo Alto staff 'Will then do the necessary electric and gas
r-elocation work, prior to the time that the project contractor
implements the proposed physical changes to Charleston Road. The
portion of the project through Palo Alto is expected to take about
four months to complete and the entire project is expected to take
about ten months to tully complete.
An Enviro!1m~ntal Assessment/Initial S'tudy witl1 a Negative
Declaration was prepared by the California Department of
Transportation, as lead agency, for the project and 'Was approved by
the U.S~ Depart~ent of Transportation, Federal Highway
Admini.stration, in November 1982. ., cop}' of the Negative
Declaration and Finding of No Significant Impact are ir.cluded as
attachlnents to the March 20, 1992 staff report to the Planning
Commission (~ttachment 6).
In 1990, Caltrans completed a supplemental environnlental
review/r~port and concluded that Wchanges which have occurred in
the proposal and in the surrounding conditions since the approval
of the negative declaration have been reviewed, and no evidence of
significant enviromDental impacts f'.ave been found."
In addition to the caltrans environmental assessments, the proposed
widening of Charleston RO~dt in conjunctio~ with the closure of the
existing Charleston Road entrance ramp and the provision of a ne~
southbound entrance ramp from SaT:. Antonio Road (Part A), was
included in the CityTs environ:rnental analysis for the city wide
Land Use and Transportation Study (87-EIA-50), as well as the San
Antonio/West Bayshore Area CS/GM Zone study (S5-EIA-7).
CM".R: 186: 93 3/18/93
Page. 7
•
I ,
.&
COIICLllSIOII
Statf believes that the proposal tv! (a) replace the existi:"lg
Ch.arleston Road ra:np with a ne'o{ ramp at San Anto:i1io Road, a long
\lith minor-'Widening of ct-~arlesto~. Road to provide two left-turn
lan&s (Part A) and (:0) install ramp metering ·""ith HOV preference,
~he~e practical (Part 8). ~ill individually and collectively
contribute to improved traif ic flo'" on Route 101 .. 1 thout
significant adverse impact on other streets. Experience indicates
that the free..,.ay "lIiill be able to ~erve a higher volume of tr2liffic
with improved travel speed~ smoother traffic flow l fewer and less
severe accidents, and reduced conaestion attributable to
disruptions from platoons of traffic entering frorn freeway ramps,
accidents, and other incidents.
Furthermore, the proposed project is consistent .... ith efforts to
maintain and improve tra"ftic condit.ions in major travel corridors
and on regional roadway facilities. These are. important
considerations, in vie'W of efforts to improve air quality and meet
the objectives and requirements of the congestion Managemen~
Program for Santa clara Co~nty~
IU!COKI<B!IDII'I'ION
Staff reco~ends, with respect to Part A (construction of a new
southbound entrance ramp to Route 101 from San Antonio Road, and
related changes to Charleston Road) that the Council:
(1) find that Part A of the ,proposed Caltrans project is
consistent 'With the COlr'tprehensive Plan and that the
Neqative Declaration prepared by Caltralls is adequate;
(2) approve Part A of the proposed Caltrans project;
(3} approvE-a resolution (Attachment 1) authQrizing the Mayor
to sign a Cooperative Agreement (Attachment 2) and a neW
Freeway Agreement (Attach~ent 3) ~ith the State of
California tor Route 101 within the City of Palo Alto;
(4) authorize the Mayor to sign a Utility Agreement ..... ith the
state of California for relocation of electric facilities
(Attachment 4); and
(5) authorize the Mayor to sign a Utility Agreement with the
State of California tor relocation of gas facilities
(Attachment 5).
CHR:186:93 '/18/93
Page 8
staff also recommends, with respect to Part B {installation of ra3p
metering, including 11:CV prefere!"',;;:e, on southbound entrance ramps to Route lOll that t~e Council:
(6) ~nderscore the il'llportan-::e of a commi trne-nt by Cal trans to
(a} ongoing monitoring of the operations; (b) a thorough
operational evaluatioll l inr::lusive of before and after
conditions; and (c) re~edial actions/projects tc address
any adverse impacts on local citi' streets:.
Respectfully submitted,
HARVIN OVERWAY
..-i/' . /{i"/~' /~, tl I~-'J.,''c/.. ~ ckl
I<ENNE'fH R. SCHREIB:ER /"
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
Chiaf Transportation official
~'~~
City Manager
Attachments: 1. Resolution
2. Cooperative Agreement
3. Freeway Agreement
4~ Utility Agreement (Electric)
S. Utility Agreement (Gas)
6. March 20, 1992 staff report to the Palo Alto
Planning Commission
7. March 25, 1992 Planning Commission minutes
cc~ Cal trans (Dennis Bosler, Rodney ata)
Ci t)~ of Mountain View
City of Menlo Park
City of East Palo Alto
City of Su~,yvale
Stanford University
Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce
Walt Bailey, Space Systems Loral
Larry Barone. Sun Microsystems
James Dinkey
Businesses in 800 block of Charleston Road
CKR: 186:93
3/18/93
Page 9
•
Al'TACHME/I,'T 1
RESOLt.1'TrON NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE C!n~ OF P4LO ALTO
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A FREEWAY
AGREZMENT AND CooPERAT!VE AGREEMEl-."']' W::::7H CALTRA..~S
REGARDING HIGXWAY 101
WHEREAS, the State of California; through its D~partrne:1t of
Transportation ("'Cal trans") I has presented an agreement entitled
~Freeway Agreemen!:," which r:oncerns St.ate Highway :<.o'~te 101 within
the City of Palo Alto from the east city limits near San &~tonio
Road to the San ~~teo county Lin~; and
WHEREAS; pursuant to the Freeway Agreement. Cal trans
proposes to construct a new suuthbound o.1-ramp at San Antonio Road,
to widen Charleston Road to provide a second left turn lane (the
·project'). and has agreed to enter into a ~cooperative Agreement"
wit11 the City to furtber cla_ri [y the rights and obligations of each
party u~der the Freeway Agreement with respect to the project as
well as a-./lY ramp metering installation that might be performed bi'~
Caltrans in the area covered cy the Freeway Agreement; and
WHEREAS, ~he City Council has considered the Freeway
Agreement and the Cooperative Agreement in full and is familiar
with the contents thereof.
NOW, T:-iERBFORE~ the Council of the City of Palo Alto does
RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council hereby approves t.he Freeway
Agreement and the Cooperative Agreement and authorizes the ~3yO= to
execute said agreements for and on behalf of the City of Palo ~to.
SECTION 2 The City Council finds as follows:
An Enviromnental }~sessment!Initial Study with a Negative
Dec::'aration and a Finding of No Significant Impact were pr-epared by
the California Department of Tra~sportation, as lead agency, for
the project, which was approved by the U.S, Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration~ in November 1982.
In 1990, Cal trans completed a supplemental project
review/report and concluded that "changes which have occurred in
the proposal and in the 8urrcI.lnding conditions since the approval
of tbe Negative Declaration have been reviewed, and DC evidence of
significant environmental impacts have been found.-
Iu addition, the proposed lk'idening of Charleston Road, in
conjunction with the closure of the existing Charleston Road
ene-ranee ramp and the provision of a new southbound entrance ramp
from San Antonio Road, was i~cluded in th~ environmental analysis
for the City Wide Land Use and Transportation Study (87-EIA-50). as
well as the San Antonio/west 8ayshore Area CS/GM Zone Study (85-
EIA-7) •
1
1n0) 16 1.'-" 003O!!ll
•
Based on the foregoing, the Council fifids that the
environmental review and Negative Declaration prepared by Caltrans
in conjun::tion with the Ci~y Wide and San A ... , .. ~tonio Road
environmer...tal analyses prepared by the City are adeq-J.ate and that
no further e:'lvircnmental assessment if=; req'.J.in!d fer Council
app~oval of the agr~em~nt9.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
AT'I'EST:
city Clerk
APPROVBD AS TO FORM:
Senior Aastr City Attorney
2
APPROVED:
Mayor
Director of Planning and
Corn.nunity Environment
Chief Transpcrtation Official
\
.-., ....... -~----
This AGREEMENT. entered into or.
ATTACHMENT 2
4-SCI-IOI 40.0/52.2
428.2-132451
Diat .. .l!,.grr,t. No. 4-1·,j,55-C
Document. Nc.SCL-43-
i.
between the STATE OF CALI FOR.""HA, acting by and through its De-
partment of Transportation i ref~rred to herein as STATE~ and
CITY OF PALO ALTO
a body politic and a municipal
corporation of the State of
California, referred to herein as
CI'J.'Y.
RECITALS
(1) STATE contemplates constructing state highw2Y im-
provements consisting of ramp metering and other operatio~al im-
provements or, Route :01 between tht:': Guadalupe River and the San
Mat~~ County line. As part of this ~orki a new on ramp from San
A..,tonio Roed in the City of Palo Alto "';iill be constructed, and
the Charleston ROeld/San Antonio Road intE"rsectlor. in the Ci ty of
Palo Alto will be improved to facilitate acces~ to the new on
ramp. All of the above work is referred to herein as "PRO,JECT".
(2) CITY desires that STATE enter into a CoopE"rat_iv-e
Agreement with CITY before the execution of a freeway agreement
for Route 101 in the City of Pa 10 It.l to (FREEWAY AGREEMENT) super-
-1-
4
, .
---~--.... -"-'
District Agreement No. 4-14S5-C
$eding the M~y 12, 1558 freeway agre~men~ with the C1ty of Palo
Alto and that portion of the September' 17, 1958 freeway agreem~nt
vi th the County of Sc:~ta Clara noy I,r,'i thin the City of Fa!o Alto.
(3 ) STATE and CITY ere p"c.lbl ic agencies authorized un-
der the Streets and High ..... ·ays Code and Goverr.ment Code Sections
6500 et seq. to enter into a cooperative agreement under which
s'rATE will advertise, ewa.rd and administer the construction con
tract.
(4) STATE and CITY do mutually desire tc, specify herein
the terroe and conditions under which
structed, financed and maintained.
STATE AGREES,
PROJECT is to be con-
(1) To ~rovide all labor, materiEls, tools and equip
ment for PROJECT includir..g adverti sing. a .... ·ard. contract adminis-
tration, Resident Enqlnee::-, material source inspection.
independent assurance and specialty t~5ting. and such other con
struction engineering as may be required for satisfactory com
pletion of PROJECT.
(2) To constrllct FROJECT by contract in accordance with
plans and epecjfications of STATE. except that all work within
CIT!" right of Ylay .... ill r,e in accordance wi ttl CITY approved plans
and specifications.
-2-
District Agreement No. 4-1455-C
{J) To bear one hUhd~ed (leO) percent of all con-
struction and construction engineering ccsts of FRO...TE:CT.
(4) If any right of way is required fer ... ork withir.
CITY; to conBult with C1TY before acquiring any right of ~ay.
(5) To maintain all STATE highway f&cilities as con-
structed under PROJECT in accordance vith the provisions of the
free~ay agreements and freeway reaintenance agreements presently
in effe~t or as may be executed or modified he~~afte~ and make no
claim against CITY fot" any portion of SUC11 maintemmce expense.
QIl'X AGREES;
(1) To review plans and 6pe~ifications for work within
CITY right Qf way.
(2) To ~llow STATE to perform work withi~ C1TY right of
way.
(3) To maintain all CITY ~tre~t facilities as con-
atructed und-er PROJECT in !lccordanr::e wi ·;.:h the provisions of the
freeway aqreements and freeway maintenance agreements presently
in effect or as may be execut~d or modified hereafter and make no
claim Bqsinst STATE for any portion of such maintenance expense.
-3-
•
I
i
!
I
'" l'
Distri~t Agreem~nt No. 4·1455-C
(l) All obligalions of STATE '.H'lder t::;,e terms of thie
Agreement are SubjEct to the appropriation of resources b::r-the
Leqislatllre and the allocs:tion. of resources by the California
Transportation Commission.
(2) Should any portion of PROJECT he fina.nced wi th Fed-
eral funds or STATE funds, all epplic.;;.ule 13\o{5. rules and poli-
cies relatlnq to the 11!'iE!' of such funds shall apply
notWithstanding ether provisions of this Agreement.
(3) STATE?s goals for utilization of Minority and Wom
en's Business Enterprise (MBE 9nd WBE; will be included in the
construction contract. The cOl'1tr::act goals ... i'11 be based on a
tec~~ical analysis of contract items and certified MBE/WBE sub-
contractora in the area. STATE ~ill award PROJECT to the lowest
r-esponsible bidder ",ho meets the qoals or who made, in the B'ole
judgement of STATE. a good faith effort to do so.
(4) STATE ~hall not adve~tise for bids to construct
PROJECT until a£ter this Aqreement is executed L~-~oth parties
thereto.
(5) In the construction of PROJECT, CITY may, at no
cost to STATE. Eurnish a representative, 1£ it 60 desires. Said
representative and STATE's Engineer will cooperate and consult
with e~ch other, but the decisions of STATE'e Resident Engineer
-4-
•
__ .... __ .. _._"M_.~ .. · _____ ./ .. __ .. _
District Agreement 1'1'::" 4-1455-C
shall prevail as final, binding and conclusive in all matter.s
concerning the PROJECT constructicn contra,;t.
(5) Upon completion of all ,",ork under this Agreement,
o\roership and title to ~aterials, equipment and apPllrtenances
which are installed within STATE's right of way ~ill automat-
ic*lly be vested in STATE, and materials, e'::p.lipment and
appurtenances ~hich are ir.stalled within CITY 1 s right of ~Qy ~ill
be vested ir. CITY. No further agreern~nt 'I,o'il1 be necessary to
transfer ownership as hereinabove stated.
(7} STATE will maintain the traffic contr~l signal and
safety lighting at the ramp entrance as insta.l1ed and pay an
a~ount equal to 33% of the total maintenance coste, !ncluding
electrical energy costs. CITY shall reimburse STATE for CITY's
proportionate sha.::-e of said maintenance costs, such share to b-e
an amount equal to 67% of the total maintenance costs, including
electTic~l energy cost6.
(e) Neither STA~E nc~ any off~cer or ereployee thereof
ehall be re~ponsibl~ for any damage or liability occurrin~ by
reB$On of anythinq done or omitted to be done by CI~Y under or in
connection wi t.'1. any work, authClri ty or juri sdiction delegated to
CITY under t~ie Agreement. It is also agreed that, pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.4, CITY shall fully indemnify and
hold STATE ha!"mless frem any liability imposed for injury (as de-
fined by Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of
anything done or cmi~~ed to be done by CITY under or in ccn-
-5-
•
\
District Agreement No. 4-14S5-C
nection with any ~ork. authority cr jurisdiction delegated to
CITY under this Agreement.
(9) Neither CITY nor any cfficer .or employee there'.Jf,
!:hall be responsible fljr any damage or lia.bl1i ty oc:::u.rrinq by
reason of anything done or omitted to be done by STATE under or
in connect jon ~i~~ any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated
to STATE under this Agree~ent and FRgEWAY AGREEMENT+ It is also
agreed that, p1.lr6uant to Goverr,.,.nent Code Sectj on 895. 4~ STATE
shall fully indemnify and hold C1TY harmless from. any liability
imposed for injury (85 defined by Government Code Section 810.8)
occurring by reason of ~r::ything done or omitted to be done by
STATE under or in connection vith any work, authority or juris-
diction deleqated to STATE under thi~ Aqreement and FREEWAY
(10) No alteration or variation of the terms of this
Aqr.ernent shall be valid unless made in writing and siqned by the
parties hereto and no e~al understanding or agreement not incor-
porated herein shall be binding on any of the parties heretc.
----
:1
I.j .,
I
I
Di strict Agre-e!'!'.ent Nc _ 4~ 14SS-C
(11) Those portions of thiS' Agreement pertaininq t.o the
construction of PROJECT :!;;hall tend nate upon completion and ac-
ceptance of PROJE':T c"nstructiCtn cor-,tract by STATE or on August
1" 1997 .. whichever is f!i!arlier ir::: time. Ho,*ever-, the o;mership
and maintenance clauseE shall remain i~ effect until terminated
o:t" ~odified in 'W'riting, by mutual agre~m~:1t.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Department of Transportation
JAMES W. VAN LOBEN SELS
Director of Transportation
By ;:~~ ____ _
Deputy District" D-i rector
APPROVED AS TO !'OR!>! 1u'ID PROCEDURE
----------ATTORNE~_~Y~--------
~partroent of Traneportaticn
CERTIFIED AS TO FU~nS AND PROCEDuRE
District Accounting /J,dminIstrator
-7-
._-_. __ ._---.... -
CITY of PALO ALTO
By
J>, ttest: --""":0. (Citi~c~l~e~r~k~)------
--------~~~-------~----------~_:_~~7""'IIiII
FREEWAY AGREEMENT
AITACHMEI' .... r 3
~-scr.,-lcl-P.!-~. 50.D/S'.6
In the City of Pale Alto
frcm the E'.:.2'S': city limits
near Sar, Antonio Road to
the San Mateo Cou~ty Line~
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this
day o~ 19 I by and
bet~een the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by anc throuyh the
D~partment of Transportation (herein referred to as "STATEn), and
the city of Palo Alto (herein referred to as "CITY-),
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the highway described ahove has been declared
to be a freeway by Resolution of the California Hi~hw3y
Commission on May 18, 1944j and
WHEREAS, S':'ATE ar,d C~TY have entered ir.to a Free ... ~ay
Agreement dated ~tay 12, 1956, relating to that ~ortion o~ State
Highway lO~ from the San Mateo Co~nty Line to the east city
limits: and
l-ffiEREAS, STATE and the County of SaI".ta Clara have
entered into a Freeway ~greement dated September 17, 1955~
relating to that portion of State HLJhway Eou.te Hll from the San
Mateo County Line to Stevens Creek; and
-1-
•
"
,-. j
I
~
~ -I
I
i
'>"!BEREA-S, a revised ylan rr.ai-' for such free....,.:!y r.as beE'n
pre}:-ared Sh0· .. ·in·:! the ~rof.icsed ylan of the STATE as it af::ects
streets of the CrTY~ and
i'.THEREAS, it is t,""e mutual de.sire of the l'arties hereto
to' enter into a ne\l1 Free""ay Ay-reeroent in accorca."lce "",ith the:
revised ~'lan of said freeway:
NOW, THEF.EFORE IT IS AGRFED:·
1. This Agreement s~pe~sedes in its entirety said
>
Freeway Agreement dated May 12, 1958, and supercedes that portion
of said Freeway Agreement dated S';pte:nber 17 I 1 :158, from the east
cit.y limits near San Antonio Road to the Sa%"'. Hateo County Line.
2. CITY agrees and consents to the closing of CITY
streets, relocation of CI~Y streets, construction of fronta~e
roads and other local roads, and other construction affecting
CITY streets, all as shown on said ~.li!!;n map attached hercto
marked Exhibit ~ and made a part hereof by this reference.
3. STATE shall I in construction of th.e fr~e""ay and at
STATE's expense, make such cnanges affecting CITY streets in
accordance with the plan map attached hereto marked Exhibit A.
,,~ STATE .agree'S to acquire all necessary :right 0= way
E.S may be required for constTl.lction ~ reconstruction, or
alteration of CITY streets, frontage roads, 3nd other local
roads, and CITY ~ereby authorizes STATE to acquire in its behalf
all such necessar}' right of way ..
-2-
.WIi
:-l 5. It is understooe be~ween the ~arties that the ri~ht
cf >«a'1 may be acquired in sectior:s or I.!nits, and that Goth as tc
tt.e acqui.sition of ri'.:fht 01 way and t.h-e cor.structio.'":. of the
free~ay ~roject~, the chliyations of STATE hereunder shall be
ca1"ried out at s\,a: .. h time and for such unit or units of tho:
~rDjects as fU:1ds are bud':;1eted and made la ..... fl..l.lly available for
such ex~endi t'..lres ..
;J -6 .. CITY will accept control and maintenance over ~ach
of the relocated or .I-econ.struct~d CITY ~treet5, and the frontage
roads, and other STA'fE constrlJcted local roads on receipt of
written notice to CITY from STATE that the ~ork thereon has been
completed, except for any portion which is ado~ted by STATE as a
yart of the freeway proper. CITY will accept title to the
portions of such ro·ads lying outside the free~ay lirdts, ut .. on
relinquishment by STATE.
-)-
cC;;' Co·'''>' . -~. -:-,
./
i" This Ayre-eme~t may be modifie~ at any time by the
mutual COl".sent of the f'arties here"t.o , as :nay becom€ necessary for
the best accom~lishment, throu9h STA7E and CITY cQo~eration, o~
the ~hole freeway ~roject for the benefit of the pEop:e of the
STATE and of the CITY"
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the: yarties hereto have causEd this
Agreement tc be executed by their respective auly authorized
officers.
STA'...:'E' OF CALIFORNIA
Department of Trans~ortation
ROBERT It:. BEST
Director of Transportation
By
Chief r Off~ce of ProJect
Planning and Design
APPROVED AS TO FOR,,!:
~ttorneYr (State)
CITY OF PALO ALTO
Ey
APPROVED AS TO FOR'-1:
----xttorney, {City)
-4-
•
\
"' :-"--" ...... -~.~,'.-.-..
A'ITACHMElljT 4
PM E: A.
STATE OF CAUFOIiNIA
DUAal'!04ENT OF TMI'IISPo~n*,TJON
NOTICE TO OWNER
No. 9112 • .2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
P. D. BOA: 10250
Pale Alto. CA 91,.303
SCl 101 !oo.r,:'
IDote !-1l-92
Owner', File
ON.
BecauseOCtheStateHlgh .... yCorutructiOOOft Route l~n ":'icfl ::in.:lucle.e ra~p meteri"~ and
.... J..deroing of 50ut.hbound on-ramps ,"·hlcn else;, includes the ",'5r:!e-r..i,n:, of Ea::;~
Charleston Road betlo'een San Ju'ltonio R';.ad and Fabiar. \I,'2:.!"
which .affects your £ollowin, descnW facilities: '" If'"C tric f ac i 1i t i~s.
youareherebyorderedtu: relocate your facilities ~ccording to your P13;'J. ~o. io;'. C.
29471 dz.te-d October 31, 1991, consisting of O.le sheN att3.cr.en hereto and
made a part hereof.
"fourworkscheduJeshanbeuroOows: Complete all Io'Qr.'<: by Hal' 1, 1992.
Notify J .. ~ Che::al Tel. (4,:)8) 277-t4b!. i2 Hours
prior 10 initi.il.start of work, and 3.ddiliorW 24 boo r:s notification for
suWq """I ""'" wben WOI'k !CheduJ. is Inlerrupted
Wabilitya 100% State sine ... the e;dstin~ iacilitjE"s are located in their '}resent
position ~.HJrsuant to ri2ht5 9ricT and sup~rior to those of the State.
f.,.-. ..
( .... _C ....... II
1I~£ __ I ...... ~
rn. ... I.,-1
Do •• ' • ..,...., au ..... ....,.,.,,.....)
THI!§: SOTlC£ 00£5 NOr CON.STllVl"E " P'EIlNrr.
OBTA.IN DoiCROACHMEN'f PEAMrr :u:roBE SI'AlITINC
WORk.
,.,.. .. ,
PRESTON "'-. KELLLY
DirE'ctor
,
:...-~, ~"''''------.--..
SH.TE OF C-\Llf()~SL-\
Deparrm~l1t uf Tramport"!IOn
~_i1!.c_J Coun h R,')utt' ~\L __ -,_-.!E",.",~. --I
_~_l.l_-_o C_l_~ __ l '_"1_.....L1~,:"'C ?c..ll.i _1_3_2_4_5_9-1
fedl."ul "'iu ~_
F-P101 (651) !
__ --'O"~ .. O"'·"'2·,,,F,,i,,I,'_ _____________ _
'W", o~ 29471
l'TILlTl AGREE~E~T ~004-'Jt. 948.2 DATE __ _
Stat", of California, actinJ:,. by and tJ>r'-"Jgh th .. Der .... nmrnt of Tr"'r1.~pmt;ltl::m. h",rein ... f'''r (' .. lleJ ST.'1TE prq){)~;
lO~~~"i;d~e1n~E;;a ... ~s~t~c~ h.~r~l,e~s~t;Ol---n~~~A_~'C~~;d~-rb~~e·itl'jele~n~,jF-,.aib~i~ai;n,~ ... ;.~Y~"~'n"d_.~_s,a'tJ~'A,n't'Q'n'~jQ~B~Q:::J crt'! OF PALO ALTO
hE'reinaftt'f calit'd (I V:'~-EP:":: ~h :1 nd m;l.illiairu __ ~ 1 e c t~-l c fa c i ll:tte ~ ___ _
________ _______ _ within
Ihe !imf~~ of Siate"s pro} ... \.'! ..... hieh reqllire'_ ..relocatjon _____ . ___ _
Ie aC,--':'lmmoo,,:e-~.lte's project
WORK TO BE DONE
Tn accordance with Notice No. 94$.2 dated January 13, 1992, Owner
shall relocate existing electrical facJli ties. All work shall be
perforrn~d substantially in accorda~ce vlth Owner's Plan
No. '\tl.O .. 29471 1 dated October 31, 1991 consisting o:! one o::heet , a
copy of which is on .file in the District office of the Depar-tMent
of 'I'r-anspor"tetion at 30 Van~ess JnTenue t San Francisco, CA 94102.
l1i!lor deviatl(ln~ frem the above-described ... ark may be made and
inc'!den~l \lork performed by the Chiner when mutually acceptable to
both parties and upon approval by the State.
II. LIABILITY FOR WORK
Exlstl.r.g facilities are located in their-present posItion pursuant
to rights prior and: superior to those of the State an:! 'oIIt11 be
relocated at State expense.
II 1 • PERFORMAN CE OF 'wORK
OWner agrees to perform a portion of the herein-describ.;od · .... ork
vith its own forces and to prov!de and ~urnish all necessary
labor, materials, tools and equipoent required therefore, and to
prosecute said vor-k d 11Igently to corople t1on.
I'l.-W OIl·:2
1,,;3 • ...,._
-~
. '
i
i
I
-
~"","".---:-.
04..ut.
c48.2 ' l'ttrlt~ ,-\.grCe'ITll"lJt '0 _' ___ _
~:" ~S tc cac.se a PCCtiCi1 0:" tne r.ere1n-:lescriOE<l \oIork to be per!'o!"t'ne:: by
a contract ... lth the lowest cualif1e;j b.1dd€r, .selectEd purS12flt to a valid
compet1 tive oidjirl6 proca:Hl.L~ t erD to iU.""T'Ji3'1 or ca~e to toe f'..l.""llu.e: ell
necessary 18bor~ met.er!al.s. tools ar.C equ1~t requ1l"~ ~refor, an:::1 ro
prosecute S51id -work d1l1goent:ly to c~pleUan.
IV. PA YlIDlT roll \lalK
'!'te 'State shall PlY 1't:S smre o:f 'the actual cost 0:[ said relocaticn '.iifr...1n 9J
days a..ftJ!r reeeipt ~ an 1"taniz.ed bill 1.n qu1n'tl.tplkatE,. s1f,t1ed. by a respcn6ibl~
ot:!1c1al or o..nerts Ol"g:sn.1za.tiai. compiled 00 tile basis of 'tiE actual co·st ar.d
expense • The o.mer s.l-ell rr:a in tam recoro 5 of t1:e actus 1 cos ts .1n...---urred. arxj
cl'Brg:e::1 or alloca1:ej to tr..e prcjeet In. accoroance \(1 t.h recogn12Ed. eccoU!ti.n.g
pr1rn;iplee.
It 1.s U'XIerstoo:i ard agroed ~t the S12tJo rill net pay for anr bettennent or
.1ncr'e.P.se 1n C8JX1oi ty of CMner l:s frc1l1 ties a."'d ttet OWner s.1J311 give credi 1: to
't:t"e Sta:te :for' all SCCl"ued deprec1eticn on the replaced :facUlties a:1"6 for t"m
salvs.,oe value of any ll>3terl2.1 or parts sarvagro and retained or sold by Owner.
At. "t:hs election oi tiE ~r, protN'.s.s bills for costs i")('.lJ.J:Ted !ll3y t:e su.:-:rr:ittEd
not 1:0 exceed o.tner's reooroed costs as of a spec1.fic date less estilIieted
credits applicable ;" canplets:l vork where tbe recorded costs are suit:1c 1<mt ;"
warrant BllC11 billing. n.. final bllUr", ""'11 be in the fof'll of an itemi?sl
sta'temer\t of the wtal ocsts clBrged m 'ti"e PNjec"t, leas ~ crej1ts !,rovided.
for !n tili;! ag..--eemnt, am less any anlOI.rlts covered by progress bUl1n€s.
Deiailed recoms ftom ",hiel, _ hllUr.;; is coor.plled shall be reta1-"",, by tn.
OWner 1'01" a peria! C!! four yea rs fr<lm tbe da tE! of the Hns 1 hill and ,,12 1 be
available tor verUicat1cn by St3te em Fedel"al au:Utors.
All cbl~tion5 of StBtE-..... ..-,jer t.~ terms of this Agreement a .. e EUbject to the
appropr:!;ltiCfl ct f'Url:is by th2 StatE Legislature ar:d 'th3' allocatiCf! of t:1cse
!'...:.n:!s by 'til; California. ~pcrtat1CR Ca:iUiss1on ..
All costs eccrued 'by OWner as a result of StatE·s request of A'l.looust 6, 1991 to
reviev, stu:ly ern/or prepe:re relocatioo plans an::! est1Jte1;es for-'ttli2' project
associatsl ,,1 til t.'lis AgreeInelt may be billed pur'U.,ot to the rems ard
oon::ii t1r;;ns o:f thi6 Agreemen: t.
If state's project \I't1.ich precipitated this Ageement Is canc~led. or"" roo::!,i.fleC: so
as to elimi."'l8te the necess.!ty o!" 'WOrk by Oo.ner, State ... 111 notJ.!y Owner in
\liT'i t.1ng ~ Sta:t:e Nlser-ves tn:-right tv terminate this Agreement by Afie'Xjl1'.er.t.
TiE J.men1ment sl'i:lll pl'O\"ide mutu911y acceptable 'tPrms a:rd CQ1di tia1S for
term.!na tdng tie Agreement.
o..tner anall sutrnit a Notice of Co::lpletioo to ~ State's District Utili rJ
Coord.inEtor vit.hirl 30 days o.f tl'e COGTpletioo of the :.tOrr: described l"'erein. ..
It is \..lrlderstoo:! that said hi.gIT..taY is 2 feder-.al J..iCi r.igi1'l.-ay arC accordirl.;lYt
procec:!urea in 23 CFF. 045 are her~by ir;ccrpcr-d~-c ir.to this Ag~t ..
RIW ~S-2
2 of 3
THE I:5TI\t .... TED COST TO ~l ... Tr: FOR ITS SH, ... RF Of
THE' ABOVE Df5CRJBED WORK IS • , . 61 23> OJ
I'" • SOIR:E 0tG [JPD[lITIJR[ 5.'"£CIAL ,-= 0 DISJ ~IT SI.6>C"
"" • 0,. AI,IfHORlZATtCl C(::s.I~T'()tIj
('II rl':I 0 , • 1.82. .
ITE-"-I j CiHI'T ER ~, ~ n.'~ I fJSC .... L 'B~
2660-301 ~[. 118 1991 1991/92
<!XO-3C1 .
I ht'fe~ cerh~ upon mtJ OW'l'lt~TStma1 knou..'lt'dgr iM.J
lx.dSl'ud fun saTe Dooilab!e or tht' p!'"fuxf a.nd pu .. posrr oj Ihr
~ EpN!dltl~re slaled ab?-.Jt'
SIGNA Tl'RE IDm Q.1,... [.-/~ (-2"1-92
sr .... TE OF CAUFORNIA
DEP .... RTMENT OF TRANSPOPiTATIU:\
Date
Supervising R/W Agent
District Utility Coordinator
ST .... TE'S COPY
-C.>IUI. DOC. JiKl.
AG£HC
-'MO\N1
""0 . .23 -. ,
R 'W Fur--ru E,I,. 132459 I 61,2?'9,OJ
Consl FU!ld~ EA _______ ; _____
CIT\' Of' PAlIJ AI.ro
OW~ER
2, ___ _
rr
A ITACHME?o.T 5
STATE OF CAUFORNIA
DE .. ,.I\.,...,.!EN'Y OF TKANSPOPOTA'!1ON
NOTICE TO OWNER
Db< Roule
sn
FederalAkiNo.. ",_r.' I"'\:(Q~!)
PM EA
'"'O.C ,:
Owner·.sF1Je S.C. ';1131. 9:132.911:''3 9113L
TC)" CITY OF PALO i,:'T!J
P. O. Bo.':: 10250
Fala Alto. O. 94303
I Do'e Cil y .. 0 No
~u.5eoftheSbteHighwayCon:stroJction(ln Route 101 ... hieD incll'd'E's :ram.~ r.le'-E'.i.r;~ aild
.. '~_denifl3 cf sou.t'lbour:.d on-ram!)~ ... h~,ch ""Is.") ir;c1i-,des the ".:i.Ge~~.n~ of E?3c.
Charleston R02d b~t\.'een San Ant-.on ... o Road 2nd :abian '.ray.
w hkh affects your r oDowin& described faciJitia:
you are hetehy ordered to: relocate your facUities ,",ccorci:n~ tD ;'OUI"" ?la~ No. 5.0.
91)31, 9U32, 91133, 91134 dateG November lE. 1991. atr.cched hereto 2nd
made a uart ~ereof.
N,')Iify J<:".i Chetal TeL # (t.03) 277-14.!.!f
~"iOf 10 initial start or work. .. nd addiUonal ___ ~ __________ _
substoquenl stUb when ,."or" schedule a Inlerrupted.
Liab,lihds lOC:t State dnce t;1e existing facilitlt's are lo<:ated iTl th~ir present
position oursuant to ri2hts prior a~G supe~ior to ~hose of the Stare.
rn IS NOTICE 00£5 NOT CONSTTntrE Ar. PEIlMlT.
O!T1r.IN ~CROA.C.HMLNT rEuur lEFOR.[ Sf ,urn~'G
WOIIK.
PP,EST01~ II'. KELLE)
~
.E~};~_~, ~
"""""UttIrr,~_
---•
Rout!" pM E.
STATE OF CALlFOR:-..:lll. f-1Ti-i;~';'--I 101 , 4D.O/ 132':'39 I Oe"putment Coli TramprJrtilJion <? "
f ed~ral ... id No ~'nel'; Fill!'
F-?101 (651) i ;;:;~G .. --';;;51, :~;3<, c." ~ or, ,~ 11. .+
UTILITY AGREEME.'T 1'0. C~-Ut. 948.3 DATE __ _
It i.<; hereby mu.uall), agrH'd that
WORK TO BE OOr>..:E
In s-cccrdance 'Wltn NC'tlee No. 9"'B .. , da'ted January 1~, 1992, O .... :"let'
s~ll relocate exlsti!'1~ .tee fac1iit1es~ /,11 .... ot"k shall b....?
per!or~ed 5uostsnt1ally in ~ccordance ~1tn Oyoer's Plan
Nos. S .. C. 911,31, 91132, 9113). 91134. d2:t-ed l':o\,C'r.loer' 18, 19:-'1
CortE1sting or. four' sheets. 'Cople~ o! 'IIhlcb are or, f1le in th?
District cffi,ce of t:h~ Department of 'i'rar.spol"t-etlo!'1 at ;.0 VFir: [leE-50
Avem':C'i San f['sncl-5cc, CA 94102 .. Hi!lOr dt'viat:lor.s iroQ tho:!
above-de5erlbe~ work ~ay be ~ade and inCidental ~ork performed by
the OYner ~hen mutually acceptable to heth ~artles and upon
approvel by the State.
Ii. LIABI~ITY !v~ ~ORK
EXletlng racil1tle~ cr~ located in their present poaitlon purEu~~t
to rieilt5 prior end superio~ to th~se of the-S't6te and ... 111 be
reloci:I ted at Sta te expense.
III. PERFORio1AIiCE OF ~ORY.
Owner &r.reeG t:o peC"ior'"m the nereln-dE'3cr-ibed ... ·ork ..... 1 th 1 te.. ovn
£orces and to provide and furnish all lj~CeBSar1 l&bor. caterials,
tools and equipment required t.rlereio!"'e. enc to prOfieCtlte Ba!d 'do:-k
dl11eently to co~~let1on.
f ~.
! : • -J
I
i
I .. --~
.-
'-
r'l.
'lhl-S~'t:u 3i-:e11 r.e)' its ernre e~ ttl;! actual COi'3t or :!:;Sid relocll'tlc.:H ... 1t.."'.!n YJ
daye al:ter rece1pt of 2.."'1 1tem1z.~ biU 1n qu1..,tupl1~te, elsne-j by Li N'f'pcr.slblo:!
o.!'.t1c1al oL CAmer'e c~.t-a'jl~t.1onf ca;r,,;l1cd Q1 t.~ 001016 of t.!~ Dctual co.:::t 5.~:
e-xpen.5e. 'itxJ ~r cll:lll rn.1nt2in recot'ds ct t.~ ect:u&l cc~ ta i.r;curr'f"j E;rd
c.'"er.t:ed or-alloc.&ted trl tt.e project 1n accorCE:nce "With rec~.':nl~ accolll"'.tln;'.
pr'1r1.clple.s.
It 1.5 ~er6tocd a.'"d CI;.!rEe:i th3.t tre S'b!!te ~1l1 not pay [or a.-:y rot!:!:,C'a:en~ or
increase 1..., ce~c1ty of Owner's facUttles a....:j that 0I.rrer s~l1 c:;1 .... e c:-ed1t te.
the 8't:Ete tor .all eccrued dept'ec1at1cr. on the-replaced !~cl1! tie! sn:j (.or ti);;
.r;elv~ value of any to<ltet'1al .0[" parts C21vtlr;ed. aro retr:.1nfoj or solj l;y Q-..ner.
At the tl'lecl1on or tt:e Qo.Irer, pr-oarcu b1lls. fO!' ~su; lnccr-rt'd r::e.y t't:" su~1 tt...'>d
not ~ c,Xcee:! Ownet"e recordej coets as ot e 5}:"C'Cl.!1C date l(>~ esti't""nWd
Cl't'd.1 til appl1c.&ble to CCi:lple"tEo:! VOl':': ",!:'ere the n=corje.j C05t.ll ere-$l1fr!c1e-nt to
warrent such b11lln,;. 'lh1 final b11lln£ sl"all t:e 1n t)", !cco of en !1E'<11, .• ,;
5'td tE'iliIB1t at n to1ilil costa. cn9Tet"d to 'ttl@' pt'C'jto-ct, li."':3s t.l;e cre-Ji t.s proy 1d~
fO(' 1n the acr~nt., ~n:::I le," any 81""..ounU. ocver-ro ~' pror,ress b1U1n.~s.
DetaUed re(,;croE in=:;J \I[".1d: tr~ !Jll11r .. :; 1s cc..q:.Ued erilll toe reta1r·f.>1 by tr.e
Owner .fer e per!td cf r:-,wo Ye6l""S !"Oill tl~ -d~te of the fl1\l:il bill oro \0111 t...e
sV811ablo for Yec.1.!1ctltJoo. by StB~ aM Fed.ere:l at.Liltcr..>.
V. C<l1ERAL OONDIIlmS
AU ocU~tiCl'1S ot Stater t:d&r-"ttle-'barr..s of this I.i',ree!"!'-er.t A.re sUbJect to tile
eppropr1.et1on or !'l.nis by ttlE' Sta~ U:-.sl.e.leture &..'"')1 t.~ ellClCS tic.r. c': ti:cSt.'
iund3 t(V tt:e California l'rone.-"OI"faUCtl Ccxi:Dlasion.
All co.st.e accrued by C\mer as a l"'Cwlt of Stn~te f"CGue:.J"t o! 1.\4.j:ust 6, 1?]1 to
Ny!ev, etujy erd/or pre~'l:JN-ralOOltioo rla.ns and eotilEte,s .fer 't.i-Je project.
83QOC1ate::: with this ~rt'<P-,,-ent cay bg billed pur-81.m".t tc ttf' ~rcl'l ~
-con::11 Urns o! ttlls Agr~tl
If Sts'b:!fs t-,roject. wl1.!cr. pr-ec1pltat:2l..1 Wa Ae,reement 1s ('.LIIn::t!le-.j or-mo:::111o~ 50
es 'to el1mlro.te t:tr n~,s..sJ.ty or IifOrk by ~r, State ""ill r.ot1fY Owner" in
'Wr1t111J a,nj State r-eserves ~ rIGht to tl.!!rm1r.etc 'thl~ A,",recIDeOt by A:::.:e:"l..!lr.ent.
~ A.~t :;h!lll pr-c,vlde t'l'IJtl.lally ecC€>ptable tenr.s aoo CCOJ 1 t1~5 for
w.rm.1na t.1ni: tilE' '.ereet:en"t.
CMncr 6I:hll eubnit a ~Jot1ce of CO!:plt'tlor. to the Et;!~'E Dif.tr1ct Utility
Coc-rd.inator .,,1thJn ;0 days o! tl'IC cer:.:l.!letiQ:"1 of 1...-.; 'll'crk c-e.scri"tot:..oa rerel~.
It is ~er-6tood tT,et uld hlE;~Y 1~ ~ Fe--Jl.'rol Al,j t-,l[~~"S)" m)J Dccc.rdiI,t.:1YI
proced~s in 23 Crn 045 eN t~C'"~by lr:ccr;:x:rated !nto t..'-:!e ArrQ(....,."""'fl~.
•
ox
o
---_ ............. .....,.-----_._---.
THE B'TI\1:I.TED COST TO ST..t, n: FOR !TS SH,'I,f~E. OF
THE ABOVE DESCfUBEO WORi.: [S J 5,2l6..!..~
.SOURCE CHG £XP'D" i 1UiiL SP£CI At.
~IT DiS ~TJotORIZAr:
UH E
118
~i ... Tt:S
1991
","Je,.
FL"CAL n ...... I 1991/92
~~ ___ L. __ .L-_
i flNefr.; cnlif~ IlPOr. my QU:l'I J'f'rsorll:.l /molL'ledge that
budget~d jundJ arl'" ClI.'I()liClbJ~ J~ ihc pt:n'aa IlTld ptlrpo$r: of the
r"xpt'ndji u rt' jtaied abotR
~ D,..TE
[/-29-92
04-Dt.
ti::I!' ..... 'l' .. 'm'·,jl'''~
CIIAA. 00<. !<c. UAn'l'l83
OB,. ..
II \1,.'Fund,EA_1324-2? ____ 1 5,276.00
CAlmt Fund.· F,.... $ ____ _
1~ WITNES.S WHEREOF, the ibo,,11' p'Hlif"S have f'lecutif'<! this a.grf"l"ment th!:' d:.l~ .and y ...... r fir~ aoo\(" ... nUrll
STATE OF CAUFOR!\'IA
DEPARTME!'<rOT OF TR""~SPORTATiV."
R.~_~~ . Deputy District Director
Approvo:.;1 Recommended
Supervising R/W !lgent---
-DJ.strict Udlity Coordinator
~,""'" Oe-2
:\ "r::1
o;te---------
ST.-\TE S copy
CITY OF' PA!.O ALlD
OW!\ER
::-s-
, '. ~~" ,-
ii Ii
f. I
'c -
-----------~---~---~--
.--...
I
---------~-
March 20, 1992
HONORABLE PLANNING COMMISSION
Palo Alto, California
A 'IT ACHl\fENT (i
V, S I ROUTE 101 RA.loJP l1ETERING ........... t!ER....QN-RbMP AT SAN ANIONIO RQAtLArill
P.EtATED CHANGES TQ CHARLESTON RO;D/SAN NfIONIO RCbD INTERSECTION
Members of the commission:
ProRT Ilil BRIE,
The purpose of this rEport is to provide info~ation regarding a
proposed Cal trans projec~ tc make certain operational improvements
along u.s. Route 101 (San Mateo county line to Route 980). The
proposed changes ir. Palo Alto, as illUstrated in Figure 1, include
the follo~ing items:
Part A
construction of ~ new southbound entrance ramp to Route 101
from S~n Antonio Road, in conjunction with:
• the concurrent
Charleston Road
intercha:1ge,
closure of an existing southbound
entrance ramp at the Renqstorff Avenue
• the installation of a traffic signal at the new
intersection ~f the new freeway entrance ramp and San
Antvnio Rcad~ and
• the miner ~idening of Charlesto~ Road to provide two
southbound left-t~rn lanes onto San Antonio Road.
Part B
Installation of ramp metering (including He.,,' preference at SOlCe
locationsj on southb-oun:l entranGe ramps to Rout,s 101 at:
• Embarcadero Road l
• Oregon Express'Way, and
• San Antonio Road (ne~ entrance ramp)
Cal trans prepared an Environmental Assessment with a Negative
Declaration for the project, and it was approved in November 1982~
The proposed Widening of Charleston Road, in conjunction with the
Ramp Metering project 3/20/92
Page 1
'" ,
I
I
"
INSTALL RAMP METER
INSTALL RAMP METERS
& HOV BYPASS LANES
CHARLESTON ROAD ............
INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS ______ ,
\
REi'lGSTORFf A\IU~:JE
/
OLD MIDDlEFlEL[, ',NAY
FIGURE 1
--,-----
NEW ON-RAMP
WITH HOV BYPASS
& RAMP METERS
CLOSE EXISTING
ON-RAMP
•
~>,
IWSI
-
closur~ of the existing Charleston Road entr-ance ram~ and the
provision of a new sc~thbound entran~e ramp from S~n Antonio Road,
was also included in the .<;!:nvironrnental analysis for the Citywide
Land Use and Transportation Study (87-EIA-50J, as well as in the
San An~onio/West Bayshore Area CS/GM Zone Study (85-EIA-7).
staff ~ecommends that the Planning Commission find that the project
is consistent \lith the Comprehensive Plan and that the Negative
Oeclarati.on approved :by Cal trans is adequate, and recommend
approval of the project to the City Cou~cil.
Statf also recommends that the Planning commission ~nQer6COre the
importa.nce of a commitment by Cal trans to (a) on-g':Jing mor.itoring
of the operations, (b) a thorouqh operational evaluation, inclusive
of before and after conditions, and 'c) remedial actions/projects
to address any adverse impacts on local city streets.
DCI.GJt<)mtD
Prior Caltrans Proposal/prpjects
.!n the late 1970s and early 1980s, Caltl'ans developed a proposed
set of operational improvements referrt;!d to as thp-"Congestion
Relief Project-on southl:::!ound U.S. RC'lutE: 10L 'I'he proposed
improvements were to include~ (a) closing the existing southbound
Charleston Road entrance ramp an~ replacing it with a new entrance
ramp at San Antonio Road~ (~) constructing an ~uxiliary lane in the
southbound direction, at selective locations along Route 101, and
(c) adding ramp metering to sou~~unj entrance ramps along
Route 101.
On November 18, 1981, the Planninq Commission held a public hearinq
tOo discuss that project. The Planning Commission comments were
subsequently reviewed a~d endorse~ by the City council and
transmitted to Cal trans in a O~c~mber 8, 1981 letter fro~ MayoL
Henderson (Attachment A).
Due to a number of factors (includinq in~dequate financial
resources to i~plement the project, concerns expressed by affected
cO:illZlUnities, and the prospect of a leg:al challenge), Caltrans
suspended further work. The passage of Measure A in Santa Clara
county (1984) temporarily reairected attention towa.rd the widening
of Route 101 (as provided for by Measure A), and away from the
operational improvements included in the Congestion Relief Project.
In aQcUtion to the completion of the Measure A project, which
provided an additional lane (HOV lane) in each directior. alonq
RO'lJte .101, modificaticns to t.he Renqstorff Avenue interchange were
also comple't.ed.
Ramp Metering project
!L
3/20/92
Page 2
..
-'
'C.::'-;:"""'
~::-:<.;>
The current
improvsJIlents
Project.
proposed proj ect is. in esser-Ice, the operational
previously included in the earlier Ccngestion Helie!
current Caltran~ Project
In July 1989 Cal trans completed an in-ho~s~ report entitled
"Ope-rational Analj'sis of Propos oed Auxiliary Lanes and Ramp
Meter-ing". The report conC":l'.lded that the original P!'"Clj ect is still
worthy cf imple~entation subject to certain modifications, such as
the inclusion of HOV preferer.ce and reduced use of at::xiliary la.nes.
Following a review of the Cal trans operational analysis report I
city staff submitted a series of questions and cotmnents to
Cal trans, in an effort to develop a better understanding of the
scope and intent of the current project, anc to differentiate it
from the earlier proposal. M~ny of the questions reflected issues
raised by the Planning Commission a1"'.d City Council during the
review of tht:1; earlier project, as communicated in Marcr Henderson's
letter to Caltrans.
The questions and Caltran~t responses are included as Attachment B.
A copy of the July 1989 Cal trans operational analysis report is
included as Attachment C.
PtlBJlQSE OJ' PRO POSED PRQJE er
Purpose of New San Antor-io Road Entrance Ramp (Part A)
The purpose of closing the eXisting southbound Charleston Road
entrance ramp ana replacing it 'With a new entrance ramp at San
Antonio Road is to ~eQuce the repetitive delays and conflicts at
the Renqstorff inter~hanqe. The congestion at this location is
ca.used by vehicles er;t.ering Route 101 trot'! Charleston Road and
exiting Route 101 to Renqstorff Avenue, compounded by the close
proximity of another entrance ramp from Rengstorff Avenue ~nd the
relatively high volumes of traffic maJdng these: ltl~neuvers. Closure
of the Charleston Road entrance ramp ~ill significantly ~educe the
weavinq maneuvers and conflicts that presently occur at this
location; thereby improving traffic tlow-tor t."te through travel
lanes, as well as the entrance and exit ramps of Route 101. The
proposed new southbound entr-ance ramp at San Antonio Road will
serve much the same traffic as the existing Charleston Road
entrance ramp, without many of the: operational shortcomings and
negative impacts.
purpose of Ramp M2tering (Part s)
When the traffic volume on a freeway is low to moderate j the
intrusion of traffic f~om freeway ramps has little or no adverse
Ramp Metering project 3/20/92
Page .3
... -...... ". "".,~,,,!,.---,.,~., .. , ~ ,. L
-
'"
»:i~~~T-
~~Jt~« ".-.
':;'";-:~~~~".-~
-'O:",-r -;"-~,-:; :'-'..;.
~;~!~JiJ,,:, "
--.~.
';in $ £
-
impact on the overall tlow of traffic. However, during the pe~iods
of peak traffic flow, as the traffic 'Vol'..ll!le on freeways approaches
the capacity of the ~oadway, the iMtrusion of traffic entering from
freeway ramps becomes increasingly noticeable. As th~ volume of
enterinq traffic increases. the eff~ct on free .. -ay traffic flow
~c!Jm~s increasingly pronounced to a point where entering tra.ffic
can, and after. does, cause freeway traffic flo,-, to deteriorate to
a stop and go condition; thereby reducing the actual volume of
traffic that the freeway can serve to a level well below its
potential capacity.
The primary purpose of ramp metering is to regulate the flov of
ra~p traffic entering the freeway traffic strea~, during the period
of peak traffic flow, so that it has a minimal effect on the
ability of the freeway to operate at its full capacity. "By
converting platoons of traffic ir.to individual units, the merging
process can be accomplished more efficiently ~ith less dis~~ption
to traffic flo .. en the free ...... ay; thereby preserving the full
capacity of the free .... a)· al"ld reducil".q accidents and delay normally
encountered in congested stop and go condi~ions.
Actual e~erience with ramp ~etering in Denver has resulted in a 10
to 15 percent increase in the volume-carryinq capability of the
freeway. In Minneapolis. ramp lI'lete-ring has resulted in a 26
percent reduction in travel time and a 38 percent reduction in the
accident rate.
Part A of the. proposed proje.ct. provio.-es for the construction of a
new southbound entrance ramp £rom San Antonio Road, in conjunction
with the concurr~nt closure of the existing southbound Charleston
Road. entxance ramp at the Fengstorff Avenue interchange. Other
rel~ted changes include installation of a ne~ traffic si~nal on San
Antonio Road and miner modifi~a~ions to Charleston Road~
New Entrance Reap at San Ant':onio Rgad
The propcsed project is to proviae a new southbound entrance ramp,
from San Antonio Avenue to Route 101, at the existing San Antonio
interchange. Figure 2 provides an illustration of the location and
qeneral characteristics of ~~e ~ew entrance ramp~ The entire ramp
can be constructed within the existing state owned right-of-way.
With the additicn ef the neW' ramp and the consequent re-orientation
of traffic in the area, San Antonio Road vill be modified to
provide! (al two full lanes in the eastbound direction from
charleston Road to the entry point for the ne~ ramp (currently, two
lanes trane.itiol'l to a single lane through this same area), and
'b) an additional, single left-turn lane: ir:. the "Westbound direction
at the entry point for the new ramp.
Ramp Metering Project 3/20/92
Page -4
------____ ~~-~ __ ·~· ______ a=~._ .. _------
•
, I
i ..
FIGURE 2
Pf
Installation of a Ne ... Traft~c Signal
The propoged project alsc inc:! udes the installation of a nelol'
traftic signal at the location where the ne ...... freeway entrance ramp
conn~cts to San Antonio Road, as illustrated in Figure 2. The
purpose of th~ new traffic signal is to stop traifi c cn San Antenio
to provide an opportunity for traffic, waiting on San Antonio Road
to makE'! a left turn to safely access the ne ... entrance ramp. This
.... ould be a simple tb"o-phase signal providing grE'.en time for left
turnin9 vehicles. Traffic eoIting from the freeway ove!""pass and
traffic leavinq Route 101 and headed in the direction of
Charleston, would nut be required to stop at the nelol' traffic signal
under any situation~ It is anticipated that this neW" traffic
signal will :be operai:.ed and m.aintained by Cal trans, and not the
City ot Palo Alto.
As a separate but related matter, Caltrans is currently st~dying ~
proposal to install another r,e~ traffic signal at the terminus of
the existing northbound exit ramp at San Antonio, on the othe~ side
of the freeway overpass. Wnile the operation of a new traffic
signal at this second location is complicated by the proximity of
an existing traffic signal at the intnrsection of East sayshore
Road and San Antonio, it is likely that a new signal will
eventually be i~stal1ed at this lc~ation.
Modifications to Charl~ston Road
In ~ddition to the closure of the existing Charleston Road entrar.ce
ramp to Route 101 at the Re.nqstorff Avenue interchange ,the
existing connection from Charleston Road to Rengstorff Avenue at
Leghorn street will not change), the proposed project includes the
provision of a second left-turn lane on the southbound C~arleston
Road approach to San Ar.tonio Road. Figures 3 and 4 illus~~ate a
plan view and cross section for the proposed changes to the
Charleston Road approach, at its intersection loiith San An.tenio
Read.
In orde.r to gain SUfficient roadway wi·::..th to provide the second
left-turn lane, the existing surface OI Charleston Road must be
widened by six feet for a distance of approximately 350 linear
feet~ To achieve this additional six feet of roadway loI'idth, the
planting strip on the east side is to be reduced by four feet ,from
7.5 feet to 3.5 feet) and the one on the west side will be reduced
by two feet (from 7 .. 5 feet to 5.5 feet). Other related chanqes
include:
• Relocation of above and below ground utilities,
• Mcdifications to existing traffic signal installation to
accommoda~e two lanes of lett-turning vehicles,
Ramp Metering project 3/20/92
Page 5
.}-.'g,.-r
'tJ
--... , ...... .
~-
----.... ~-~
TREES TO BE
A 'I:: tIoOV ED
NEW HI GALLON TAE E".e
TO ElE UIis-TA.!..LfC IN
B~CK 0' SIDE~~K
N ....
G~-SAN ANTONIO ROAD
---------------------
!1ir---~--__ c: U,cl B ~ ov £ 0
j
BACK' FEET
-== __ WIDEN"lt: ~~gvltJf:~
... EFf·TiJ.cI ... 1. ... NE:!
I
CHAR L ESTON ROAD
FIGURE 3
~'" ~ .. ,~~~~: -;J
;;o:_.~,....)
. ,-'-,.
. -; ( r 1-'J
3 10' 3'
----,~-I iLl .;-~IO:...' _,-' __ I~'_' -t-I L"'.:.:.F....:T....:'_IO:...'-l,.1 .,:.:...,' I .J-:-\'-,~-,-... -,-
I I. N.8Ne. L. ... NES S.9NO. LANES \
5' S'WU.K S"W\lK
7 . .ei' Pi..ANTING
STRI~ 7.5" PLANTI~G
STRIP
EXISTING CROSS-SECTION
o
.' ~'S',,",l" I N .• "D
-3.5' PLA.NTlNG
STRIP
10' 10'
12' jlEFT 1lEFT i 10'
L~NES S.BNt'. LANES
la' .J\ L~s--'
s'w.. LK
IS.S' PLANTING
8TFtI P
PROPOSED CROSS-SECTION
FIGURE 4
• Removal of thre~ mature trees (lc to .l:;'-inch diameters) on
the east side of Charlest~n Road (Fig'o.lre 3),
• RelOl.ov-al of seven small treeS (2 t.o 3-inch diameters) on the
east side of Charleston Road (Figure 3),
•
•
Planting tOi.'elve ne ..... trees within the private, adjacent
landscaped area belonging to Sun Micro Syste!l'ls (Figure 3),
Removal of one mature tree (13-inch diameter) on the -rest
side of charleston Road (Figure J),
• C".lI'"b removal and replacement and replacement of four
existing driveways, and
• Re-striping of Charleston Road.
Traffic patcerns through the Charleston Road and San Antonio Road
intersection are e:xpected to change ....,i th a greater number of
vehicles traveling to th~ new on-ramp. Based on projected traffic
flows, and intersection modifications, Caltrans anticipate!=; that
the Level or service (LOS) of the intp-rsection ~il1 improve from
LOS ~D" to LOS "e Q •
General comments for Part A
utilit.y Agreements -As part of the :minor modifications to
Charleston Ro~d, there is a need for some major relocat.ion of
a number or existing above and belc~ ground utilities. As part
of this project, the Cit.y of Palo Alto will perfonu the
necessary 'W'orx to relocate electric and gas utilities, and
Cal trans will reimburse the City for all ~osts related to such
work. The estimated costs are approxima~ely $62,000 and $5,000
for electric and gas facilities t respectively. The city .jll
be :equired to sign utility agreeroents with Cal trans for this
purpose. The content of the agreements is being negotiated.
Other utility work will he done by the project contractor, to
specifica.tions approved by the City of Palo Alto.
Revised Freeway Agree~ent Calt~ans has an established
pra.ctice of executing a freeway agreement ... it1". each
jurisdiction through ....,hich its free~ays traverse. The
agreement is a general statement of intent by other parties
regarding-local streets, costs, and right-of-way as they relate
to a particular freeway, including interchanges and ramps.
ThE _JCisting freeway agreement for the portion of Route 101
'Within the City of Palo Alto "Was executed in 1959. Ir, order
for Cal trans to now proceed ~ith the propcsed new southbound
entranc& ramp from San Antonio Road to Poute 101, Cal trans is
Ramp Metering Froject 3/20/$2
Page 6
~.. 2W
, ,
•
o~~~~t7;~ .• ' .
•.. ~!";t~~·. -~~.:::~~~~> _. .
,--~-",,-", -, """----
-
requesting that the City of Palo Alto E:xecute a new freeway
llgreillDent that supersedes the existing agreement and
incorforates the inclusion of the new freeway entrence ra~p at
San Antonio Road. A copy of the proposed new freeway agreement
is included as Attachcent p.
Charl¢,ston Road Right-Turn Lane -The traffic anal}'sis for the
San Antonio/West Bayshere Area CS/GK Zone Study Environmental
Ir:pact Report, included considerati::m of t:.he addition of i!
riqht-turn lan~ ~n Charleston Road in the northbound direction.
The need for the additional ri9ht-tu~n lane was related to the
ar.ticipate-d opening of a new Sari Antonio tree'.ay entrance ramp I
and its related re-orientation of traffic at th~ Charleston/San
Ant.onio inte.r9~ction. P~ight-of-iiay required for this
improvement, however, vould require demo) itioh of existing
structures or lrI'aitinq for r-edevelcpment. Since much of the
traffic that would use this right-turn Jane ~ill also have the
option ot proceeding south on Charleston Road and using the
freeway e.ntrance ramp at the Rengstor-ff Avenue interchange,
staff believes it is best to .. ait and see hoW' tr-affic re
orientation actually occurs before any definitive actions are
taken regarding right-ot-way acquisition that involves
demolition of exis~ing structures 4
prainage Problem along San Antonjo Road -A read,.tay surface
drainage probleDl along-San Antonio Road:, in the vicinity of th~
driveway entry to the Sun Micro Systems (formerly Fcrd) site,
is being addressed by alterations in grading and extension of
drainage pipes as part of this project.
noNIEP PlPROVEIIIHTS: PUT II -RAXP )(ETEUXa.
Part B of the proposed project provides for the implementation of
Lamp netering en the southbound entrance ramps to Route 101 from
the San Mateo Co':,mty line. to Rout.e 680. Within Palo Alto, raDp
metering ~ould be installed on southbcu~d freeway entrance ramps at
Embarcadero Road, Oregon Expressway, and: San Aa"'1tonio Road (proposed
new entrance ramp). As part of the installation of ranp metering,
consideration is also given for special provisions tor High
Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) pr~ference.
Embarcadero Road (Ea$tboYnd) -Royte 101 (Southbound) Ramp Me~
The proposed project would install ramp metering on the southbound
entrance ramp to the freeway f from eastbound Embarcadero Road).
The ramp is approximately 1,100 feet in length and includes a
narrow overpass structure that separates it from an existing Route
101 exit ralDp.
Ra~p Ketering Project 3/20/92
Page 7
'.
-
WI 15£
. -ii),;;;
"t,
---
'!'he proposed. change llt this location is lirnitoE:d solely to the
installation of a ramp mo-te.r. consi~eration was qiven for HOV
preferencE but vas found to Dt! impractical, c.ue tc the narro~ ...
overoass str-...lcture. Cal trans has indicated that the es"timated
additional cost of $660,OOC, to provide 6uffi=i~nt ra~p vidth in
order to incorpor3te HOV preference on this particular ramp, is not
warranted by the volume of traffic and is not loti thir:; the financial
l~mits of this current p~oject.
Int'or1!lation prepared by Caltr:,.ns (Attaclunent B/ page 12) indicates
that the anti~ip."ted l!!aximum number of vehicles in the queue for
this single, mixed-flow (single occupancy an·oj, high occupancy
vehicles) lane will be 20, ~hereas the storage area on the ramp is
sUfficient for 40 vehicles.
"Embarcadero Boad (Westbound) -R_oute 101 (Southbound) Ramp Hete:ring
Traffic on this ramp (from westbound Embarcadero Road) first merges
with traffic exiting Route ~01 and then diverges a.t an existing
ramp to oreqon Expressway. The proposed proje~t 'Would install ramp
-metering on the southbound entrance ramp to the freeway (from
'Westbound Embarcadero Road) et a location after the point wher-e
traffic diverges fro~ the ramp to oregon E~~ressway (see Figure 1) •
The proposed change at this location includes installation of ramp
meterinq as well as HOV preference. Provision of the HOV
preference requires additional roadway width, with up to 20 feet of
addi tional width proposed on the east side of the ramp, for a
distance of approximately 400 feet.
Information prepared by Caltrans {Attachment B, page 12} indica~es
that the anticipated maximum number of vehicles in the queue will
:be lOt and storage area on the ramp (300 feet), Excluding the HOV
lane, is adequate to aCGoQmodate 10 vehicles.
oregon ExpressW'ay (Eastbound) -Route. 101 (Southboung> Ramp Mete .... iJ"!g
Th& proposed project would install ramp metering on the southbound
entrance ramp to the freeway (from eastbound Oregon Expressway}.
The proposed change at this location includes installation of ramp
:metering as 'Well as ROV preference. Prevision of the HOV
preference requires additional roadway "lI'idth, with up to 20 feet of
additional width proposed on the south side of the e~istinq ramp,
for a distance of approximately 1100 teet.
Information prepared by Cal trans {Attachment B, page 13} indicates
that the anticipated maximum number of vehicles in the queue will
be 20 and there is more than adequate storage area (1,000 feet) on
the ramp to accommodate this nu~er of vehicles.
Traffic from this ramp and the two entrance ramps from Embarcadero
Road must ms:rge into a single, southbou!1d acceleration lane.
Ramp Metering Project 3/20/92
Page a
.. -... ,,::->c;~~;&:. ~'--~
.. ',-. ,~ :'~~:!~7:~~-~ -
','"".~. '--.:';
~',-.!.
•• :..._"-__ ,C
...
-
Therefore, metering for each of the three ramps ~il1 need to be
coordinated to ensure tl1at the rate at which traffic enters the
freeway from the .acceleration lame is properly regulate.:!.
San Antonio Boa:::! -Route lOL (Southbound) F~ Metering
The proposed project would install ra~p metering on the proposed
new southbound entrance ramp from San Antonio Road to the fre~way
(southbound). Caltrans ' proposal at this location is to have two
lanes of ra:np metering without provisj on for HOV preference.
Caltrans believes that a single lane would be ina.dequate to handle
the volume of single occupant vehicles. therefore I the secona lane
is needed as ~ell. City staff has requested that Caltrans consider
in! tially designating one of the l"mes for HOV preference on a
tr-ial basis. If actual queuing of single occupant vehicles is
shown to be excessive, then other options (including the
designation of both 13nes for single occupant vehiclesj could be
pursued. Cal trans has indicated that it is 'Willing to initially
designate one of the lanes .for HOV prefer-ence, even though it
believes this will not work well. If the HOV preference does not
work well, Cal trans will then remove it.
General Comments For PAR~
Caltrans$ in its response to comments (A~tachment B), has stated
that queuinq is expected to be contained within the ramp itself and
if it is determined that any surface street operations have been
advogrsely impacted after the project is implemented, measures,
includinq future projects will be initiated to mitigate those
impacts. Furthermore $ Cal trans states that it intends to conduct
an operationel evaluation o.f the projects effectiveness, 'Which will
inelu~e before and after conditions on the freeway, ramps, local
streets, and intersections4
Cit.y staff believes that such an evaluat.ion is essential to a
rational understanding and development of s""pport for ramp
metering4 If done in a thorough, shared and objective manner, the
information would be invaluable for separating facts from
perceptions and for addressinq any real problems that might
materialize.
COXPRB'INSryz PLAN COMPLIAticz
The proposed project is consistent ~ith Transportation Program 17
" ••• malce operational intersection improvements to ease tr-affic .:'low
on major streets·$ and Progra~ 18 w ••• make effective use of traffic
carrjinq ability of Palo Alto's network of major streets".
Ramp Metering Project
'L-·'.· "
'/20/92
Page 9
.
-
The project, as it pertains to San Antonio and Charleston Roads is
also consistent \lith the recommendations inclUded in. tl'~e Citywide
Land Use and Transportation Study, the San Antonio/West Bayshore
Area CS/GH Zone Study, a!"ld the original Cal trans Congestion Relief
project.
P'fII\OlDllPlTAL AS SEB BKEN"r
An Environmental Assessmer.t/lnitial Study with a Neg2l.tive
Declaration 'Was prepared by the california Department of
Transportation, as lead agency, for the project anct was approved by
tl:ae U.S Department: of Transportation, Fed~.ral Highway Adminis
tration (FHA) in November 19B2. ]I.. copy cf the Negative Declaration
and FHA Finding of No Significant Impact are included as
Attachments E and F4
The proposed wideninq of Charleston Road, in conjunction with the
closure of the existing Charleston Road entrance ramp and the
prOVision of a new southbound entranC9 ramp [rom San Antonio Road,
was also included in the envir-orunenta:l analysis (Att.achments G
and H) for the CitY"lide Land Use and Transportation Study
(87-EIA-SO) and the San Antonio/West Bayshor-e Ai."ea CS/GH Zone. Study
(85-EIA-7) •
CQHCLUBIOli
Staff believes that the proposal to replace the existing CharI eston
Road ramp with A new ramp at San Antonio Road (along with minor
widening of Charleston Road to provi~e two left turn lanes) and the
addition of ramp I:letering 'With HOV preference, where practical,
will contribute to improved traffic flow on Route ~Ol ~ithout any
significant adverse impact on other streets. Experience elsewhere
indioates that the free~ay will be able to serve a higher volu~e of
tra£fic ~ith improved trav~! speed, saoother traffic flo~, fewer
and less severe acci~ent&, and reduced congestion attributable to
disruptions from platoons of traffic entering from freeway ramps,
accidents, and other incidents~
Furthermore, the proposed project is consistent with efforts to
maintain and improve traffic conditions in major travel corridors
and ·on regional roadway facilities. These are important
considerations in vie~ of efforts to improve ~ir quality and meet
th~ objectives and requirements of the Congestion Mar.agement
Program for Santa Clara county.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the project
is consistent \lith th~ Comprehensive Plan and that the Negative
Rarop Metering Froject
L
3/20/92
Page. 10
Declaration prgpared by Caltr~ns is a~equate, and recommend
approval of the project to the city council.. The project being
defined as f¢11ows:
Part A
construction of a new southbound ej1trance ra!llp from San Antonio
Road in conju:nction .. "ith:
•
•
the concurrent
Charleston Road
interchange,
closure or an existing sou~hbound
entrance ramp at the Rengstorff Avenue
the installation of a new traffic signal at the ne .....
intersection of the new freeway entrance ramp with San
Antonio Road, and
• the minor widening of Charleston Road to provide two
southbound left-turn lanes onto San Antonio Road ..
Part B
Installation of ramp metering on southbound entrance ramps to
Route 101 at:
• Emba rcadero Road,
• Oregon Expcess~ay. and
• San Antonio Road (new entrance r4mp)
Staff also recommends that the Planning Commission underscore the
importance of a commitment by Caltrans to Ca) on-going monitorinq
of operations, (b) a thorough oper&tional eva~uation, inclusive of
be_tore and after conc!itions, and 'c) remedial actions/proj acts to
address any adverse impacts on local city streets.
~p Metering Project 3/20/92
page 11
r'.'
d
_.'1
Respectfully Eubmitted,
~~ ,..j/ , / c,?? /~;' '/
!LO:i:,:'lj, /\' -Jel" i£a~y
MARVIN L. QVERWAY KE}"NETH R. S CHR£I BER
Chief Transportation Official Oirector of Planning
Attach:nents:
and Corut",unity Enviroruo.ent
A. Letter from Hayer H~nderson
(Oece~er S~ 1981)
B. Caltrans' response tv city staff comments
(May 21, 1991)
C. operational Analysis of Proposed Auxiliary
Lanes' Ramp Metering (July 28, 1989)
D. Freeway Agreement between Cal trans and
City of palo Alto
E. Excerpt from Negative Declaration
(September 3, 1982)
F. Federal Highway Administ~ation Finding of
No siqnificant rmpact (November S, 1;S2)
G. Notice of Determination for Citywide LanQ Use
and Transportation Study {87-EIA-50j and the
San Antonio/West Sayshore Area CS/GM Zone
stu~y «S5-EIA-7)
cc: Patrick Pang, Caltrans
Dennis Bosler, Caltra~s
City of Menlo Park
City of East Palo Alto
City of Mountain ViE~
City of Sunnyvale
Ramp Metering Project 3/20/92
Page 12
" ,
'-
/
_Plo:~t ,"'_C_",~_~_:~v,,_~ __ ~_~ -------------:---,
ATTACHMENT A
(415) 329-2384 De,ember e. 1981
Mr _ M. E. Hard! n
Acting District Director. Di~trict 4 CalTrans
PO Box 3366~ Rincon Annex
San Francisco. CA S4119
Dear Mr. Hardin:
I am writing on behalf cf the Palo Alto City Council to convey to YOu its
action of December 7. 19SL Althoagh the tHy of Paio Alto recogniz€$ the
need to improve t~aff;c conditions on IGl t a review of the proposed project
by the Palo Alto Planning Commission indicated serious concerns abDut the
adverse impacts the project might have on Palo ATto streets. Ttle Phnnlng
Commission's comments and concerns included the f~llowing;
1. Severel street 1nters(ctions in Palo Alto are aperating It. or near.
cJpacity d~r;n9 the peak traffic periods. CalTrans s~ould can duct a
more detailed analys7s to det~rmine t~e actual adverse impacts on Palo
Alto streets.
2. The northbound traffic en Charleston. turning right tc eastbound San
Antonio. will increase as a res~'t of closu~e of the southbound on-r~~
at Charleston. Any negative impact nee\.ls to t.e 51itigated by Ca1Tralls.
3. "ne traffi:. impacts of development on West Says~ore Frontage Road in Palo
Alto must be considered by CalTrans in conte.xt with the expected tra ... ei
pattern changes that will occur in the vicinity ~f the Charieston/San
Antonia intersection.
4. A traffic signal needs to be installed to facilitate left turns frorr,
westbound San Antonio onto t~e ~ew 101 southbound on-ramp. The cost of
th'!s traff'lc signal and a provision of a left ti.!rn pod-,et must be in
tluded as part of the project budget.
--------~~------_.
Mr. M. E. M~rtin
Fag, 2
--_.---_.
5. A special condition needs to be added to tt1e required CaHrans/PaTo Alto
cooperdtive agreement to the effect that CalTr-ans agre~s t.:l set aSide
sufficient funds to implement the specified mitigation: measures ir, Palo
Alto (enough for major signalized int!rsection impro\;ements} and to
mitigate any subsequent unforeseen ad\lerse impacts on Palo Alto str2'ets.
6. The feasibility of future mitigation measures is of serious concern. If,
after completion of the project. problems are crE',ated on Palo Alto's
street system not resolvable through mitigation efforts, CalTrans needs
to agree-to remove the ramp meters and/or to re-open the prest!nt
Char1eston Road on-ramp.
we bel ifve t~at the following lrLitigatiol'1 mEas ure5i need to be made part of
the project and implemented to minimize the ad¥er5e impacts of the project on
Pa1a Alto streets and intersections:
1. Pro't'ision of two left-tul"'T1 lal'1es for southbound Charle.ston to eastbound
San Antoni o. Pres ent ly ~ on ly one 1 eft-tUrTi tra ffj c lane ex i.s ts for th ; s
movement. The two left-turn traffic hines must be provided while still
retaining the twc through traffic lanes fOi so~thbound Charle~ton.
2. Provision of two full traffic hnes for eastbound San Antorlio between
Charleston al'1d the new 101 southboiJnd on-ramp. Presently. only a rner9in~
("two traffic lanes to ~ne~) area exists in this section of San Antonio.
3. Provision of a new left-turn pocket on westbound San Antonio fDr trC!ffic
turning left at t~e new 101 s01.ithbound on-ramp at San Antonio. A I1BW
traffic signal to facilitate left-turn moverr.rer.ts a.lso may be r~uired at
this location, if CalTrans l requirements for a traffic signal
install a.tion can he m!t.
4. Execution of cocperativ! agreement between CalTral'1s and the City of
Palo Al to to assure the impleme!1tat1an of future mitigati.on measures as
needed with the following points fncl~ded:
A. CalTrans agrees to cor.duct a "before and after" project st\J~Y of the
impacts on 101 and on Palo Alte streets.
8. In addition to tne specific traffic mitigation measures described ab.)ve ,
CalTra.ns agrees to fund mitigat~on for all subsequent ad"terse impacts On
Palo A1to streets caused by the project, ;nchH~ing all necessary work in
the vidnity of the San Antonio/Charleston intersection.
C. CalTrans agrees to operate the p",ject on ci. trial basis for ill six month
period. If, after tne six month period unresolvable operational problems
persist on the Pare Alto street system. CalT~ans agrees (at its expensp.)
to abandon or remove those project facilities or any portions tnereof,
which directlY or indirectly affect the Palo Alto street system.
J'
f:
~-I ,
~ , , ' r i ~. ,
-------------------------------------:---~~~
Mr. M. E. Martin·
Page 3
D. (alirans agrees to pay for the design. construction, and any applicable
mair!tenance of the improvements to resolve t~e e;;:;sting on-street
flooding problem on San Antonic Road near the Ford Aerosp!ce entrance.
This. w~l1 be s'Ubject to ths appro,,"a1 of the City Enginef2r.
The £ity of Palo AHo will support the project :Jrovided th2 above mitigation
measures are made part of "the project. Wi th these measures, a mitigated
Negative DEclaration 'M'iTl be appropriate-rather than an en'Jircnmental impact
repDrt. Without t~e mitigation ~~asures. the Negative Declaration
recommendation in the environmental assessment ;s not appropriate.
Since!"l;!lYJ
~,~
ALAN HENDERSON
Mayor
AA:ca
cc: Adriana Giantur""Co. Director of Tra~sportation~ CalTrar15
PalD Alto City Council
Palo Alto Planning Commi5sio~
Ethlyn Hansen. Ca1Trans
Ailen Shelley. Department of Putlic Works, Mountain ~iew
.\
I
-
City COm men! A-1
ATTACHMENT B
PATRICK K PA!-IG
CAlTRANS' SENIOR TRANSPORTATION Et~GIN"ER
MAY 21,1991
RESPOf'lSES TO C!1Y STAFF COMMENTS
A GENERAL INFORMATiON
Clarify the general concept at ramp meteling. Explain its purpose, expacted time o!
operation. ,"ow they are regulated and if they genera!ly operate as isolated controls or in
conjunctiOli with other ramp meters.
CAL mANS ResD9'1se
Freeway congestion is caused when the demand for a segment exceeds its capacity to
handle traffic. This bottJenecl< segment oper-ates at capacity and relativeiy free fiow while
congegtjon occurs in the segments upstream from it as vehicles wait their tum to pass
through tf1e bottleneck. n,ese congested segments are actually operating jal below their
capacity and the Ireeway carri.,. less traffic than" is cap<lble of doing. The objective of
ramp metering is reduce congestion and the overan travel time for the tota! traffic stream -
both freeway and surface street vehicles. By regulating the rate at whlcl1 vehicles enter
the freeway to balance demand and capacity, the inherent capacity of a freeway can be
more consistently maintained, and in certain cases, the capacity may be ir.creased
stlghtly. Since a freeway with metered ramps is able to oper.t& at Of very near its
capacity. the vehicle throug1"'rpu1 IS higher wtth meterin~ than without it. ~iore vehrcres
carried 00 the freeway resurts in more room on local streets for local traffic.
In generai, ramp meters operate during peak commute periods when demand for the
freeway exceeds its capacity. For the segment of soUthbound Route 101 trffough Palo
Alto and Mountain View, we expect to opera!e the ramp meters during the afternoon
commute ~riods. All existing ramp meters in District 4 are operated in a locally
responsive mode. That is, metering rates depend on freeway mainnne condItions
measured by detectors in the vicinity of eacl1 ramp. However, we will be implementing
a c:entrartzed contr~ system that wi1! monitor ramp meter operation and have the
capability to make adjustrnents to changing traffic demands In real time. We expect to
have this system operational by Fall 1991. The ramp meiers we are proposing for
So<.Jthbound Ro~~e 101 will be part of this new system .
. '\ L ..
f~:'-;'
. ' ~~ ~ '.
-
-~.
',,,.
'~)---.' ... c. .
c~i .
-~ --. ..~ .. -----",",-,
Clarify the benef~s of ramp-metering. Nole that Figure 4· Speed Frofile Map in t~e 1989
in"hotJse OoeratiQ('lsl Analysrs of Proposed . .e.uxiliaC)' Lanes & Ramp Metering -SOUTH
.1.Q1.§.anla Clara County report illustrates te,at southbou'ld US 101 speeds of greater tnan
50 MPH are maintained ~om the north County line to south of the San Antonio Road
interchange, The resuits thereiore, do not indicate an apparent need for added con!ror
measures within the City of Palo Mo. Benefits of ramp-metering, as they pertain
specifically to the City of Palo Mo should be addressed.
gAL TRANS Response
As we explalned above, demand exceeding the capacity of a bottleneck segment results
in congestion and delay as vehicles wait to pass through the bottleneck. The primary
bottleneck for this portion of RD~e 101 is the North Shorenne Bo'Jlevard interchange
area. The demand ti'"lat tries to pass thrOLigh this bottleneck originates from all the on
ramps upstream of North Shoreline Boulevard \o'-;11ich incil.'des the on-ramps from Oregon
Expressway, Embarcadero Road, and the proposed on·ramp at San Antonio Aoad.
Ramp mete ring will reduce the congesbon and delay along southbound Route 101 for an
vehicles including thOse originating from Palo A,~o.
City Commerrt A-3
Clartfy the concept of HOV bypass lanes on entrance ramps. l!1ustratioos and references
of eJU5ling locations should be provided in this regard.
CAL TRA.'1S Response
HOV bypass lanes 00 entrance ramps anew b'..:ses and carpools to bypass the queue
at 8 ramp meter which provides them with a time-savings benefit Theoretically, the time
saving$ provided by HOV bypass lanes offer an incentive to single drivers to form new
carpools. However, in practice, there ~s no solid evfdence to i."1dicate that time savings
alone provided by an HOV bypass Jane results in the formation of new carpoofs since
there are rr~ny other factors that influence whether or not a person will form a carpool.
Some of these factors include the proximity to a convenient trip end 0.e. another
commuter or a park ana ride lot) that would be conducive to forming a carpool,
preferential parking at work, ot~e, incentives provided by the employer, and
accommodation of p€lSonai activities.
The occvpancy requirement for ramp meter HOV bypass lanes is tyJO or more persons
per vehicle. We have also started to meter the HOV bypass lanes. This is being done
primarily for two reasons. Metering !he HOV bypass lane nearty eliminates toe speed
elmerential between the HOVs and mixed-fiow vehicles dowr.otream oftha metering signal.
Thls improves the merge between the HOVs and tne mixed-flow vehicles. Metering the
HOV bypass lane atso enhances enforcement since it is eaSier to identITy "V:o\ato~s and
f~"'---
-
direct them 10 the s,'1oulder ,'/hen they are stopped al t~e signal. AJihough HOVs must
stop at the metering signal, they w\11 experi6nce only minimal dela, at L'le signal Since
they will al ..... '8ys be metered at a faster rate than the mixed-flow traffic.
TIt9re are fivs existing focations of HOV bypass lanes. These are at:
1. Morrtague Expressway loop on-ramp 10 northbcNnd RoutE 101,
2. Montague Expressway diagonal on-ramp to northbound Route 101,
3. Guadalupe Parkway on· ramp to n<'rthbound Route 101,
4. Wolfe Road on-ramp to northbound Route 280, and
5. Southbound Route 680 connector to nortobound Route 101.
City COmmenl A-4
Provide the City with maps and drawings which clearly illustrale the soope and deta~s of
the proposed work. The recently sl.!bmrtted "pre!rminarY plans of tf-Je new San Antonio
Road entrance ramp has provided us with a better undersland'ng 0' the proposed work.
Sim~ar "prenminary~ plans for each of the other intercManges, which indicate lane lines.
HOV deSignations, and specific metering locations shoufa' also be provided tor our
review,
CA L TRANS ResPQ'1se
A...0ttach9d per your request. are the preliminary pavement defineatioo plans for
Embarcadero Road and Oregon Expressway on-ramps (PO-I).
City Comment A-5
Address the issue or metering northbound ramps. Explain why ~ is not ir\ciuded in the
currerrt scope of work and if there is col1sideration for any Mure projects.
CAL TRANS Respons~
Current!y. iamp meters are operated during the morni!"lg peak period on northbound
Route 1 01 from Capitol Expresswal' to lawrence Expressway. There are no immediate
projects scheduled 'or ,amp metering along northbound RO'.J!e 101 north 0' lawrence
Expressway. Stud'es for ramp melering along this portion 0' no;thbound Aoute 1 01 are
being conduCted as part of the cveran traffic operations system (rOS) for the Bay Area
freeway network. The atlached map shows the area covered by the TOS network. The
first maior tmplementatlon of the TOS wiH be our "Corn erston e~ p!"oje ct which is schedule d
for the 94/95 fiscal year. After the "Come'"tane" project, the next major slage of the TOS
w11l be on the freeways in the Santa Clara Cou nly area.
This proposed ramp metering project was developed specifically to address congestion
along southbound Rol.1e 1 Ql. Therefore, this project did not inciude ramp metering for
t~e northbound direction.
L
-
-.
. -.-~--:<.:--.;
City Comment A:§
Address potential or ongoing ramp metering project.s within the San MatEo CGunty.
Explain __ vhat the impact (if any) of instaflJng or not instalJtng meters in San Mateo County
wil: have on the s'.Jccessfut operation of the propo$;ed project through the City of Paio
Alto.
CALTBANS Rescon ••
There are also no lmmedlate projects scheduled for ramp metering in San Mateo County.
Ramp metering '1 San Mateo County will also be studied as part of the TDS study. We
do not expect the absence of ramp meters along southbDund Route 101 in San Mateo
County to have a significant impact on the operation of the proposed metering project.
This is because the segment of southbound Route 101 between University Avenue and
Embarcadero Road currentiy operates s: capacFty and rfmrts the amount of traffic that can
reach the area we propose 1c implement metering Mth this project.
City Comm!!l!.A:1
Address agreement measures, general funding. and possjb!e "reserved" funds earmarked
specifically for City of Palo Alto mitigating measures, This issue was discussed in the
November 18,1981 Planning Commission meeting (see Attachment "6'). Also, the 1989
in·house Operational Analysis of ProDOsed Auxiliary Lanes & Ramp Metering· SQUTH
101 Santa Clara County report reflects the current Caltrens poncy stating ..
"Ramp metering will be considered 10 be 8 standard pan cI rtle /Tee~ay operation
and forma! cOOJ>erB1ive agreements will no longer IOCJtineiy be executed before
proceeding with impJementalion of ramp metering,"
Is it Caltrans inten~on to proceed withOL~ an agreement with the City of Palo A~o?
CAL TRANS Response
n is CaJtrans' intenUon tD work cooperative~i ",ith the City of PaiD Alto to identily and
address all anUcipated impacts to local street operation. k is also cur intention to work
cooperatively with the city!o address impacts to k>-..al street operation that occur after this
project is implemented. if problems occur en the local street system as a result of
metering operaUon, we will work cooperatively with city staR to develop an aopropriate
solulon. Costs for such mitigation will be covered by the State. The passage of
Proposition 111 created a fundlng source cae ed the Traffic Systems Managem ent (TS M)
program. We expect the TSM program to be the primary method to fund any mitigation
projects. We are commrtte.:i to maintaining a cooperative relationship with the cITy.
However, since it is our responsibility to operate the freeway to mo',e both people and
goods through the COrridOf in the most efficient and safe manner, we pfan 10 move
foN..·~.rd ~ •. h this project wfthout a formal agreement wtth the City of Palo Mo.
.1-
.. City Comma,,' 11-8
~, Address !he State's abilny (resources) to adequately and continually monttor and maintain
C>peraton of the ramp-metering controls.
CALTflANS ResPOnse
To maintain efficie"t operation of the ramp meter system, Cattrans has a cor.tinuing
program to monitor metering operation. Currently, this is ~rformed by field staff
assignbd to monitor tne existing metering system ~'1 the Santa Cla~a County area. YVh9r'!
the central control system is brought on line, much of th1s moortoring will be sem}.
automated. TTlis will improve our ability '0 ideotify and to respolld 10 r.rep meIer
probiems in a Umety manner _ The central system will aiso allow uS to maintain efficient
operation as the metering system increases in size.
•
-.. -.-.---~ .. ""-........
.... .,
-
---~-------~------------------'------'~---'
B, QPERATIONAL !NFORMATIO~
C!!y Comment B-1
Address po!entiaf impacts to ;ocal streets and m~tigating measures for ea.ch location.
Provide updated data to suppor traffic projections and any statements 'tVhich indjca'e
how q~euing and delays will be mon~ored and controlled 0C1 City streets,
CAL TRANS Aesponse
The impact to local street operat; 00 win be prj marily from the proposed closure ol the
Charleston Road CJf>-ramp and the proposed new on-ramp from San Antonio Road,
These two proposals will change travel pattam. along both Charleston Road and San
Antonio Road which will affect the operation of the intersection of t~ese two streets.
However. improvements to the intersection are also prcposed to adtj:-ess the impacts.
\Vrth regard 10 queuing and delay at the ramp meters, we expect tl1at any queuing will
be contairled within the ramp when the project is first implemented, Attachm ent A shows
the expected metering rates and ramp Queues for the ramps from Embarcadero
Expressway to Shoreflne ~ievard, As we explained above, our monrtoring program wiil
ensure that any prGblems aie addressed in a time!y mannoer. If it is determined that any
surface street operations ha'"e been adversety imp~cted after the project is implemented,
projects will be initialeci to m~igate those impacts,
City CoIT'm ent 6-2
Discuss "before and alter" studies tD be cond ucted by Caltrans which ... ~I assess the
impacts to the lreeway and to local streets.
CAL TRANS Resoonse
,' •. -.
','"\, ,"
CaItrans wiil conduct an operat,onal evaluation of this project's effectiveness., this
evaluation w11l compare "before and after" condrti ons for freeway and ramp travel ~mes
and delays, freeway and ramp volumes, local street travel ~mes, and local strset
intersection level of service, The "befo,e' portier. oi this study is underway and nearly
completed. Although we intend to begin monitoring the operation immediately after the
ramp meters are operational, the "after" study will not oogin until after the initiai settle·
down period of about four to six weeks, We expect 10 complete the 'after" study about
six to eight months after the ramp meters begin operal! 00,
Pa~ 6
'. ~ -.'
-
-~-----.---.--.. ----.. ----~---------~
C'c:y Comment B-3
In justifying the proposed SOLJthbOu~d entrance ramp at San An!Dnio Road, it should be
demonstrated that other alternaHlles (together with each al!ernative~' specific drawbacksJ
were considered,
Note that it is our understanding tha1 c'osure of the Charlest':Jr'l Road s-n!rance ramp and
tr'lstailation of a new San .A.ntonio Roaa entrance ramp are operat,onal improvements due
primariiy to the merging problems along US 101. Consideration and evaluation of closing
of the Charleston Road entrance ramp and directing access to the freeway through the
Rengstorff Avenue slgnal, without the instaIlation of the new ramp at San Antonio Road
is recommended.
CAL TRA"lS Response
A$ noted in your Jetter, the proposed closure of Ule Charleston Road an-rarilp and the
propo.sed construction of the new San Antonio Road on-ramp are operational
improvements tor a mergingiweaving problem along southbound Route 101 between the
Charleston Road on·ramp and the Rengstortl Avenue off·ramp. We have evaluated your
recommendaticn to provide access 10 southbound Route 10110( Charleston Road traffic
by directing them through the Rel"1gstotff Avenue intersection. This alternatiye would
overload the Rengstorff ~.venue on-ramp and the intersection since it would fssentially
concentrate traffic from two ramps at o,"1e focation. Mrugation for any adverse impacts
to local str~t operatioo in the vicinity of the ramp would be very costly sine€' it would
require signrticant intersection and ramp modifications as well as aoorrional right of way_
We befieve that the a~ernative we have proposed provides the most cost-effective SOlution
to the problem.
City Com men! S-4
In reference to the proposed soutnbound entrance ramp at San Antonio Road, need to
specifican)' address expected impoet (~any) to traffic a;, Old Midd'eneid Road. Pre,;o".
concems were expressed in the November ~S. 1981 Planning CommiSSion meeting (see
Attachment 'Bi.
GAL TRANS ReSPOnse
No significant ~pact is expected to Old Mjdd1efie~d Road operation as a resuf't of the
proposed on~ramp at San Antorrio Road. To evaluate the impacts 01 the proposed en
ramp. the "before and aher'" study will include the segment of Old Middlefield Road
between San AAtonio Road and Shorefrne Boulevard, to evafuate its operations.
'L
•
I
I
----------------
,-
"',-:.:;:"
'?-~~ .
.. · .. d· .. ,
.~;-./~~,~;"
,~~~--
City Commen t 8-5
:n reference to the recently submmed ''Pre!iminary plans" 'or tI-Je proposed sct..1hooJnd
entrance rarr.:p/San Antonio Road intersection ...
~1..<fJte alt6maUv'as which wiil separate-wesrOOl.Jnd t/'ulWgh yaffic from l)ej(lg comro!lQ{j
by Ihe signsi (soe Attachment 'C'j.
PIflluate aJre,-n&tJ;..es whicfJ wil: resuJr in a redtJCt)or; to the siZe of the propost-d
JntsrsK:1iOll. The r:urrerot propoSai renects an intersection 01 Rbour 15O leer fn width. A71
l'1iKJuetion tQ this distance wijJ rt1sui! in shorienBa clearance (81J..red) iflftJrvals and
jmprr;1ll&l1 signal efficiency (see A1Jachmf.+nt ac-).
incorpcrate Jarge r;rounCf·mo~.mted (Of mast/ov'e!he8d if !I.!rldlrlg ai/CHIS) directional Sig~
j()to i.he design 'or both east end Io4-"eStDDuna spprOllChsS.
C .... L TRANS ResponM
-
Per j'oc... >( suggestion, we have revi'ied the intersection design at the vicinity of Sa"
Amonio Road and the on-ramp onto southbound Route 1 01 suc,h that southbound
through traffic on San Amonio Road wm no Ionge r be COf1trored by the traffic signal,
.l\ttach.d for your review are an electrical plan (E-1 7), showing the traffic SIgnal layout,
and a pa,emer.t defineation plan (PO-3),
City Comment B-6
Clarify and update traffic projections at the intersection of San AAtonio Road and
Charleston Road,
hi reference to .. November 2, 1981 CaJrrans Sh..'Cty, nolTitOOund Cha!ieston _~oad tnrJrlc
(-assume CluU!esron Road orienrstion as tlorrIl·$outn) making rigttt W.'71S on San AmoIlio
Road to US 101 wil! remain unchanged (160 peek f"rOJJf volume before and 160 peak "our
lIOluf71l'] e!tlJr), GJYen that some trBff,r;; on ChtuffJS1.oo Road will desire 10 acce. .. s
S<W\"tIOOund US 101 on the new San Arnonio Road e:1tT&nCe ramp, it is, howtJver, liifery
mat lhuft witt be flI7 increttse i~ me n"gflt t1Jm ,'11CNemem flom Cllarfeslon Road. ihis point
was discussea in the November 19, f91H P!lJltning Commission meeting (see Attachm3n!
"8'),
Data. collected Primatiiy in 1979 is 100 old to be valid,
C .... l TRANS Response
VIs have conducted s!Udles for the jntersectior1 of Charleston Road aoo San Antonio
Road which indicate that the increase it! the right-tum movements tram westbound
Charleston Road (assume Charleston Road orientation as east-west) wil! be relatively
minor since some freeway-bound traffiC originating along Charleston Road east of the
San AAtonio Road intersection wil! ta'Ke the Rengstoci! Menue on-ramp to southbound
Route 101. Attachment B shows the existing and expected conditions fOf the daia
conected in December 1990,
iI.
________ ~ ____ o_' __ ' ______ ~3--...... -"4III.
The Crty of Paio .Alto wishes to promote a!~8rr.at'\les to sirtSle occupancy vehicles.
Accordingly. we recommend that Ca~rans re-evaluate the PlJssib~e lnstariatlO1i ot an HOV
bypass lane kf the southbound Embdrcadero Read entrance ramp. An. HOV bypass
lane wiTl provide added incentrve for HOV and will most certainly resurt in greater sWppCit
of the overall project Ever)' effort Sho<..JFG be taken to inccrpmate HOV lanes on an :)f the
metered rQmps.
CAL TRANS Response
~ i. our policy to investigate the feasibl1ity of provi:l1ng an HOV bypass at each new ramp
meter U1stanat1on. Factors that are considered include ava~abfLTi of adequate s~orage to
minimize locat street operationaf impacts, HOV time savings, potential HOY usage,
constiuction costs, arJc emorceabilrty. Every on-ramp within the project limrts was
evaluated for the feasibility of providing an HOV bypass lane, An HO\! bypass iane is not
being provided 't\ri!h this project at the Embarcadero Road on·ramp due to several
factors. The ramp consists of a narrow one-I<":I:ne structure which would have to be
widened to proved an extra Jane for t'1e HOV bypass. The cost of constructing the HOV
bypass at this on·ramp is es~mated to be about $660,000. The HOV wO'.;ld also receive
reiatively Ugh! usage. The exIstic'9 peak hour HOV volume for this on·ramp 1$ about 110
vehicles and the exiS'Jng HOV volume during a 4 1/2·hour period is abou1 360 vehicles.
We also expect that the time savings benefit for HOVs at this ramp would be about two
minutes. The relatively low usage a<"\d time savings ben2~t did not supper. the additional
constru<:Von 00S1 for an HOV bypass at this time,
'L-.···· -",'"
-.-.
\
\
i ·i
, J
~----. ---------~--------------~~~-
, C, SPECIFIC DESiGN FEATURES
"
J
J City Comment C-l
r
Addr~ resolution ot an eXis'jng on-str~et fiooding p;ob!em on S"," Antonio Road near
the Sun Micro Systems entrance. CondYJons may worsen ~ tne proposed ramp will orain
" addItional runeff 10 this area. Any design should, therebre, identit)' finished elevatiOns
, ; and a possible need to! a new storm drain pipeli ne. q
•• , '<I!:
-
CAl TRANS Aesponse
Based on our current desjg!"l. runoff from the new San Antonio Road on-ramp will drain
towards the freeway and therefore will not adversely impact the Sun Micro Systems erea.
The drail'lage plan lor this area will be furnished to you as soon as ~ becomes avauable.
City CemMen! C-2
In reference to the recently submiMd 'preliminary plans' lor the proposed rroOdifications
at the intersection of San Antonio Road and Charleston Road ...
the general layout of 'the ime."$8ction &ppfNJIS 1'0 be IfCcepf'tJble. but final $uppctf of
proposed cf1ang6s wifl be Subject fa review 01 revised traffic projecti':;JflS
nore rh8t there are SfWfJrai underg!ound utilitiu fOcmed along rhe west side 01 ChIJt1;3$wn
Road near the Sun M;cro systems par/t.ing /0{ Tire deCision on r.vnic,"J sid2 of;he street
to widen can only be made !ot.owi,"Ig' detBiJecJ anaiysJs of IJfI existing tJtjllties (above and
beJow) IJIJd trees which might be impacted.
incrxporare S/t'l signal mociificlftions and Signing chsnges into tf)e !nterst:tCb::m
improvemfJn1s.
CALTRANS Response
The fi nal pian of the modificatior! of the San A'ltonio Road/Charleston P.oad intersection
win be sent to you lor review,
Charles'.on Road wil! be widened on both sides, A=ding to our current layout pian,
tt is an'Jcipated that two overhead el£ctric poles will need to be relocated, one on
westbound, aro<!. another on aaslbouM Charleslon Road,
\VI*.h respect to the underground utJljVes wit.hin the projeC1limits, potholing must be done
to determine if the relocation is necessary.
AdOruonally, ~ appears that some 01 L'1e trees on the westbound side will be impaClao by
this project. We will work closely with the City and Sun Micro Systems te determine ~
feasible mitigation measures can be incorporated lnto this project.
Paft 10
c ..
':; ,3,~· "": -" -:~~:),'";: .~
-f" ':-''''';;'''_ •
':; ,;'d"~, ," "_. '-:->!<~.-.d.--;
; :'~":'':-:':\.~~.--,'-, ~
;r_!~ __
I
I "\
I "t"
I
·~~~~~c~o~rn:e~r;s~to~n~e~pr~C~J·:~:=~1
••••• , TOS Network _.J).
-
I
1
I
~~ __ r'~--~----~
I
~
"\,' I" ----------------;:::;,~~~~~~----------------' -------.-.. ~.'-~':~~ " \P & . .. ~~I .,....
Attachme
7Jf
A .' ,,', ",' " ,
E
n", '" '':;'' ,.;J,Jil,:, ,.~ " "',
"peeled Met . ' ,'''' ' ",,,' l'i" :,Ji!f,~ ,4~':' enng Rates . ,",'.' "~ -' ".
Southbound Route 101
\
Frum Embart'AdPM ~oad
Diagonal On-ramp
Avallabl .. 510rllge
.co v("h
'-Embu(adem Rd On-Ramp
Dt'mand Mf'I .... ing Vl'hlcll'!I
11m. (V('h/hr' R.I' InQIJ('ue
----C-'
143(H500 ~: --330 10 ~:...-'
1500·1530 410 15 -.
2 530.1600 400 400 IS
1600-1630 ,00 400 ,--,15 f-----
1630·1700 49() 480 20
111XH7.lO 430 440 IS ,--.
1730·11lOO 420 450 0
11lOO-18lO 440 «0 0
Nnll" P"ln COi!t'CIM on Jul)' 1990
."rom EmbarC'adero Rood
Loop 0J1-ramp
Available Starat!!
tOvl'h
~-~"1
IE~bArcadero j{d loop On-Ramp I I ""mRnd I ".'ering Vehld .. ,,-fO> ~--0-~-ISOO , 400 _+_3"',_~:
~~~ ~~ 420 I, 10
1530-1600 490 490 JO ~; ---
1-'-600.1630 500 500 10
~6.JO.1700 600 600 10
170(). 1730 69(1 690 10 ---'
1 no-I iloo 610 6J(l 0
ttaoo.18JO 450 450 --.J -0
!
, ,
I
I
f
f
,
-'
t '.
;
J
NI'II(,: D,I!iI wlt\'dl'd on 1ul)' T990
.-.----
'.~',
__ Jot..._-
"'"-,,,W"""r ~'r""5'I!'-!.Hl"~.Ji'T:'."'-
. -"---.. _-'_n W:;\ i If" ¥ J.,
.. ~
~J ---;
t
AVAII",blt !"Iorage
20 vt"k
r' ~on l:.lI:prr!J~way On.J(aD'l~. ___
o.mand Melf'rlng Vehlde! (V~"/~T) Ral~ In QuC'uC'
I.
1500
15
IHlO
lhJ(
~'l~ ..
17.
lllOO
-:-c ---
J)I) 510
l:xl 410 -
~ 470 f--~
\JO 410 ---
100 360
~-
lJO 350
"'" 390
no 340 _L--_
490 10
.10 10
450 20 ---~~---.In 20 ._-_.---------
360 20
3SO 20
'JO 0 -]40 0 8-
Attachmen\i'-2
Expected Metenng Rates
,.:,~,
1
'I 1
l
__ J
t
,
1
f ,
i ;r
~
, .
To~d08cd
From CharlHfon lload
I Chatlrslon Rd OR·R~mp r Drmand (VPh/hr)
Tim. SOY HOY TIm. -1-----
14JO·1500 640 17(} 1430-1500
1500-1S:l1) 7IfJ 1)0 • 500-.530 -
15'»..600 IME_ 'r.(! ------'530-1600
ltm-l&11) Il30 1('() 1600-1630
llJO-l700 ~80 120 1630-1700
1700-17JO 670 170 1700-1730 -
17:lO-1800 77ll -:20 1730-1800 --
1800-1830 6W 90 ------L!800-18.1O
Nt'PIl': Datn rollc't;,t>d on July 1990
---.~, .. -... -.. -.~~~'---."_.--_. ,_.'.-" -''"'':''''''\'I''~-::::~a44,42 4 "~~"-.'--"'-"--'-
-1\ ~--~-~
,
I
,
I
Avail.hlp
StOfDgP. (Yf'h)
20
--R~ng!ltorff Avenue <:,n&Ramp
~mllnd (Veh/ht) SOY V",MdeJ
Ml'tl'rins InO.l(>ul"
1-. SOy HOV __ Iu.t~
f-----1-,.,----280 50 24O . --f---
330 40 330 2 • -
300 40 300 20 ---
Jro 50 3m 20 1----
450 6D 450 10 ------
.. ill 100 6SO 20
'90 70 SJO 0
550 III 490 0 ------------
AttachmenG\-3
Expected Metering Rates
f -
I
~-
-,
Y;
NOI{'; D;)III {'nll~IPd on Illiv 1990
J_,--
',,-"",'" ," '~'mo.-""~, -':'~'~~!r:~i'~!t"lJ
.---~
Old Middlefield Way
Southbound Rout. 101
. ----~ .
Available
Storilg~ (veh)
3S
Old Mlddlpfl.ld Way On·Rarnp ~ I){omand (Veh/hrl SOY V('hldl;''' Mrlering
TIm!! SOy HOV Rate
InQII('ue
1-430·J500 470 120 '10 30
1500·1530 430 110 430 30 1---;:[ '--:i70 l-'-~~ {70 ._ 130 30
U.oo-16Jf) 490 120 '90 ~-il
--f-._-..
~"~ ~ '" 5:l(J ]0
1700-1730 600 15.1 600 30
1730:1iOOr-'70 J " I 140 530 o ,
.-~
J8OO-183O 450 130 I '50 o _J .' 8-
AlIachmen\,A-4
Expected Metering Rates
_M
" " --',
}
,
,
j
N. ShorrHnp n~ulevAtd Loop On-R.amp
Dm1and CVeh/hr} ~!rln I V(!hlch~.
Time SOV HOV ~ g lnQu~u(' Ie
1430-1500 54. 70 500 20
1500-15'\0 750 110 750 2.
1\.10-1600 UJJ 14. +-~. 2.
1600-16JO 68J 110 68J 2.
16.10·]700 9ffi 100 900 2. t-~--
1700·]730 080 \10 900 2.
1730·]800 850 00 ~ •
1800-1100 760 100 760 0
'. ,i
,
NnIC: Ol"~ cnlloot'd (In July 1990
/
AY.IlAhl~
Stora~(wh)
20
N. ShoteUm~ lIoulevilrd On.RI-mr
~m",nd (V",h/hr) I SOY "1 Vehldt's
M.",lng r'" OU"". nn~-::-:-r_~---"Y ___ lJP'y~~~ __ . ~ __ _
U''''''5OO 47(1 160 420 25
1500-1530 530 110 r---si.-15-
15JO.I600 510 130 510 I 25-
1(,QQ..1630 400 ~.o
16.10·1700 ~~ _~~
1700-1730 530 110
17JO-lfKX> 450 80
0100 15
.90 25
530 15
1-i800.1630 310 I .;; ~I 0 _~J-L~~600 ~~
..
Attachment\-S
Expe~ted Metering Rates
.
-1""
tr AttachlIlen~B
Existing and Expected Conditions at the
Intersection of San Antonio Road and Charleston Road
Proposed Geometries
NoScaJe
1990 Peak Hour Volume-("'ph) j
, I I II II! flV I
Left 256 I 98 198 240l
n,f'J·911 313 598 1653=]
Ri,ht 395 I 145 178 I %
Level of Service: C
[LV : li50
Data Collected on : Decembe:r 1990
1990 Peak Hour Volume (vph)
I 111m IV
Left 69 98 198 6%
Thro 911 313 716 177
Righti 256 235
LeveJ Or Service: B
rev : 1000
\
-~----... -.... -------------,
I Sca~ 01 CaIiIomlo
~t 01 "!ronsp<>n.lion
• DUtr!<t 4
OPERATIONAL
ANALYSIS
OF PROPOSED
AUXILIARY LANES
&
RAMP METERING
4-Xl-10l 3B..l/S2.5
282-38913]
2e2-396171
ATTACHMENT C
1 01 \
in
Santa Clara County
Embarcadero Road
to Route 880
fl
I
I
I
I
I
j
i ,
,,-'.
•
•
-
r
INTRODUCTION
T r.i$ report discusses. • reevalu·
ation of traffic operation impacts
of the-project to proV'i de auxiliary
lanes. &nO Amp metering on SQu.U\
bound Roy t:e 101 from the Embarcad
oro Road/Oregon ~w .. y inm
change to Ro:Jte E80 i,.., 5arl ta Q.u ..
Cc=Iy. See Figure t Location Map.
ExrcllTIvr SUMMARY
Routt! ]01 in San., Clara County is an
eight-lAne fm>war from II>< Emb;u
aodero Road/Oregon l!xpresow>y ir>
tert:h.an!", to 1he Cua<lalup< Pv1<way
off ... ramp wiih auxiliary lanes It sev
eral locatioru;. The four southbound
la~ or. Route lOl from Embua.dero
Road to De-LI Cr~ Boule'o'ilrd oper~
ate as three znixrd-flow lanes and an
HOV lane during the w.ekday morn
ing ond ~ f""'l< periods.
The southbctmd mixed-flow 1anes e'(
perience recuJ'Tent tnffic congestion
duri."lg weekday afternoon peak peri-
..J-SA-x' f~.lIE:uto '(~-ods.. 'l'bere m, two ~ bottl.e"""I:;>-~'::~ y ~,.,:r ~ t-ned loc:ii:i;ons Within the -.(::r:::S1UD~""Y'-': "'... .u.ly limits. en.;s the
...
N
UlillTS .. "-c.-.. ..... ;.....I
North Shor-eIir.e Boulevard inler
chan~ iU'C2, and the other is from the
De La Cruz Sou!e\+ard diagOnal on
ramp to-the. Gl.ladahtpe Pa:r\;.w-ay di
agonal oU-ramp. Cong-estfon u po
s!:Tea:m of ti'>e North Shoreline BouiE'
yard bottleneck iasts from about 1530
to 1800 how'S with. r.'Ia.::d.. .. ·num indi
vidual dwy of about 2 minutes. The
peak hour volume in the HOV la!!e a!
chis bottleneck is about 800. COrtges
tion upstrea..'"':"1 of the De La Ou.l
Bowt'\.'iJd/G1liod.tlUpe. Parbray bot
:Jmeck. lasts &om a'bout 1500 to 18.30
hours with a maximum inahi.dual dE'
lay of abou t 12 minutes.. The peak
hour volume in !he OOV lane a f this
bottlena:k is about 1500.
It is reoommended to implement 1he
project thaI proposes to _constNct owc
lliMy Jane;, and to ins'.aIl &rod opon.'"
ramp meters &long southbound P.ou te
i O~ as foDows:
o Construe! (ln1y the ,auxilia.ry tu.e
hom De La Cruz Boulevard' to
Guadalupe Parkway. 1ne awal
iary lane from Old Middlefield
Way to Route 8S would not be con
structed.
j 0 lnsuII nmp l"J"::Cte:"S at Iill. onotamps
from the Emba=dem Roadlo,.e
gor. E.xpresswoIy on-ramp to the De
La Cruz BouleliW diagonal 0:)
nunp.
o Provide t:rypasses for high OC'C\.I.
pancy vehicles (HOV) at each nmp
meter. if reasIbte.
o Implement an other provisions of
the originAl project.
,
1 •
-
BACJ(C}lOI..fll."D
A project to construct aUxiliary lanes
and 5O\l,..d \WaDs, and te instal! and
.operate ramp mclers along south
bound Route 101 was approved on
November a. 1982. 0\0E' to f .. mding
bmita!iC'ns~ the cor.struction o( the
project was septra red intc two sma net
projms (EAs :;89131 :.L"'Id 3%171). The
project proposed aUXIliary lanes, ratr.p
meb!ring. .and preIere-.'1tial en~ fo!
HOYs at setected IOcatiDns along
sou thbound Route ] 01 between lite
Embarcadero Road/Cregor. Express-
way inte:rch.i..."l6f and Route 88Q.
However~ it was decided to she! ve
these pro~ when Caltrans and the
City of Slll\t1.yvale were unable-to
agree on control of the ramp meters
during negotia tions for the coopenl
tive agreement At mat time, it was
District polley to obtain.a forma! coop
erative agree:nent !rom each. jurisdiC
tion affected before ramp melcrir.g
was imptemeTued. A cooperative
.~t ¥o'&S exec"l2ted. to allow Cal
'trans to m.itipre any traffic impacts
on the local streets. Under dtis situ
ation, It was often very diffiC1.l1 t to im-
p:emen:: metering. Scme jurisdictions
required. the cooperative agreement !o
inclcde their ccmp1ele control of th~
ll'\-"tering system,. l..i...reasonable COJ'l
~ttainl:S on the mek1'irIg opera 4or .. or
1.tlVeIated work to be done on their
street systems as. ,I condition of ap-
proru
A conmbuting factor in the decision
to a.heJvr the auxilia.""j Iane/ramp me
~ proje<Os ~ the propo>al to
construct anothEr lane througl\. !hi>
:section of R.:lute 10] und er Measure
A.. SL"\Ce it was proposed to operate
the additior..a.l Jane as an exclusive
lane lor high OCC1Jpane... vehicles
(Hm~ during the morning and 01,.,.
noon p-~=-periods, these projects
were then considered to 'be no longer
1'Ieeded 10 maintain U1 .dequale leV"e!
of ser.-ice on ~ freeWilj'_
'The C'Un-en1 Distr::ct policy lor ramp
ing mete-r instaUatior>.s is 10 ma.ke ap
propriate use or ac::.:eptro tra!'f:c JT.a....,~
<lgement tec.1oni:que.s such" ramp me
te":ing 10 C"ITY out the Dss\ricrs teo-
spon.o,jbihty of rr.aintairting.ln aC~~I'
able k-vel of service on !he free ..... ay
sys!!'"':T., making the mos.! effective use
of ea..:.; tr.msportation rom.:!c."", and
protecting the pe:bllc'.s. tnves!rneT1j t!"i
the systen-.· R.1mp metfflng wil.l be
considered to be a staruU:"d pm of the
-IreE"""oI.'ay operati:>n and formal o.."O?,"
erative a~ts will no longer rou
tL.-.eJy be £xet"\l ted before p~ing
'Nit}, irnplementa tio!'. of nmp meter
ing:
However, Caltrans will work cODpera
tively with each local jurisdicticrn to
r-lximize the eifido<!nC)' of the meter
ing 5)'5tem and to mlnimize-a..llY p0-
tential impact on the local street 5)'r
t~ Where it is determi"loo tNt miti
gation, such as signal or intersectiDn
modilica tion~ is neces.s.arj lor proper
Tamp Inftering or s-..nface street opera
tion, oil proJect wiD be initiated to cover
such v..-or'k at 5ta~ ~ with the
C'OrlC\ll'T'en:e! of the .ppropriate local
jurisdiction..
The current pelicy has revived the
,auxiliary lane/ramp mei.eri."g proje<:L
However, condition5 have changt'd
~ this project was originally pro
pose.:l:. Another lane in the I!'ledian
has since Oeen C'tInstru~ed undel'
Measure A. Tr.liIic demand has
changed during the ten-J"'U period
since thi5. project was initiated. To de
t~ whether or not ramp meier
i.'"lg is still wa.rr.mted OT if the project
should be revised .. a ree ... ·alua tion was
conducted and is cfiscus6ed in this re
port.
EXISTINC GEOMETRIeS fI®0 U r :1
Route 101 from the .Ernbar--1
cadero RO;1d/Oregon h-01
press way lnter.:ha."l.ge to the j
c:!~>
;f~1"
C'lUdalupe Parkway off-r.am? corui!.t.s I
of ";ght !2-foot lanes, • 22-(00' wide I
medi&...., with Ii 1)1'<' 50 concrei-e ~T'
rier. &rid l()..!oot iruide a."l.d outside I
5houl~ ftor,:, t.~ Guadalupe P~rk
way of(--ramp t::> P.e;ute 880. Route 101
has six 12·foot Lanes, I variabie wid~
n~ with ;II double metal beam
barrier barrier, a variable width inside
shoulder, anQ an S-foot ou!!iide shoul
der. !lie lemdH i.5 reLatively level.
~ are southbound euxiliary 1a..-..es
from the Oid Middlefi.!ld Way en
ramp to the North Sh ore1ine Boule
vard diagonal oIf.ramp. the North
Shoreline Boute'\'.erd diagonal on
ramp to the Route 85 off-ramp, t.'1e
Route 237 dlagoNl' on-ramp 10 the
Matlu1da Avenue off-nmp, and ti!e
Bowers A venue dl.agon.iil of'.-ramp tD
the San Tomas Expressway off-ramp.
'There ilTe' local street interch.!nges • t
____________ ~__ Emb.rc.adero
'500 '600
..
... ~, ..
-
I.'aIc BM!:. ~. Road/Oregoll r. to L., ; =....-.......c.~y, <-n I ~~ . ......", -"---~ -----r----j Antonio ROad.
1700 1800
a..,leston P.oad,
Rengstorff Ave
~u~, Old Middle-
fidd W.yINorth
Shon:Une BoulE
vard, MoLtett
BouI~ard. Fair
Oilks .A·II~nu.er
Mathilda Ave-
J'lLle, uwrence
&P=S-"Y, Son
Tomas Express-
TmeorOa way, Bowers
A ,...,u<. 0. La Cruz Boulev,,:d. and
Guadalupe~. There..., fr .. -
~~y to freeway in~gt5 • ~ Routes
85, 237, and 880. )JJ ramps .t the;e
UlterclLM'lges have one lane 'With
:i'houlders ~t for ~ Route 85 ofi
ra..-np. The Route 8S o(f-n.mp is i. two
lane ramp with • S-foo. left and an 8-
(oot right shoouldeB.
EXlmNC OPCRA TIO,""
-I
The 1988 1nJ'1 ual ,average daii)" t:-affic
()'.AD11 for the sectiOl'". ben-."f"eIl Em
bal1:ildero Road and Roule B5 is about
170,OC'O. Tne-MDT between Reule 85
and GlJ .. dal\Jpe Parkway is about
158,().)), The AADT bet;..·een Guada
lupe Parto .. r~y a..,d Roule-880 is about
143,000.
The four southbound lanes C~ RoiJle
701 rror'r' Embarcadero R03d to De La
Cr.Jz Bouleliard operate as three
mixedAjow lanes and an HOY lane
chumg :he weekday morning and af
ternoon peak periods. The HOV lane
er-ds just S01Jth of De La Cruz Bouie
vMd. From the southern .;-nd of the
HOY Lme to Route 8SO, aD lanes are
mixed fiow.
The mixe.1-now lanes experience con
gestion durb'lg tlu: Weekday .af~
peak periods.. Two ateiliS stand cut
within the ~tudy limits 8S 'key bottle-
neck locations. One is the Norti!
Shorellne Boulevan::l inrerch.ange area,
and the other is from the De La Cr.J.Z
Boulevard dia.g:ol"..aJ on-ramp to the
GuadalupE' Parkway diagonal of(·
ramp.
At the North ShOTellr.e Boulevard u-.
'i.eT'Change a.rea. the bottleneck is L"le
t~ree-lene section from the Norti!
Shoreline BoulevMd loo? off-ramp to
the dfagona.! on-ramp. T ypica.! week
day congestion lasts from 15JO to 1800
hours. TIle peilk hour ~n! at 1700
hours. The peal. hour bo,tlened< ou'
put is about 6,.300 ve.h..ide per :hour
(vph). The ma.x.imum dEIJ'Wl.d is
about 7,fXJO vph from 1S30 to 1545
hours.. The demand remains Slightly
aOO'o'e capadty until 1730 hours.
Ma::d:-num individuj1l c:wy to motor
ists is about 2 minutes ilt 1730 hout'S
with the qlle"Ue e:xtendu'g
about P/z rru1es upstre.am to
near the San Antoruo Road
intercha.IIg"e. See FIgUres 2
and 3 .
sou t H
101
.tI,
... ' .... '., ,.
, " - -.
, •
•
o.
at
-
. I
Mixed·now tram.:: enroun!m ,ddi·
tion.aJ. co~rior-furt..~er dOWT".slTearn
~etween Fair Oaks Avenue an.:!
Guadalupe Parkway. Conge3t:on
typ'kan y luts from about 15CXJ 10 lS3Q
hou~,,-The primary be ttlened: is the
t:h.ree--lar.e section from the De La
Cl".u 'Boulevard diagonal ou-Ii!mp to
the Guadalupe diagonal off-filmp.
The peal:. he-tH' (1515 to 1615 houn.)
bcttlenedc output at the De La Cruz
Boule'w-;m! diabOrI.il Dn-ntmp h. iibo'Jt
S,.600 "ph. will! ,& demand of 6..300
'Th. )I..!Arimum indiv.dual del.ay ..... OIS
about 12 rrunut-es at 1615 hoW's. Doe
queu Ii! extends ~pstream I distance 01
aoouI2-1/] miles w-the 'Bower.; Aver-ue
'intercha.-,.ge. See Figures :2 and .c.
Then! are also two poten tial boUle
ned:. 5eCtiOns .501.tlh of Route 85
Th~ are from tlle uwrence-Ixprrss
way diagonal on-ramp to the Bowers
Ayenue off-ramp and the section be
tween I..'le Bowers A venue loop and
diagona! on--ramps. !be u'Ntence
Expressway /Bowe:rs Avenue :K'ction
curren t! y experiences s...loeoU. wa ves
I [",d, occasionally, minor queuing
!rom about 1500 to 1515 hoW'S--The
demand for the section between the
Bowers Avenue loop and diagonal on
ramp$ Ms been ca'lC'.Jl.ateil tc be
sughtly hIgher than eapaoty from
.about 1530 to 1600 hours.
1M median lane ~ u an HOV
lane for vehides with two or more
~ from 0500 to 0900 hours and
from. lSOO to 1900 hours. Thf' HOV
lane is free fiow during both peaK pe
riods.. Peak hour HOV volume dwi"'S
Ih< afternoon pe>l< "",,:xl;' .ooulSOO
at the North Shoreline Boulevard bot
tleneck and aOOLlt lSOO a! thE' 1)e La
Cruz Boulevard/Guadal:.Jpe P.arkway
bottl"".dc.
Souu, of Raub:' 880~ there is Ii two-Lme
oott1enod at the E.st 5on'" ear.
Street interth2nge. The ~ue from
this bottll'neO: occasionalJy etlends
... ~
into the Dc La Cruz: Eoule-va!d/
Guadalupe Pa.rk ..... ay oo!tlene--..k ",'hic},
C<!USE:$ add,tionai cc.ongt'5~Ct!'\ L'1 !..'le
sh.:.dyarea
l.OCAL SnUIT O?£RA.nO~r
local street operation was Mt in
clw.1eod in t.."is study. Although M 10-
01 $tree! oongesoon is ex;peoed, I. de-
tailed a..'"'Ia.lysis ot existing u.d ex
pected local street operation will be
conducted heron: L-Tlplementation of
amp metering to identify ll,.e poten
tial impacts to loc::al streets. The i.-n4
plementation of ramp metering will
requin dos.e coordina!i'Qn wit.~ local
8gE"ncies lo Id'2ntirj a..-,d evaluate po
tET.LlaI tram.: impacts 10 L"1e locaT 5),5-
tpm. A primalY concern ~ the .. mC'>u n!
of ramp queuing and its impact en
suriace street traffic not destined for
the freeway. Caltrans will mitigate
any IC<'.al street congesti.on r~sultb\g
from ramp metering o~ti on.
As part of the original pr.oject. Cal
trans evaluated the effects of the pro}
ect on local street operations in the
at}' of Palo Alto. A traffic imp:; ct
analysis report covering this study
was compleled in June, 1-979. This
ltudy lound that traffiC on Palo Alto
so-eets would not be im~ded by the
po}ed because no .civasiDn "-'"as ex
pec-ted from on-ramps and the inlet
section of Charleston Road ilnd San
A.'llonio Road would e~rien.ce no
pew:pb'ble chang~ in level of :servlce
due to the change in traffic: patterns
caused by the proposa1 new on-ramp
at San Antonio Road.
PROTECT ALrrRNATIVlS I Three protect alternatives were ana-I
1yz.ed. TN: alternatives were selected
on the OOsis of Tem.r!..i:l"ing fI®0 U 1 ~
within the.5oCOp< 0 f the origi-
nal peoi«'. 1 0 1
I
~,
, .
".
l1tU'f..DaNT OJJC1NJol. ALo'Xl1J..\RY u.."l£I'
Jt,vo M£Ti:I.Do/C pMJ]EC1
The tNijor (eat'>.ll"eS proposoed ir. the
original pro;.<t """""
D Inst&Il rarr;p metering at an or.
ramps f.om the Emban:adero
Road/~g(m Expressway inler
<hang< 10 the De La Cruz &,ul ..
vo:d inter<:hat>ge, "'«pi the North
Shorer; no Boulevard diagonal on
ramp and the De t.. Cruz Boole
van! cIi.ogoNl on-ruJlf'.
o Consttud ill: ",.((().foot long awcil
i.u) tan£: from about '00 feet up--
• _ of the Old V-iddlefi<ld W.y
on--t'Unp to the Route as off-ramp
.n,l .2.000-fool long auxiliary lone
!rom the 0. La Cruz lIou\evud eIi
ligoN:! on-ramp 10 the Guadalupe
~"'ily off-rounp. Cunstrucdon
would be in the In<dian. The ~
way La.-v!S would be.shifted toward
the~
o Cons:b1.K't .. new an-ramp at the
San ""tonic Road In .... chonge and
dooe tbe existmg Chuleston Road
DrHamp to provide I longer weav
Ing oe:tion between on-and off
ramps.
a ProvidE' prefrrenti.a.l entry (or
HOVs at the IoDowing ramp.;;;;
o San ~ Road on-rmnp.
o RengsIDrff Avenue on-ramp_
o Eilis s-t on-ramp.
o ~bthildl: AYftlue loop Uld di
agonal on-nmps.
o La......" ~ diagonal
""""""'I'-
o Bowen A ....... loop and diag0-
nal on-nmps.
o Construd. noise waUl in the vicin-
Hy or O!d Middlefield WIY on
ramp.
o 0Ih<T f""'i":i futures include:
o Widen die road Wlly and modify
the signaIo .. the O\uleston
Ro;w!/San AlIlOnio Road \ntt!r
IeCtior_
o InstaD the sipW$ at the inter
nus neUe waD h&5 bt!en t'Dnstt'Ua.ed:
UDder-a:lothe:r pro;ect..
seaiun of Sa."l ~toruo Ro01dl
and the new on-ramp to south-·
bound Roule 101.
a '.-\"Jden L"Ie Icop on-ramps at the
North Shoreline BouleVilrd Md I
::,,:;: Oaks Av.nue IT''''-I
tJnder the original propcsal, t'l...e :najor
bentfi! would have come from the
spot Cipadty improvements to the
freeway pro .. -.ided by the • uxi1iary
lanes. 'The .added capacity wouj,:3
have rE'duced (r~wi!ly ;:ong~tion
while ramp metering woul;;! help to
protect the ~ded capacity_ Because
of this added CoIpiC:ity, the ramp me
ters would have bren operated OIl de
mand ..... eliminating the need ror
diversion onto JOO\! streets. ~ pro}
ect proposal wa! developed using this
.pproach.. Metering It deornand rates
tne:a...'"'\S the :metering rat!' e5S("f\tiaIly is
t:M samt.as the vehicle arrival rate on
the nmp_ Oel.ly to ramp tRifle i:;
tnini:t:na.! lUlder tl-.is condJtion. Meter·
ing al de%l"lilnd r.ttes ten-e:s two k.."')'
p.nposes.. Fu-,x, it se:TVe5 10 breai: up
pl.oroons ol..ruo.. entering the en..
... y so that thoU merge onlO the ~
way is smooth and' causes M shod:.
'Waves cr cfuturbance to freeway traI·
fK flow. Second~ it protects the ramp
from "'bad tra!:'kers'-. those drivers
who ajlel tl'-.eir travel pattf>!'m. to enter
the freeway ,It UI ururoetered !'amp.
Und~ current traffic demand; this al·
te:rNtive muld no longer be operated
as it wu origin.lDy propt»ed_ Con
structing the Old Middlefield W.y!
Route 8S auxili&ry lane would reJeao;e
substmtiaJly D"oOn! demand to the
downstream sections. Demand would
exceed capacity at virtually all !OeC
tions between F&it Qaks. Avenue Ind
Guadalupe Pam..y. Sev",ely restric
tive metering rates would be $ 0 U 1 H
IlO«S5aly at an ramps 10 »,~~"'
ke.p the _.y free flow-1 0 1
ing. Ramp meter queues
would extend onto Jocal '--_-I'
1"'1' 5
,
I
.
i
I
" I
•. J ,
••
-.
s~ and wot!1d Inten"ere wi th local
street operation.. Subst.a.ntial di'Jerslon
or-Ie local streets wouid be e~ted
Uld ma."'y of the inter5ectic;ns atong
alternate routes. L'vol.l.ghout the prai
ect area would btcom.: cor.ges:-ed dur
mg the peak period.
Arv.>ther i:r.portant issue is thE; .valia
bill!)' fJ( right o( way for the Fro~
auxlliary lane$.. Tne origlna.l project
proposed construction in the median
for the .cxUWy la..,es. However. Ui.
additior.al1ane ~..lS already been ~on
:stnlded in tilt Ined.i.an under Measure
A.. The;awdlWy ~ woUld' now
have to }-.c built on the C'Utside. '!lu!re
is adequate eristing right of way to
~ct the De La Cruz. "Boulevard I
Guadalupe Parkway auxin.ary la.!'Ie.
The Old Middlefu:'ld Way/Rotlte 85
aur.1Wy Wle wowe require adell·
tiOfta! right.r ¥ny.
B.
1J.ou:MEm" R.,.wp Mrrt::RfNG OM.y
Under this altema live, ramp m~
wouid be instaDed on all southbound
on-tamps. The San Antoni.o or..nmp
would not be buill and th!.' Charleston
~ c.n--ramp WtIuld be retai ned and
metered. No preferential bypass
nrnp lanes would be mnstructed. It
would be possible to implement this
alter"na!:h-e In stages.
This. .&.!tem.ltive wowd berefit free
way moIDYi.'ItS at the ~ of SUI
.lace-:sbftt motoris~ beause of the re
'S'tric'tive meterit1g r.ates neocessary for-it
to work I""perly. I, would ha." •• ;g.
nificalll impact on loa] tTalfic cin:u1a
tion.. 1m ~ 'WouId hon'e • free
.flowing opcadon while \oal routes
would become overloaded in key ar·
eas because of vehicles diverted hom
the freeway. Since substantial diver
$ion is expected under tJ-is .3 • .Iiernative,
:most of the i.,-,t!!f'Sections on al tema te
routes t1u-oughout the project are ..
would become congested during the
peak period
•
... _.....-.-
~mp mettt quE'll es ..... ·ou] d exten.d
onto loca! ~tT«ts .at Charles.!on Road,
Did. MiCidiefitld W~y, Ren~tor(f A ve
nue, Ems S~', Fair Dab A\'€'~,uL',
La 'Nte.i'ce Expresswa'y, an.d De La
Cruz Boulevard, These qU~\Jes ..... "'u)-:I
mteriere wiL"', local 'i1:7~t oper3tic,n.
C.
];Qi..£M£.vr O~cmAl P1iClf!cr WI"nfC;.rr
Q'l.;)MlDDwru.o V: ... ·r!F..Ol.:rr 85
A!JXZl...l).Ryu.,..'r:
Under this I.ltemath-e, the origin .. .!
project wou:d be irr,?JementE"d with
tl,e foCowin.g revisions;
o !be auxiliary 1ane from Old Mid
dtelield \'\o'er to Rct'.Jte 85 would
not be constnlcted.
o AU on-raJrl.p5 would be metered
including the' No~th ShDrt'!:ine
Boulevard and th~ De La Cruz
I Boule .. ·.a.rd diagonal on-ramps.
o Herl bypasses wO:Jld De indud~
at each on-ramp jj feasible.
All othe1 provisf 0I\5 pI .:lpo.s.ed \J nder
.the origlnaJ project would be Imple
mented.
'The operational goaJ for this al tema
tive would be to p1o'lidt'! an improved
level of senice 50uth of Rol.J.t:e &5. ThE'
auxiliary !.ne from 0,. De Lo Cruz
Boule'Vard c:li'igcmil on-tamp to frlE'
CuadaJupe ParkwOiY ofi-zamp would
provide .sufficie:n~ apaoty to nearly
e!irrunate the conge$tion betWE'eIl
Route 8S and Ctada]l.:pe PiLrxway.
The rK!uction in congestion would be
duo primarily Ie tho >""ill.,)' lane.
The ramp me1:eTS wow d be operated
at the existing demal'l(! :rate and
'Would .5e1""V'! mainly tD preserve the
capacity improvement.
.A5 discussed ur.der "'Existing Opera
tion'" ~ there are two polentia! bottle
ned: sections fr"oyrI. the Law· SOU T ~
renee Expr ... w.y diagonal ;;;,~~:..t
on-tamp to the Bowers A \"e-1 0 1 ~
nue off-ramp and between I
the Bowers A VEnue loop .uld J
--~~---~~-
l i
_J
'.
-----
~ on-ramps-These two S«
tions could be amtronecl by minor re
stl"k'tive metering a! the upstream or.
ramps, 1be meteri."'Ig Tatef; ne<:ess.5ry
to rr.aintam free flow on the freeway
would only be slightly less than the
6.Jrival Dies ai-t.1oe meter And would
only be ~ for .. l"!"Jatively short
period. The R ... np q',leues that de
velop would be contained on the
ramps and would' not affect loc.a1
street operattan.. Ramp vehicles
would cpmer.ce minor cld.a y it; t."le
two Co five minute TU',~. However~
the I:ime saved em !:he ~y would
be 5UhstanIl>Jly gru .... lhan L'>< del.y
.it the r.l.mp ~ers so tha t U-.f ovetaD.
~y travel time is shone with
n:mp meering. Diversion onlO IDCi"!
streets is not e.:c:pected sll'\a! driven
would inrer gre:at~ travel time by di
vening.
Romp ~ <nil mainline HOY.
1.lne$ ~ the SilJTle 5eCtion of free
w~ are ufB considered 10 be cern-
poting _12gies. One goal of wnp
~;, to pro.,;&, smool~ flowlni
Ireewoys. Tho goal of HOV lanes is '"
increase tho per>on-<:urying capabil
ity of • -.. of highway by provid
ing motori.~ witll .. time-5l.ving in-
centive 10 form HOV,-To the !'Xtent
that de1.1y is ~uood by romp """"'
ing or-apkity improvetnenb, the In
ce\ove to form HOVs is also reduced.
H_. tho cmr<nI peak hour vol
-mne for the HOV 1I~ is ..rout l5OC-.It
the De La Cnu Bouleva:dfGuada
lupe Pad,,,,,y bottlen.a. or nearly ..
C1podty. ~ -.... in tho ROV de
rnmd WCkI14 result m congestion in
the HOY lane.
One method of continuing to provide
• free flowing HOY Wle would be to
change the oa:uponcy toqui""",,"1 to
three or more persoru per ~ cl~
Theomicolly. this would rod"CI! Ii ..
6e::nand for thI! HOV 1a:M, Ho~'e'vet.
from both • pncticol and po"tical
stand: pOint,. t.hi.s w('\U!d -:01 be lea· I
sible". 11 h veT)' unlikel)' t}1A1 current Iwo-passeng~ HOV lane lJ5t'r.i wo..ud 1
.ccept the i:hange,. even .... ilh hell"'}
E'f'Jor~t Also, sin...~ San:.a Citra
county u.ses the two or mOre ClttU~
poInry requirement on its o!':(press",.y
HOY lane!o, it is unlikti)' L"'-lat tht'
coun!y would agree to tM change. 1
I
The oluxiha...'), lane and '.Jimp mt'terir'lg I
would insYte that current HQVs: ron· I
tinl.le 10 hoi VI;: :II: congtStlon·rree trip
south of Route 85. In addition, I reli·
able and cor.gestiol'l+1ree ~'ay tr.p
wowd be p!"ovlded fCJr mi:x~·flow
ve.h1des..
1"'he North Shore-lint' Boulevard oottl~
rJe(x would rema.ir. sir..ce-the Qid Mid·
dtefield W:ly!Route 85 <1Iwci!iary Ltr.e
would nol be mnstrue'..ed. Bet:"wee:\
Embaradero Road l..""Id Rente is,
rounp meters """"Wd be operated to re-
duce co~tion as mud! a.s pDSSl"ble
during tho early pa ... of tho peak "...
riod. The mel:c'i:rag rate5 r«essuy to
maintaln fret: now on the freeway
w:mld only be shghtly less than the
arrival rales .at tht meter .and would
only be used .. the ~g of the
pWc period. Th. nmp ~ tha,
~evelop 'WOuld be contlined on the
ramps and would no' aifoct lOOiI
street ope'llltion. Delay for on-r.iL."'np
<ehiclco wowd be less than two ",;,,
utes.. However, u traffic dern.ar<d
build.'5 and more restrictive n.tes .are
nec:es5ar)' to maintaW , frte flow free...
WIly, ramp meters will be openred at
c!omand ..... and tho freeway will be
allowod to bocomo ocngesled ThU
4IpprcadI ~ being taken for the (01·
lowlni .....",.,
o Ramp meterir\g will provide SO~
benefit to mixed flow ve:r..ides ,at
tho begUming of th<! l""k period.
o Thi5 North Shoreline "'''O:O-::U-=T-:H''
eou~ev.ard bottienecx »,~~~
would ild ali " contr.,t (or 1 0 1
tra.ffu: entering the south·
ern portion of the C01"r'i.
F''' 7
' ...
,
r,'
"
f
'.
'.'
'.
..
0
0
dor .and wO:.J.ld virtually gua:-anteE'
S:'JlO<.,t}, operation ateng Rouc~ 101
SOtlt." of Rou te 85 fat the future.
"When co:i1g"E"Stion rom-..s during (o-,e
middle and later parts. of lh'.! pt'ak
pmDd. the--re .... ·m still be .a delay
5a\'1r.g incenti· .. e for HO'/s when
~ d~ is L'-;e hjgh~t. The
strategy or providing .!Ii tim~:s:J ving
incer.five (or HO\'s i! stili (~sible
since the peak hour HOY ,,"OJume
is ,about SOO at the bottleneck and
there is shU exctss capacity avail·
able in the l:i0V lane to OiCCOI1"..mD
datE a s'Nft to HOV;s.
HOY bypasses: at these ra.."';1P me
ters wilJ als-::> pro'\o;de :s.::Jme m;M!'
incentive fur HOV.s..
O1>1I" Po 0 ,.cr,
~ .are several projects wi LhJ n the
limits of this. stud)' that are U, ,,·a.!10US
stages planning or design. Coordina
tier. \'oitll1hese projects may be neces
sary.
o A project at the l\.e:ngstorff AvenUE
lnt~han~ (EA 101854.) !'1.::Te!\t1y
\l.nder ccnstructi:m invotve'S modi
fying the interchange' and inciujes
provisions for ramp metering. Th.is
project is funded by the Dty of
Mounlam V~""·.
o A proposed project at the Nort.i
Sborcline Bcul~\la..-d interchange
(EA 115(91) is =tly !>oing fl'
viewed. Th. Int=hange will be
conve:1ed' 10 .. pardo configura
lion. This project will be financed
from Mea..'"'Ure A funds.
tl A Measure A project on Route 10]
betw<= the De 14 0= Boulevard
and Route tart propo5eS to widen
the freeway to eight tar.es.
[i The Gu.adalupe Park· ... ·ay over
aossing 'Nil! be repla.:eci in a pr0-
posed project under E...\ 123021.
nus project also includes IXlmplet
ing the o.mnectlon wl th North Ffnt
Street east of Route 101. Fu-..ancir;.g
wiD be from Measure A fund.!;
o A project to improve the operation
or the e.TistLrtg ta rnp r.le'e~s on I
northbound Route 1D1 b Sa....,~
C1ata COU:1ty is p'0po~ l.~.nce[ EA !
~26$3:J. V:'\der this propoX'd F~j·
ect, ramp melers ",iJ..; be cart:rcDe-d
cy a ern,Tat comF~te ~ia Le:c,
phone line
REcD .... [,Y.r~'2:l . .4i no,\'
It is recornmended ta prv::~ \oo.;t.i.
this project 2S d escnOe-d t.: '1ei er Alter
native C:
o ConstruCI only th~ at!Xi1uy la;:'1€
from De La Cruz &uIe\"ard 10
G"o.!adalupe 1'a!kway. TIle auxi1·
iary la:n~ from Old },:f.i~d·!efield
Way tv Route 85 wot.:..ld not b€-con
sl:ruct~.
o Instill r.unp meters at all o:1-ramps
from the Ern.barradero :Road/Ore
gon Expressv.-ay on-ramp to the De
La Cruz Sou le'o"a!"d diagcnaJ on
ramp. -This includes the N.orth
Shoreline Boulevard .a1Id the De u
Cruz Boulevard diagonal on
ramps.
o Pro·.~ .. de HOV bypa55es at f"-3U1
ramp me.ter if feasible.
o Implement an other PW\-tstOl".5 of
!.he original pro~
m addi tion~ it i~ recorr .. "nE'l'.ded tc prc
vide telephor:e servi-ce at a.n cf t.!.ce
ramp mel.er controllers. TM proposed
ramp metering instaDat(.1n5 \'."iU even
tuany be mDnitored and ~nt:roned by
the T4 ture traffic opera tiorus .system
CTQS). A5 a.."'l. interim measUl"e until
the !OS is implemented. it is pro
p,,=ed to L"lte:!'C"Onnect t.~ese rarnp me-
ten by telephone liT1es b t~e on·li.,e
rofltro! system propcsed under EA
U6S30. 'I1-..is y,,;1l provide i more effi
cient operatior. and r:n.ax:irnize t."e ef·
forts o( the llrnHed available field staff
wed to monitor ~ installs !ions.
It is .aiso recomm~nded to
investigate the feasibility of
providing an auxilia ry Ia ne
between the UWl'ence E)'·
r,'"O::-C.:-' "'1-'""'
101
c ..
..
..
pressw.y dlagmol OMO"", ""d tho
Bow-cs A venue off-nunp .1M extmd·
ing: th.? ~ 1-:.uili.a.7 Iiln(' thtt be
gins af the Bowers A venue diagonal
on-nmp bAck 110 the Bo~ A Vl!'nJ.: Ii:
loop on-ramp. Although these awol
.iary l&nes .re not ~ (or proper
open !:jon of t.ht proposed .alternative.
they may be ~-t~ efficient
corridor operation .In the future u
tnffie demand ~
ArtAClfM.£NTS
Figure ~ -Speed ProIile -Emba<cad
era Rd:, ID 'Rou Ie es
I'lgure 4 -Speed Profil. -Moffe ..
Blvd. to Guad&lupe Park·
way
FiguIe 5 .-rropo.ed Aux;liary Lone,
lWnp ~er, It HOY Bl"
paso LocatioN
\. ,
IT® I
"--. --------''''----
-------------,-
50U!:-
---=--=-=
" ~ . ,~'. ,.----------------_._--
.•.. ;
j
j
I
-~ ,
!
I
I
\
o~ __ _
----------------------
>
1"'"".--':1. ___ '..!;_
u ~~---~ .. ___ .. S\.-
"'0 ---..;.---, , ~ -• *'------------.. ------" ------~ ~ :. : ::: ~. ___ .. : '.~: : : : : = ~ : : :,.::~. _ . ____ _ '~ ~or :=:~:~ i: =~:. --.'~--~-. +." _. - - ---".----~ ••••. - --- ---. f ::1 :::~::j:: ------:::::----::::::::::::::::::::l::::::::::::t:::::I:~L:::-~ II, _. -t -. i - - ---_ .. - -"._-_-_-_-_-_-_-_____ -'-___ -'-__ ~__ __."
I -------------
:'-'-~i~~ ~·:'~a~::--~ -
.;'
',J
. ' .. :.:
• -".
------- - - - -,-- -----. -------------------------
I
1---- --- --:-- -----; --:---- --; - -- ---\-. - -----":-------~ . --:-.. ~ -. : ... -- - -- -" -.. -. - - -" - --:---. -. -. --- - ----
f£~w:-::~:~~~S8:::::j0
I ---------------..... ----
" .. ~;' .. ..:,.--..:.--~--~----. -------------... <-~:
, I , : "
+++~~--~:::::~ :~
'!'~ j ~ i? l,
::;c;::~: P~o!
'\
,.; "
,
!
t
I
i ,
,-.. --
~\'f'
----\--L~~.l-\-J-~
. -," .
=
-
FREEWAY AGRE~~NT
ATTACHMENT D
4-SCL-IOI-P.M. 50.0/52.6
In th~ City of Palo Alto
from the east citv limits
near San Antonio RO~o to
the San Mateo County Line.
TArs AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this
day 0= 19_, by and
bet~elan t.he STATE OF CAl.IFORNIA" actin-; b}' and through the
Department of Transportation (herein referred to as ~STATE·), ana
the city of Palo Alto (herein refeL'red to as "CITY·,.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS $ the highway describec above has been declared
to be a free'",-ay by Resolution of the California Highway
commission on Ma:i~ 18, 19-44;' and
~'HZRE}I,S, STATE' and CITY have er.tered inte a Free'fo-ay
Agr~ement dated May 12, 1958, relatin~ to that portion 0: State
Hiqhway lal from the San Mateo County Line to the east city
limits; and
~mEREAS, STATE and the County of Santa Clara have
entered into a Fre~way A~reement dated Septemb2r 17, 1958,
relating to thi;it portion of State High'Way Route 101 from the San
Mateo county Line to Stevens Creek; and
-1-
•
;; ,
.i
WHEF.E?1.S, a revised F-lan rna£-, for such freeway h.a;:; been
prepared showin~ the proposec plan of the STATE as it affects
streets of the CITY: and
WHE'REAS, it is the !!n.l.tl.lal desire of the parties hereto
to enter into a new Free~'ay Agreement i:r. accordance .... ith the
revised plan of said freevay;
NOW, THEREFORE IT IS AGREED:
1. This ~qreement supers~des in its entirety said
Freeway ~greement dated May 12, 1958, and 5upercedes that portior.
of said Freeway Agreement dated September 17, 1958, from the east
city limits near San ~tonio Road to the San Mateo County Line.
2. CITY agrees and cons~nts to the closing of CITY
streets, relocaticn of CITY streets, construction of frontage
roads and other local roads, and other construction ~ffecting
CITY streets, all as shown on said plan map attached hereto
marked Exhibit ~ and made a part hereof by this reference.
3. STJo.TE shall, in constructioL of the fr~e\o,'ay and at
STATE's expense, make such changes affectinq CITY streets in
accordance with the plan map attached hereto marked Exhibit ~.
4. STA.'!E ar;rees to acquire all necessa-ry right of ... ay
as may be required for construction, reconstruction, or
alteration of CITY streets, frontage roads} and other local
roads, and CITY hereby Buthorizes STATE to acquire in its behalf
all 5uch nec~ssary right of way.
-2-
,------~~~------'-------
5. It is underst".ood between the f.'arties that the rig-ht.
of ~ay may be acquired in sections or units, and that both as tc
the ac~~isition of right of ~ay and the construction of the
free~ay projects, the obligations of STATE hereunder shall be
carried OIJt at such time and for such unit or units of the
projects as fU!'1.ds are budgeted and made la\"fully available for
such expenditures.
6. CITY 'Will accept cor.trol and maintenane~ over each
of the relocated or reconstructed CITY streets, and the frontage
roads, and other STATE constructed local roads an receipt of
written notice to CITY from STATE that the work thereon has been
completed, except for any portion which is adopted by STATE as a
~art of the freeway proper. CITY will accept title to the
portions of such roads lying outside the f~eeway limit5, up¢n
relinquishment by STATE.
-3-
•
-.j
j
7. This Agreement may be modified at any time by the
mutual consent of thp. par~ies hereto, as m~y ceccm~ necessary for
the be!t acco~plishmer.t, throu~h STATE and CITY cooperation, of
the whole freeway project for the tenefit of the people of the
STATE and of the CITY.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the ,.arties hereto have ceuseo. thi.:;;:
hgreement to be executed by their respective duly authorized
officers.
S'l'A'!'E OF CALIFORt'HA
Department of Transoortation
ROBERT K. BEST •
Director of Transportation
By
Ct.~ef, Of=~ce of ProJect
Planning and Design
APPROVED AS TO FOP.l<:
Attorney, (State)
CITY OF F.>.LO ALTO
By
~PPRO\TED )"S '1'0 FOR!-1:
Attorney, (City)
.
5" ;
~ ,
· ....
RESOLUT!ON NO. ____ _
RESOLUTI0N OF THE ClTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVING
FRE£WAY AGREEMENT.
WHER~~, the State of California, through its
uepartment of Trar"sportation, has presentEd an agreement entitled
-Freeway Agreement-..,hich concerns Stete Hiqhwar Route 101 within
the City of Palo Alto from the east city limits near San Antonio
Road to the ~an Mateo County Line; and
WRERFAS r the City Council has heard said ~greemQnt read
in full and is familiar with the contents thereof.
THEREFORE, be it reBolved by the City Council of the
City of Palo Alto that said Agreement be and the same is hereby
approved and the Mayor is directed to sign the same on behalf of
the City.
ADOPTED THIS day of
•
\
By ______________________ __
Mayor
Attest: I her~by certify that the foregoing resolution was duly
and regularly passed hy the City Council of the City of Palo A!tc
at a regular meeting thereof held
19_
City Clerk
-5-
... ~
· .
State of CaH fornie
Deportment of Tra~eportation
04-50-101-35,3/52.5
04393 -396111, 3G9131
SCH Nc, BIJUOIJQ7, 8['110408
~[GI>,TIV[ OCCLARAT1C~ (CfQA) ATTACHMENT E
Pursuant to: Division 13 Putllic ResoL.;I'ces r.ade
pescription
The California DepCirtmef~t of Transport.ation is prop;)sirlg to install Oii"-remp
met.ering l construct auxi1inry lanes, construct Drefer2ntii31 (raMp; bl'pass lar.e$,
consLrtJC't ne-w on-ramp and corl~f.ruct noi~c l'I'a11 ~n. southbound State Route 101 in
Senta Clara Ccur;ty frorrl the San Mateo-Santa Clara Cm.'r.ty liM il'") Pale AJ tc to
Route 17/101 Int.ei'"char1ge in San Jose.
The projeC"t is needed to elimj nete bc.ttlene'2Ks that ore r:al!Slng c~flge!"::'.iDn and safety
problems in tt;is segment of the free .... 3y, t.o :regulate ort-ramp traffi::: to preve'lt re
currence of cotlgesf;icn, 2nd to ertCourag(' tl-,e use of a;;d accolTllr.:Joa.te tra'l.si t buses
and high occupar->cy \'t!hic}es.
4n Environmental Assessment/Initial Study has been prepOIred by the C .. lifoinia uetJarl
mept of Trartsportaticr.. That e~"dJ:'or ... ""entaJ. docume:lt and related reports are a ... ·ailable.
from Etnlyn Ann Hansen, Chief, [nvirortITlental Planning 8ranch, Dspcu .. tmpr1t of" Trans
portation, District Gl<, l!>{] Oak Street, San fra~cisco, C~ 94102, (41S;· 557-2175.
It is determined that the prcpc'sed action will not have a signi ficar;t eff2"ct LI;Jon the
environment for the foll~wing reasons:
1. The project '.dll r,ot reduce the numb~I" of any rare or end."ngered ~1t;'lt s or
ar.imals.
2. The prcjeC"t will not signi ficantly affect flSh o. i3nim;s.l life or their-
habitats.
3. Plant life "'ill not be sign.ificsntly aff~cted.
4. There will nct be any signific~nt change in ~ir, noise ~r water quality,
5. NCl histcric ar<d arch.ae:;:.lo~ical sites or structures -of architectural C,I""
engineedng sigrtificcar;ce ;'i11 be affected.
6. The project 'Will not sig,-li f~cant!)" change the rate of wse cf any r:aturcl
reSDurces.
7. Tile project will not affect H'creational, educatic-na.l and religiDus facilities.
B. The :>roject will not have a significant impact on tr,e area's land use, hOLJ.sing~
businesses, tax rate Dr economy and is ~ot growth inducing.
9. The social and cultural chAracter a.nd the pDpulaticn tlf the area ... ·ill nDl be
affected.
10. The potential for geolDg:ic or seismic haZords ;'Iill nat be increased by the
project. .
11. No 4( f} lend or prime ~gric·ulture land will be impacted.
12. 7t->e co~osition and charader of traffic .,.i11 n.ot bt' signlficantly affected.
1.3. There will be nc slgni fJcant impact upo~ the-<,.esthetic featur~s c.f the area.
14. Public ser-vi-:es will not be sigr,ifl:::'ant.1} &ffected.
~~~~\l~_~
Dil.'.ision of Tr&nSpDrtat.lCln Plaflning
-.
•
-~~-~--~--~~---------.----~~~
_._--_.'.._-
ATTACHMENT F
rfDERAL tlIGhh'AY ADHL"1ISTRATIO!\
FINDINr. c.r NO S!GNIFICI.N! IMI'A.~
?t'~posed Rat>1p ~jeti'r Installation, :Ramp Constructiotl.
Preferential Lnn~ ConStructio~~ Auxiliary L2ne
C:lnstruction .l!nd NoL .. e 'iI;all C,,'nstru.:-Uon 0::1 'souch
bound State Route 101 in Sant~ Clara Count]
The FHWA !-las detl!l'!tline~ that this pwj eN 1oIi11 rout have any
signifit:.ant impact on the human etlv1rorment. This finCir." of no
Bignif:ical1t i.c:lpact j . .5 biJ.sed or. the attached enviroI".mental ..;.:::-~essme;!::
vhicc has been independently evaluated"by the Fb-;\tA and cieterm:.i.IH:a [c
adeGuately and accurately discuss th~ environ..':len!.o\l 1,sst;es and: impacts
of the p-roposed p!'oject. It prOvides S:l.l!fic:ient evi-::1ence and .!!ni!lY'6is
for determining that an enviTonmtmt31 impac:t ~tatement is not required.
The Fffi,'A takes full resllcnsibility for the accuracy. Scope, and: C'ontent
of the attached environmental assessm~t.
'/zv f,' 19 j! 2
Dtlte I
__ « C~"'----_
For !ru.::e r. ;tannor.
Divisio~ A~inistra~or
__ D~~trict Fnsineer
title
•
'.
I
\
-
TO:
,
ATTACHMENT G
NOTICE OF D£T'RMINATI5~,
Office of ?1ann ng and Rese3fcn
-1400 Tenth Stre t
Sacramenta~ Cal fornia 95814
or
X County Clerk.
-':olJnty of Santa C1 ara
FROM: Cit, of ?aio AHllO __ ~
{Pub 1 j t:/~Agency; ;-"
250"Hamlltcn Avenue
P.O. S',. lD250
,~-alO AU.2 .. L .. Q __ g.~3Q3
:;. (.. Ot f-IJ i ~.
.,'" '".'
SUaJECT: fi11Mg of Notice of D~termination in comp1iance wlth Section Zl} rr
or 21]52 cf the Publ tc Resour .. --:es Code. ....
State Clearinghouse NU!1'!ber Contact Per-son Telephone No -=__ _.~ .
mm~'~:r. ~0 '''"'''''''''",::::'c,,,,,'''''''' Iml "'''f\.J .
(If submitted to Cl •• ringhou,.) ,,_ -d"'-1) ,
Project location: Cit ide· Commercia.l, CC. ,£S, eN, CSP] z:oQ.~~! and c i !..-, I
Industrial Gil GM B GM 1 LM LM(3), lMtl}, LM(I), and OR zones and pr iln;; '" -··1 1
,!::~ ~ ~ I ,
Project Oescription: Amendments to 1{H0.Ds.J2Tdinance~nc Zor.i,~~_, __ i;' ~ ~ ~ i.
Comprehenshe Plan Land Use Map and Transportatir,:m_nemef1t,_adoption of a new 1 .. ':
TraffiC rm~ct Fee Ordinance ~~
has approved tne above described project an
dete~'nat'ons regarding the abo~e des~rib~~
n9
L The prcject X .. in. llIin not. have a significant effect cn the
enviranment.--
2. _X_ An [nvlrcnreenta1 Impact R~r.,ort was prepared for tJ,is ?!"cject
p1Jr5~ant to the prov'islorlS of CEQll,.
A Negative Geclar.tion was pr~pared far this project pursuant to
-the-prc'Jisions of CEQA.
The fIR or Negati~~ Declarat~on and r~cord ~r project apprcva1
may be examined at~
Pil.l0 Alto Oepartment of P1anf'ling i.nd Co_~ur;lty £liytrCr1ment
250 Hamilton Avenu., 5th floor, Palo Alt"o"-,_C",A~9",4,,-30,,,l,-___ _
3. Mitigation measures L were, _ were not. made a ccndition of the
ap?ro'ial of the project.
4. A statement of O"'erriding CortsideraUons X not.
adapted for thjs projec~.
Date Received for Filing
(NODI)
- 1 -
'''--'--'.
r
I
t
ATTACHMENT H
£n'll;ronr:t'ntal D,:>r:UI~~r1tS -City Of Palo .itc
fBLS[j
Jid~ ;~ 1 1-::86
£t~Vlr\O:IM!="NH.:'" AS$ESS)~.u~T GRACE "' ... YAr-...,M·,A'''~A
t~"",=-~~'':''~<>IJ .. ,~ ~roject Descriptior./Tit'e: Aep!",o'lal of COr'lpre~~nsive p1a~1 Lti1c Use p~c char4-Wi
Zone District C~~~5'S and Zonl~g Ordlnance chanaes. d~d Traffjc MitigatiPG Qrdjr~nce.
Location/Address: Propert\l 2Clrleo G.!of, ere CS in the Sa" ~,'nt'J"'ic ;:;:oad!~est 611)1-
:!!'1ore ar!1I fse-e atu :::h-ed map].
Address and TeTep~one of Applicant: 25D Hamilton A~e~u~. P~lo Alto. Ca'1forn'~
~pp'iC!tio'l for; C.ompreher1sh.-e Plan cha"o-e~ ZOf1e t:~ar.IJ€'. Zone l1isvi,t c~anoe
(e.g., zoning change. SUtld1vlS10li of propf'rty. ai"c:"te:ctura' rel'l~'W. use perm,t}
Zoning at Project location: CS and GM Fee ~eCi>lpt 1:0.:
Ttle project 1S af1 e~!:"g~r.cy project. ministeriai project. uT1(!er nCA guidelines
and pfo~dures ~dopted hy t~e City of Palo AltC'. and V'e.-ef':'r'e is ex~;;;pt from
en.,.f ronmental assessmer.t.
The project qualifie-s for a Categorical E.xemrtf"n [Class under CEOA
!luidelines and proced~fes adopttoj by the City cf Palo .. ito;--an~ r.o further
enY~f"onQ!Pital assessment is necesury.
City Offichl: Department: Date:
NOTICE or DETE~INATION
Based upon
bel" of the
COrle 'uded:
t.he information of the en\lfronmenta1 IIforksheets. t~e tH'Idersfgne
Planning Department t1B rrede an frlitii!l study of tht' project a
!<leqatiYe
'Ill'a ct.
Negative
uec1aratioT1: T~e proSect hH roo siQnifical'lt envir::H1
No EnYlrOn~ntal !"l>act Report is required. n,~ reasons
DecTaration are:
--~
~ .. "
g r::
.c
~~rl~.
----------------------------------------------------------~~~---.~ ~-\~ xx The project rray nave a significar.t env;ro,lnental irr':pHt.
Impact Report wi" be prepa~ed.
Pl.nn'ng Oepart","t Off""l: 4,,~ ~
P 1 a I'1n i n g :) i re c to r : )(f('1(:Hf fK Y j 74"&. DII te :
The project has been~
The project !"las heel'1 der';ed.
Revised 8-1-79
Da te:
Da te:
F"i'~ No.:
.~
E5-EU-7
, '
/
ATIACHMENT 7
~-etjr,e:;1:!ilY. ~arch 215, 1992
Regular Meeting
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. Approval of PTarming Commission Mi;'lutes of February 12, 1992. 2
PUBl!C HEARING
2. RETAil AND INDUSTRIAL (LM) ZO~ING ORDINANCE TEXT ';'~ENDMUm: 2
Text amendment to Zoning Ordiflance Section 18.60.040 and
Comprehensive Plan amendment to a110w retail services as
condjtjanall1 permitted uses in th~ tM Limited
Manufacturing zone district. The Comprehensive Plan
amendment further i nr: 1 udes 1 angvage e;c:p 1; cit 1 y permi t t i ng
uses which are already allowed or conditionally allowed by
the Comprehensive Plan in the l~ lone~ su~h as ,hi1d care
and churches. £nviro~mental Assessment: No Significant
impact, and a negative declaration has been prepared. File
Nos. 92-ZC-I, 92-CPA-I, 92·[IA-2. Conti"ued from February 26, 1992.
REPORT Of OFfICIAL
3. ROUTE 101 RAm Mn[R!i!G..E~D NEW SAN ANTONIO .ROM ENTRANCE 4
RAMP: Review and comment on CalTrans proposal to instal r
ramp meter; ng on soutnblJund entry ramps tc Route lOr
(Bayshore Freeway) in Palo Alta and to construct a nel"l,
southbound on-ramp to Route lDt at San Antonio Road,
including mcdificat;~ns to the intersection of Charleston
Road and San Antonio Road.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
4. DESIGN IMPROV'MENT EXCEPTIQ~~UBCOMtllTTEE: ,~ppointment of 18
two planning c~mmiss~on members to the Design Improvem~nt
Exception Subcommittee.
NEW BUSINESS
5. 1992-97 Capital Improve~ent Program 19
they do not make a lot of sense elsewhere.
CQlTr.1hsiQn~l!"'..r_L~tel1sen: I ther€fore move the staff
3tton that the city council adopt the negdtiYe declaration? the
amend~ent and the pro~os!d LimIted Manufacturing zone
~~1"'Crrl
issue f'lere, such as
anything like that?
Ms. Lytie: No, there
question abcut this.
that is coming aiong
Chairman Beecham: The city
Commissioner Glaz;er: J did talk
staff is correct that there is no bu
years, a number of peepl e have come
possibility and we-re unsuccessful.
here now.
his is a good idea and it
act on retai whereas some of the
CulTl'llissioner Schmjdt: ] wish to
has the potenti.11 of 1!11T1ediate
other things 'wie have talked a t at other meeti. things that would
be harder to achieve or take more time. Tt'll have s~me impact
right away.
C~airman Beecham:
the sUlJIIlary of i t~
can do. At the s
prevent a mi sta
with the idea
d talk about this when we last d this item, and
me, is that it adds flexibility hat the city
time, it ificludes. safeguards that 'life uld need to
from going in. Sa as before, 1 :ll!! quite c fortabTe
Chai rman Beecha:r;:
on? All those in favor,
of 7·0.
Is there any
:;.1.j Aje? All
This is scheduled for the city council on April 20, 1992.
Chairman Beecham: Jtem 3 on our ager.da is Report of Official. Route 101
metering ramp and new San Antonio entrance ramp.
AGENDA ITEM 3 ROUTE 101 RAIIP METERING Al<D NEW SAN ANION 10 ROM ENTRANCE
RAMP: Review and c~mment on Calrrans proposal tJ instdl1
ra~p metering on scuthbour.d ~ntry ramps to Route 101
(Baysho~e Freeway) ~n Palo Alto Ind to construct a new.
s~uthbound on-ramp to ~oute 101 at San Antonio Road,
including modificathms to the-intersectlon of cr,arlestN1
Road and San Antonio Road.
Chairman Beecham: Dees staff tlave any caments?
03/25/91
·4·
....... -t:!N~;!"'C-·· .... -... --_.
'; .. {-
-
;x
Mr. Q'oIE!'rwa.,i: ha;.'e iii few comments. I am from the Transportation
Division of the City of Pil:10 Altll. This project is made up cf hw rather
distinct pa'l"ts, .. 1t,~.oug,", they ar-e related, He first one dea1s wit"
closing th~ ramp It Charleston Road and opening a br~nd new ramp at San
A"tor!it. ~oad. "'~ien nat it is done, there wi 11 be a renrier.t1)tion of
trifnc. at tJ"e fr'l,tersection of Cliarleston and San Antonio, arid therefore,
SOine propou;s to mOdify Charleston Road to ac,,:ol'llmodate two 1eft~turn
lanes. are induded as part of this project. An of that is part of the
ramp-c:los1n9, ramp·o .... F.!ning project.
The ~ther po~tian of this project overlaying all of that is the conce~t
of ramp metering. ~nc~lJdi!'1g ",eterin~ lights en th~ ramps froiTi the San
N.at~o Count.)' line d()"n to 1-880. In Palo Alto, nose win be in the
southhound direction at the Ore90n EXpiE<SSway southbour,d ramp.
Embarcadero ';:o.d actually has twc $Cluthbo:..nd ramps. oni! from the
eastbound direction it'id one from the \f!!estbounc direction. The neilrf San
Antonio ramp that is being added also ~il1 be metered. The concep~ of
the !!Ieterif'lg lights is that they .ill only oper-ate during peak periods
when the frE!WiY ~g;n$ to fl1"1 up and through the ~eriod when it does
reach capacity. The whole concept is to break up platoons of traffic
lnto 1~divid~al ~nlts so that as they enter the freeway~ they do not have
as significant a" impact en the flt'W of the freeway traffic. It has beei'!
deliKlnstratp:d el sewhere that the actual fl ow rate, and therefore the
capacity of the freP.\llay, is improved' sig{lificantly. There is also a
red~ction in the severity and the types of accident that generally occur
whe~ platoons of traffic enter the freeway and people start jockeying
aroun,j t<l get into the left lane and try to !yold that ~r1tri15ion. There
is a slight incidence on the ramps themse1ves of rear end accidents with
meterfng. but those are generaily of a lower, le~s severe nature then the
ones they are replacing on the freeway.
So there are two ~arts to this. Jt is baslca1ly a Cal Trans project. The
facility is th-eirs. Putting the new ra!TIp in is their fac.ilit); putting
in the lights is their faci1ity. The reason that it iiffects Pa10 Alto
directly is that in conjunction ... ittl putting in ttie rdrnp:. they are
agreeing to .... idei1 Charleston P.oad in order to pre-vide two 1eft-t~lrn
lanes, which is something that the City of Palo Alto wants. That is why
it be91;1s tc ir.tnediate1y ha'ol5' some re1E-vance to our decision-making
process. as well as just o~r interest in the project.
Cal Trans has been .ery cooperative in He developm~rlt of this project,
and
they have done most of the things tnat were concerns to the city back in
1982 when this project was first considered. We have some people 'With us
this evening. The project ~anager for this project has been Patrick K.
Pang. He is a: senior engineer 'With Cal1rans and has seen this project
through Since its inception. He has on11 recently been reassigned, as
the design portion of the proj~ct is IiOW dra",jng to i! conc1us;on. His
replacement ;5 Dennis Bosler, who will serve as project manager during
the implementation of this project. We also hav€ Rodney Oto, who deais
more with the operational aspects of this prOject, once it is constructed
and put intc operation. Besides that, we have David Vega and Ashok
Aggarwal present from our transportation divislon.
CDrmissioner Carrasco; Mr. O' .. erway, it ~eems t{) me that ATan Henderson
03/25/92
- 5
•
u
-
had 'ltfritten. a letter describing Sf.Jr',e mitig~tion m€a;;ures that needed to
be incorporated into this project. H€ even statei that without those
mitigation measures, 1'1..e. could n.ot find. a n~gatiu~ de:::1ar.ation, and. ne
would want a full en'{ironment1!.1 ispact rep.ort When I Took :It the report
that CalTrans hlS prevared artswering that letter', it seel1",£, to say that
there will be no problems and don't ~orry abo~t it. I do not see them
i"f'1corpor.ated into the pian. ,c,m I It',iss\\\g s.ometh.i~g in this n!?w propesa-'
that does, in fact, take Alanis Jetter sl"1d incorporate it into thE plan?
If you CGu1d take Alar.'s 1ett~r c.rtd ey.phtn to m€, one ilem at a Ume,
how it has bf;en incorporated into the p1an, i would appre::iate it.
Mr. Overway: The idea of going one at a time is a good cne. it is
Attachme~t A to the staff re?ort.
ItEm 1: Se\'en,,1 str'2et i!"ltHsect~ons in Pillo Alto are operating at, or
near, c<l.pacity durlng: the peak traffic periods. CalTrans should
cOf'lduct i. mere detai1e-d analysis to) determine the actua.1 i3d';,~r5~
impacts Oli Pa10 Alto streets.
1 will not speak for thEm, but I feel that they nave done tnat. They
h~ve done suhsequent traffic analjs~s sinc~ that time. ~e have a1so done
trafflc analyses since that time. lrJe have the San Ar'!tonio Study whfc!":
took i d~tailed look at that particular intersection. ~e did the
Citywide Study wnicn incorporated the San . .II.ntonio information, and also
'ooKed at)t. We curse:l"o'€:S ue saUsfied that the p1anned improvements
built into those two studies that we did \oIas the assumption that at some
po)nt, there wOlJld be a ram? put there ar,d the ramp at ChaY"le:stol'l ?{:lad
closed. So by my interpretation, any~ay, this probably has been
addri!'Ssed.
Item '2: The northbo1Jnd traffic en Charles-ton, turning right to eastbound
San Antonio, will increase is a result of closure of the
southbound on-r-amp at C.harleston. Any negative imp:lct needs to
be mitigated by CalTrans.
Inc1uded in the San Antonio Study. again, )lias the prGvis~on that the
roadway should be widened the.,.e, and a right-turn lane should be put in.
A~tual1y, there is a traffic impact fee to gcne~ate some revenue to help
on that. in addition to samE other things that were proposed. However,
in so deing. there is a very large building there, and it would take a
purchase or condemnation of that bunding in order to do that. It is not
that we don't think that might not be dor.e at some point in the future,
but my sense is that it would be better to wait than to insHt that H be
done it this point in time. It is not at all c1ear how traffic will
r€distrlPute 'itself, once t'riar1esto~ Road is c10sed and San AntGnio is
opened. Closing Charleston Road does not mean thdt people driving in
that dfrection cannet get on the freeway'. It wnl still be relatively
easy for them to cross oller Rengstorff and enter the freeway at that
po:nt. So people that are in the intermediate area between Rengstorff
and San Antonio will individually ~djust their travel patterns to fit
whatever the travel conditions are. ~'e would rather "'3it untn traffic.
has settled down to see how important that right-turn 1 ane wOiJld be. It
does have significant consequenc.es. If that property ever de'Yelops, we
would certainly try to take ad'o'antage of suc.h an opportunity. but to buy
or condemn that property to try and get it is of significant
consequences.
'C
03/25/92
-6-
b
-
item 3: The traffic impacts of develcpm~nt on West Bayshore frontage
~oad in Palo Alto must be consider~d by Cal Trans in context ~ith
the expecte1 travel pattern changes that will occur in the
vicirrity of the (h(t;r1es~D!"/San Antoriio ;nt€r:s.€-:tic'l.
I am not real sure ",hat that means. Perhaps we sho~..:ld come bad:. to that
and go on to the next one for ~aw.
ltem 4: A traffic signal ~eeds to be instilled to facilitate left turns
from westbound San Antonio onto the new 101 southbcund on-ramp.
The cost of this traffic signal and a provision of a left-turn
pocket must be included as part of th! project budget.
They are installing that traffic signal and they are paying for it as
part of Hie project cost,
Item 5; A special c·ondition reed5 to be added to tne required
Ca1Trans/Palo Alta cooperative agreement to the effect that
Cal Trans agrees to set aside sufficient funds to' implement the
specified mitigation measures in Palo Alto (enough for major
signalized inters~ctior, ~li1pro\'ements) <!nd to mitigate allY
subsequent, unforeseen, adverse impacts en Palo Alto streets,
Olle of the differences in the approach tt1at CaHrans has tak.en this time
is that the last tim~, they were pursuing a cooperative agreement with
the city and with all the cities along this route. They have ta\'.er'l. the.
approach this time that what they are doing is iin operational ir.1provemer.t
and they have the authority to do it *1 tholJt necessarily gett i ng the
formal approval of the adjacent cities. Obviously, that is subject to
interpretation, but that is the position they are taking. It quite
possibly may be a valid one. They are not seeking cooperative agreements
at this t;~, so there is no document between us whidl says that they
agree to do certain things if certain thi"l9S Tlappen+ They hav~ stated
tnat Uiey wlll cooperate with Pa10 Alto in developi,ng this project, I
feel that they nave done that. They say t~S:J lIIi11 condi.Jtt
before-and·afte r studies. and they have said they \\1'111 commit to making
whate~er improvemer.ts are needed afterwards. But that is more in the
farm of letters and comments rathtr than a formal, cooperatt~e
agreement. So I wo~ld say that for this particular item, that le~el of
specificity regarding what they ~ill do if tne thing doesn't work when
they are dane is not as clear as specified here,
Item 6: The feasibility of future mitigation measures is of serious
concern. If, after completion of the project, problems are
created on Pilo Alto's street system not resol¥able through
mitigation efforts, Cal Trans needs to agree to remove the ra~p
meters and/or to reoppn the present Charleston Road "n-nmp.
They are unwilling to make that c.omitment. They have said, and
experience would it1oicate, that tney are will ing to work wHh the
community to try and find satisfactory solutions, but to make a
commitment ahead of time to take It out If It do.sn't work, J know they
are probably unwilling to do.
We believe that the f~llo~;ng mitigation measures need to be m~de
03/25/91
-7-
i
I
i
1
I
I
I
-
part of the project and implemented to minimize the
ad'Jerse impacts of the project on Palo Alto streets and
inters~ctians:
Item I: Prc'dsion of two 1eft-turn lanES far southbound Charleston to
eastbound San Antonio. The two left-turn traffic lan~~ must be
provided whiie still retaini!'1g the-tl;W{) through-traffic lanes for
southbound Charleston.
They are doing this. That is why we f'\eed to 1Ir'1den Charleston Road.
Item 2: Provision of twr:o, ful1-traffic lanE"S for eastbound San Antonio
between Charleston and the flew ]01 southbound on-ramp. Presentli~ only a merging ("two traffic Tapes to orle~) area
exists in this section of San Antcr.io.
T,ey are doing tn.t.
Hem 3: Provision of a nelli, left-tiJl'n pocket on westbound San Antonio for
traffic turning left at the ne~ 101 southbo~nd on-ramp at San
Antonio. A new traffic s;g~al t~ faCilitate left·turn mo~e~ents
also may be required at this location.
ihat is being done.
Item 4: Execution of cooperative agreement between Cal Trans and the City
of Palo Alt~ to assure the implementation of future mitigation
measures as needed with the following pair-ts inc1uded:
There is no cooperative agreement. They hil:ve givt!n some assur'ance, but
not in tne form of a cooperative agreement, so that 1S not quite the same as what this says.
A. Cal Trans agrees to conduct a "before and after" project study
of the impacts on 101 and on Palo Alt~ streets.
They ha'ie said tne, '.,11 de this.
and wi 11 do the "after" studies.
in their comments in the report,
They are doing t~e "before" studies
They have sp~cif;~al1y addressed that
8. In addition to the specific traffic mitigation measures
described abov~, Cal Trans agrees to fund mitigation for all
subsequent adverse impacts on Palo Alto streets caused by the
project, klc1uding all necessary work in the viCinity of the
San Antonio/Charleston intersection.
They are taking the position that they will work with the local
cmzmunities, They will accept responsibility for the impacts that their
project is causing, but probably net e~actly at the same level of
ccxrrnitmer,t that this statement implies, HOWEver, this is our ~'ordingr
and the other is their wordlng.
C. Cal Trans agrees to operate th~ project on a trial basis for a
six-month period. If, after the six-month period,
unresolvable operational problems persist on the Palo Alto
street system, CalTrans agrees (at its expense) to abandon or
remo'w'e those pr::Jject faci1it;es~ or any portions thereof,
03/15/92
·8·
-".-'"
~hich directly or injirectly affect the Palo Alta ~treet
system.
As ! said tef.are, 1 <ja not believe they WGuld agree to do Hat. Hey
would ~gr€e t.tI work wi::.h uS Jnd soh'e the-prob1elts, bl!t they Irt'i!l :"lot
commit, unequivocably, to t-aking it out.
D. Cal Trans agrees to pay fer the design! canstructicn, and any
applicabl€ rna~nter,al"lce of the impro'o'elil€nt'li to resolv.e the
eXisti1'g, on-!itr~'Ct flDooing problem on San Antonio near t"e
Fe-rei Aerospace entrance. Thi s wi 11 be subject to the approval
of the city engineer_
That is being done as part of this project. That cOllers the points.
COlTJJliS5~Oner CCirrji..sCo; I was going to bring up this issue that the
agreement does net incorpO)"'cte SO~H~ of these rnitjgatio~ measures that
were part of the environmental impact report. Does that change the
finding? In jour opinion, WOL.'ld we require an fiR. because these
IDlt1gation measures that were a part of the fL'1ding are net being adhered
to?
Mr. Overway: I will defer to Ms. Case to corre-ct me if I am wrong. J
don't thinil the kinds of things they .ue talking about here would, in my
jud'glTlent, change the cn'Oironmental analysis. They have agreed to make
the physical Ic:inds 0" improvements that are needed 1 and are demonstrated
to be needed. and those same physical improvements are ths ones that came
out of our st~dies. What they are g~neral1y not doing is tc make the
firm. regal commitment that a cooperitive agreement may have represented
tOo abandon the project if it dees not work. In place of that1 they are
ag~eeir.9 to work with the city to resolve those problems. That: frankly,
is a very realistic pOSition. This project will not be a unilateral
disaster. in my judgment. It is an opentional issue, with SOIM ct:anges
being made. They have thought it through and we have looked at it
c10sely enougn that it is going to ceme close to ~ork:~ng rp.asonably
w€lL if it does not, I think they ... ill wor-Ie. with us to resolve those
issues. I just do not see the likelihood of uni1ater~11y needing to
a~andc·n that, and p'Jl] it cut, as be-ing 'rlerj real.
Commissioner Cullen: What about the neighboring cities? Do they have
cooperative agreeme~ts ~ith CalTrans?
Mr. Ov€ryay; N0 1 CalTran:; t1as taken this apPioac:n w,oi,.l:h all of th2m. They
have actu&lly worked much closer with us on t~is part'cular one because
in our instance, it is net just ramp metering. It is the new ramp and
Charlesto~ Road, etc. So they have spent a lot more time with us than
they have with the neighboring cities. There are no cooperat;~e
agreements with any cities.
Ms. Cag:; r would like to add to U1at. ~e will not be entering into
what you might call a cooperative dgreement, but in fact, they need an
agreement from us because they need our approval to acquire right-of-way
in our jurisdiction. So there wjn be an agreemerlt. In their
terminology. it is called a freeway agreement rather than a cooperative
agreement, which puts it in a different category. Nonetheless, they do
need our appro~a 1.
03/25;92
-9-
~ .
!
-..: .
. 1!l.~
~'. ;
,
,
I
I
4
-
·::as _
COiro'lissioneL.~ .. hri~Jense..n: Could you follow up on C(I:J1mis.siGn~r Carra~;co's
question? It seems to me t~at if you have ~~ environmental impact
statement, and you ha~e agreed-to mit~gations, thos~ have some force ..
No~, more recently, they ha ..... e some ~nforcec;btlitj .. If you halJe a
negative declaration and JOU do not have these 8itigation measures
'IroTitten ir-to it, that seem:s to me to be a differeilt thing, If we were
willing to say pre~iously t~at a mitigated negative declaration would be
appropriate, includL'1g these things, :Jut otherwise an ElR is reqL.;irf'd. I
do not !:ee what is changed in the situat i on. How car. we go c:or,Var.J" to
our ear1ier position?
Chairrna1"l B€'c§cnaJl: It seems. to me that 'What was stated in tl1£o letter ',,:-as
that if mitigations were in ttle project. then the r-ega:tive dec1aration
was appropr1ate. More or less ~hat staff has said is that ~ssentially.
all the mitigations that were in ~~an Henderson's letter are being
inco~porated into the project.
Commissioner Cllristel1sen.: With the excf'ption of the 11'!ipact on Palo Alto
streets, in which case, they are sayifig, yes, we will work with you but
we are not going to guarantee that we will do something. What 1 want to
~ear is wh at there is to do anyway.
(ha1rman Beecham: You are correct. They if-e rJot making a guarantee, but
they ere saying~ they will .assess it, ar,d they are saying they .,;i11 work
with the city, and they are saying they will pay for it. That is wl1at
they say in the report, al though there 1S no agreemer.t on that.
Cotmlissioner Marsh: It ieems to me that actually, some things have
changed. I do not know how that affects the environmental assessment,
but for example, we have had some sales tax since 1982 that resulted in
significant changes to tne whole ]01 corridor. incTuding tn~ addition of
lanes, etc. That certain1y affects the way the traffic moves into the
freeway. I would think it would, in general, have a positive effect,
ii1though I do not know that for sure. Gi \len thGse chang~s to the freeway
cor!"'idor. is staff comfortable that an environmental assessment done
before that was ever contemplated ;s still dependabl-e?
Mr. Overway: Yes. The rea sen that i am comfortable with the
environmental analysis is (1) your point tnat t~e ~OV lanes, if anytl1~ng,
add a positiye~ rither than a detrimental t asp€ct; and (2) 1 get some
assurance from the environmental analysis that we did ourselves. r still
feel comfortable with that enlJironmental d.na1ys~s, so based on that, I do
not have discomfort with theirs.
CommissionEr Marsh: I would think that c~,~nges to the 101 cor·ridor would
mean that traffic i!;; fiowir,g at least as smoothTy. if not more smoothly
now, '-'itt! the HOY lanes~ as it ..... as in 1982. S.J concerns ebout backup, in
partiCUlar, of the access onto the ram~5 ~ith metering wcwld be
al1eviated somewhat ~itn tho~e cnanges, tne widening that has ta~en
pl ace.
Mr. Overway: That is the case.
COIMlissiQner Cullen: Unless you listen to the traffic reports at five
o'c1ock. every night and find that if yOU don't turn off of Bayshore
03/25/52 _ , n_
•
. :
.~
WiIl
-......
....,
coming ~outh at l'il1ow Road, you are net going to get thr.:H.i'9;, th~ ne'xt
three Palo Alto intersections for quite awhile. It backs up every
afternoon. That i5 on t~e freeway. With some people attempting to ~et
ontn the freeway. I do not see haw the metering is going to help that.
It is the actual trafnc 011 the freeway j tseH rat,1er than th'E trdffic
that is trying to enter the freeway. So the HOV 1cne is an ~;o:,provement;
but I do nat think we can say that It really takes care of the backup
problem.
Mr. Ovenrway: He concept -,f ramp metering dCies not solve the-pr:Jblem .you
have stated. What it does is that it allows the freeway to operate
better for 11 littlE' lOllger than it otherwise wou1d, and c1ear itself up a
little sooner than it otherwise would. However, when there is: too much
traffic Of'! the fr-ee' .... ay, e .... en if H,ere is just a little bit coming in from
the ramps, there will be periods of brEakdown, But the conc~pt of the
ramp metering ~s to break H~ose platoons of traffic. I think you
piobably ~.a\'e experienced those, as groups of cars come if I together, the
traffic on the freeway starts moving O'fer to the left lanes so they don't
get caught in that Idlid of s!~ff. All of that turbul er,ce reduces t~e
ability of the freeway to carry the trafftc. EventualTy, when the volume
bui1ds up to a point where it simp1j does not matter whether it is a
platoon of tr~ffic or just one car, it is still gOing to break down. But
everyday, it l¥il1 last a little longer, it .. ill work a little better for
a little longer time, ~nd as traffic beg~ns to decrease, it wIll clear
Hself up a , ittle sooner. itH.t is my understanding of the benefits of
ramp metering. It is not a cure-all for freeway traffic,
ComisS:ioner Glazier: I have a questiQn about our si~tvtor'y iHJthoritj' in
tnis whole thing. Suppose we decide we don't 11ke this thing and donIt
'IfIant it to go forward, to what exlent ran we stop it? (an we pre\lent
Cal Trans from doing anyth',ng~ or is this their politI!:! lliay of telling us
that this is what they are going to do?
Mr. Overway: Regarding the new ramp at San Antnnio Road, I believe that
statutorily. they need an agreement from U~ to do that. It is called a
freeway agreement. If we refuse to sign that agreement. they probably
cannot go ahead with the new ramp. If we do not 'want Ch.:;riestor. Road
widened, we can certainly ilsk them not to 60 that. and they w{)uld' be glad
not to d{) so. Regarding the ramp metering aspects. they have a
reasonably defensible position that they have a right to do that on thefr
OW'rl property, and they can do $0. It would probably take a 1 awsui t to
stop them from dOlng it.
Mr. Pang: That pretty much 0 llt 1 i nes Ol:.r pos it; on at tn is po i nt. We hope
we would not reach that point. The reason I sald t~at is that r know the
city is concerned about whEther it might. work: or not. There are a number
of things that we can work with the city on. One; s that we (an adjus.t
the metering 1 ignt 50 as to let more cars go through at that locat lon.
Marvin touched upon putting an HOV bypass lane on that partic~lar ramp.
We can convert that into a mh:ed lane so that that · .. 111 buy us twice as
much storage) theoretically. We f:i':y b-e able to do some minor striping to
the approach to that ramp so we can improve either the operation of it or
the storage of it. If it does fail, we would probably have to initiate a
project to put more pavement out there for storage. That may take some
time, but if it is within 5250,000, we m~y ha~e a little more flexibility
to get a program and ao it sooner. Sa as a last resort y if noth1ng else
S~L
03!25j92
. 11-
!L
-
wori<.s. shutting it down is not tot;J.l1y 0:.1: of the q'-Jestion, but we wa'lt
to mai<.3 sure we have gone thro~gh an t1i~ opti.:ln and have worked with the
city before we re<Jcn tnat conclusion. ~n5tead of ma'<.ing ~ <:orl'11',;tment :-ruW
that if it does not work p in the opinio~ of the city, we would shut it
down. We think there are a number of ·ways in which we can reasonably
work ~jth t~~ city. Based on our experience in the Pdst in other
locat~ons\ a 'jot of tnose prcblems tan be r-esch"ed re1atively easily. So
it is not a matter ~f wt1-ether it wi 11 work or not wor:t.. \ole just ha\le to
~cnitor how well or how poorly it is gOing to function and then come up
with some mit tgation. measures.
r:..Q.ITlm;ssio~er Christensen: If y~u had to a{ld roo!"e paVel'llent, .... ·here wDuld
that be done?
Mr. Pirlg: it walJld have to ·be looked at or; 11 case-by-case basis. At
this 'point~ we do "rJot anticipate it happening. But theoretically. the
reason you have backup in the city is becau.srs there is not er1ougf1 storage
on the ramp itself. So you can either add a lane within the city street
or add another lane to the ramp to improve the storage. But don't get me
wrong. This;s only a theoretical approach. We will lock at the
situation and determine the best way to do it. Tnat will be one of the
p05s1bl~ solutions, but we do not anticipate it at t~is point, and we
don't believe that .. jll be the case. That is based or. the "before"
study. We ~,ave-collated traffic data at that locat;{:Jn and' ha~Fe done some
projecti'-:ms ourse~ves. So we are very comfortable that we will not reach
the point ~here extensive widening would be required on the city street.
£Q...mmissioner Christensen: What about t.he situation at £mbarc~d~ro Road
'a'here it is r.ot even .. ide enough for tne two la!1es, and lt is ·~'ery
expens1"e to add that second lane. So far that reason, that is not going
forward. There is a problem created there, and certainly we do not want
to see the city street taken at that location.
Mr. Pang: The expected traffic load from the Embarcadero ramp ls
relatively low. We dQ not belie"e it .... ill reach capa.city. Are you
referring to the lane that we are not JIIid€ning?
Cc>m-n1~s1orrer Christens.;-.n: ] refer to Embarcadero headed east. That is
the one thit seems to be the tightest, the one that is very expensive to
widen, that goes o~er the other part of the freeway.
M'r. Overway: That particul.c:r Or1e is very long, a 1 sc. It has a lot of
excess capacity beyond tne projected queue. However, fixing it would be
very expens i .... e.
Mr. Asgarwal: I just want to add that the proje~tEd queuE IS 20 cars,
whil! the capacity is 40 cars at the present time.
Commissioner Christensen: I guess 1 had more co~fidence in this until
looked at the Oregon fxpr~ssway ramp and see that we have the high~st
demand between 2;30 and 3 n'clock in the afternoon 90ing on the Oregcn
ramp. I found that a l1ttle hard to believe.
Commissioner Glazier; I have some problems with those data as they
relate to the eastbound Embarcadero going south onto 101. That ls what I
travel every morning in a southbound dir€ctio~, and two or three times a
03/25/92
-12 -
.. .,
'i"
f' '
-
week, I::etween 8;00 afld 8:30 o'clock, the~e is a pretty 10l"<g blldu.lp
there. a is tllore than 20 cars. So 1 fl:'ld it hard to beli€\lE that after
W~ add in the ramp metering. the backup is gOing to go dawn. I~ the
reason you say the maximum Ql.ieue is 20 is because it is in tnE
afternoon? 1 know t~at in the morning. there is much more than 20 cars
backed up, As I said, this happens two or three ti~es as ~eek.
Mr. Pang:
afternoon
direction
The traffic data we have collected are primarily far tne
which is the so·tal1~d peak hDur fo~ 101 in tr.e southbound
is roughlY between 3 and 6 o'clDcK, if Mt iiHJre.
COrTIll'dssi,9ner Glazier: If, indeed, the afternoc,n is the peak period
getting on tc southboijnd 101, then it should be worse. I do not go
sDuthbound Dn 101, 1 go northbound. As it relates to that ramp, I am
very un"omfortabl~ with th'! data, Maybe it is just a personal anecdote,
but I am ur.comfortabl~ with it.
.c_ommissioner Schmidt: My ques~ion h also i!'l regard to the Embarcadero
Road an-ramp area There are three locations where there would be
metering in that section. I em wondering if t~ere are other situations
existing \\onere you ~a, .. e thru-right next to each other? 1 'W{luld assume
that in operation, they would be staggered, but does it wc~k. ha ... in~ three S~ cTose togeth~r?
Mr. Pang: I don"t believe there is another location, perhaps ather than
Rengstarff, where we are going to c10se Charleston, which will alleviate the situation.
Mr. t)verway: Do you k.now of any other area.s where ramp metering is close
together? I do not know of any others.
Mr. Oto: As far as other 10citions~ there are none where there are three clos~ tDg€ther~ lie ha .... e locations wit~ two ramps that merge together
befure entering the freeway. Both of these an: ioletered. The operation
at those ramps ;s s~ch that the vehicles are re'~ased one at a time so
that by the time they reach the merge point, they ~ave pretty much sortec
themselves out. ~e 2~pect that to hap~en at this location, e~en though tner~ is one more ramp coming in.
Commissioner Schmid:: s~ they would be released one at a time, rath.er
than in p1atoons?
tlr. Oto: Yes.
Mr. O .... _~r,;a.,,: They are released back aways before they merge together '::'0
Hat as they start up, they have some momentum. It is uniqUE. and I am
not suri! that we have a similar experie~ce elsewhere.
CommIssioner CuUen: What is the time line on this project?
Mr. Pang: The plan for the project ;s 95 perc~nt completed. We are
waiting for the last hurdle 'Wnich is an air quality a..,alysis. We are in
the process of completing that study. After tnat, tne job will be
submitted to our neadquarters for furth~r proceSSing. Then it will be
advertised. We are looking at the end of the year .... 'hen we ad .... ertise this job.
03/25/92
. 13-
I
r ,
I
r
i
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
•
-
(.ommigioner Cliiler.: IIIbat ab\lut Hoe constrwction?
Mr. Pang: If we advel·tise in December, construction will probably start
s-ometime in .4.pril of 1933 and be C'1:r:plete-j in abot.:t a year~and·a~~alf. o~
the conservative side.
~Qr1JI1issioner CJill..e:n: It seems to m;; tr..cit we hi'.'e had a couple of simiia.r
projects. We already went througf, something about four years ago
r~gil:rdi ng one of the on' ramps from San Antonio. r wender wl1at happened
to that. We had a project on changing the flow of traffic from one of
the on-ramps to 101.
Mr. Aggarru: Th.e only project 1 remember is this (One that came to us
back in 1982 or 1983. I d{) not recill1 any otrler 1 eter than t"at,
Commissioner Cullen:
of these overpasses?
Time does p.2ss. What aboo..:t tne sfl:srr.ic upgradir.g
Has that been accompli shed?
Mr. PjLn9; J personally am nat aware of any seismiC retrofit type of
pr-oject at this location, blJt that does not mean it d0'25 ni)t €.xist. r am
lI'ior-e tharl happy to fono", up on that and gjve yOlO a response-as to the
status. if any.
CommissiQI'l __ sE __ Y!lJ...flll: ~e had something in the Capital Irr.prol!ement Program
cn that.
Mr. Overw~: That would be the responsibility of Cal Trans. What r do
know is that they came through and upgraded tne b~cycle bridg~ at Oregon,
so I know they ire aware of it and are doing those kinds of things. J am
not aware of any of the old bridges that they have gone through or felt
that they had to go through. J do not know where tha.t fits in their
priorities. It wou1d be their cost and their r~spC"ns;bnity.
Mi. Veo~: j wou1d 1 i ke to ciar; fy Some of the concerns ar.d comments !
heard earlier. There is a feel!ng that the metertng would be operationa1
in the morning. J believe that the meterir.g is intended to come iflto
operation only i~ the afternoon when tt'le peale. period on u,f:! freeway is
heaviest. It is not in refarence to when the ramps are heaviest. In the
southbound direction, their feeling apparently is that the after~oon is
when it is e.xpected. So there ma$, indeed, be more ~raffic in the
morning on Hat Oregon rQmPl but for tne freeway itsel f, meteririg \IIIould
not be necessary to assist traffic to ent~r the freeway.
£Qm:!ljssioner Chri.stensel'l~ I have a concern about som€thing in the data.
It is not my experience that 2:30 to 3 o'clock in the afternoon is the
peak time headed out to th~ freeway on Oregon. The other concern I have
is that the Charleston area is ! gateway to the city, and you are taTking
about a remoYing a large number of trees that were only recently ~lanted
there on both sides of the freeway. We are not even talking about even
putting trees back on one side of Charleston Road. r feel that same
bethf treatment of tne Cha:--l estan entry into tne city n€eds to Occur if
this widening goes forward, Tony has drawn a little sketch of putting
trees down the center of the street. but certainly a sigr:ificant planting
of trees on both sides of that 'Widening. \lie have spent a lot of tirn~ on
entrtes to the city. and to hal;"e this happen and remove all the trees we
03/25/92
-! 4·
----~------,.
requ{red applicants to put in and not rep1lce the~ is ~ct acc~ptahle to
me.
CQmmissior1:er ~jlrras(.o; I have tne same kind of concern Hat C{1IT1mis.s;oner
Christensen has. That is the ',ntenectiol"l that 1 1cok UpOI"l as my el"ltr,)'
into Palo Alto, as do a number of people who live in south PaTo Alto. I
f~el that the way it has bE'e:1 designed now, it is going to be an
intersection that is almost 70 feet wide. The zarling on either sIde is
single-family, and ~s you go furtner down into it, it is multiple-family
and a gas station. Living on th~t kind of a street is not cand~ciw€ to
the k'ind of nlce environment that we wcwld imagine for people 1 i'w'ing in
ralo Alto. I would strong 1y suggest t~at we look at a Tandscape plan~
much as we have done in tt1e pa::.t wHh Tands:~ape pla(ls from ,oriviite
develop2rs. They are Quite elaborate, and n'!quest that they desc.ribe
~hat is actualiy gOlng to take place. The plan as slIblTlitted bi C~lTrans
does riot COflle up to the standards that we have come to Expect from other
applic~nts. I am not sure if you should make a~ exception, but I presume
that it wou1d be nice to haYe an entire iandscape plan.
r would also suggest narrow"ing Charle~ton down \,.-isua1lJ' by putting il1 a
median with street tr€E-S. 1 would 1 ikE-that to be explored. wnen H
comes back to us, CalTrans has recommended on Page 10 that ti1e plan of
the Sar. Antonio/Charleston ~I"ltersect;on, a critical intersection in terms
of the entry to Palo Alto~ will b~ sent back to us for our review. It
ShOUld also be fer cur approval as well as our revie~. It is a Palo Alto
street. and W~ need approval and jurisdir:Uon over Hat intersect1on. I
would suggest that landscape plans be added to your recormendilltion, Mr.
OVE-Nay, in Part A and Part B of the staff report on Page 11. ! ... ould
1 i ke to make t"'-at an amen.:iment to the report tt'1at when ; t goes to the
city counci~, we look at really detailed landscap~ plans for this
gateway.
~irm_an Beecham: Does staff have any cafilTlent about tha t,ees and the
power of overseeing and approving any fl't~re pl anS'?
Mr. Ol,lerway: One t~;,ng I war.t to darify, ar:d if H says it an Page 10,
help me fl~d it, because at this point, t~e intent was not to bring this
back. to tire p1.arlning comm~5S;on agaif'1. That does not ~ea" that YOLl
cannot make it come back again, but at this point, the prcject is going
forward to the council un1ess something else happtns.
Cgrrr.lissioner Carrasco; On Page 10 of their letter. Specific Oesigri'
Features, CalTrans Response, "The final plan of the modification of the
San Antonio Road/Ch:ilrlesto!1 Road intersection will be sent to you for
review. II
Mr. Ovsrwat: 8j their defi~itior.. that has been done. We have a set of
detailed construction plans avanabl€ in our office. it does not include
the kind of landscap;ng plan Hat you are talkir.g about. They have
submitted that to us. Th~ ether isslJe ;s that we can certainly talk about
Charleston Road and hndscaping for it. I do not know how much further
Ca1Trans is willing or prepared to go. Frankly, 1 think they have been
encouraged by staff to go this far. Whether they would go furth~r or
nat, I do not kna~. I rather expect nat, but that is up to them to say.
Partly. this relates to their view of this as their doing th~s because
the City of Palo Alto wants it, however, our view of it is that they have
03/15/92
·)5 -
';~i1~~~~
;~'~:l'
-
i
I
I
-
US I
Lo do this in order to get what th&y want. which is a freeway agreeme~t
to put in the ramp. Sa it is just a difference of opinion.
Comm;S$~ongr ~hristensen: '..,'€ll. there i~ no ',ray that that ll1tenection
is going: [0 work without that left~t'.,;rn lar;e. E .... erybody;s trying to g~t
ante the fr.eewa.¥ at that point, so if Hey clc:se off the freeway and do
not add a way for t~cse cars to get through that intersection, you are
just creating a huge mess for Palo Alto, and it won't ~atter if they
meter the on-ramp because the stop light t~ere ~jl1 meter it for them.
Mr. Qverway: That is why we fe€7 it is essential tt1at 'We go forward .. ith
the .. ,dp.ning of Ctlar1eston Road to get that extra lane. nat is w:,y !'Ie
ha'fe tried to get as rr:uch landscaping repracement as possible. That ~,S
whJ H ends up 1ookiil9 1 ike it has. They ha\le replaced an equd1 number
OJ more tre~s than they are actu.!l it taki;,g out, but tnat does not
address the more 9~nerous landscaping p1an that Commissioner Carrasco 1S
ref.arTing to.
~-±~; One comment I would like to ma~e 1S that Charleston ROad, \oIith
its CiJrrent length and configuratlorl, is very tight already. One or two
lenes are only 11 feet wide. So there: is no way whatsoever to put ifl a
planted area in the median. Right now the trees th?lt we are willing to
put in are actu41lY goin~ to be planted inside Sun ~icro's property. If
there were room ~;thin the city limits to do that. we would have don~
so. I be~ieve there 1S no room whatsoever.
Chairman Beecham; For me, this is il: project whose time tlas come, We
have two parts to it. une part docs impact US on (harlestan Road. To
speak to the need far having a ramp coming off San Antonio, I have alsO
used that ramp, as we all ha~e. Unfortunately. 1 ha~e also been a
passenger when the people who were driving were not familiar Wit~, tn~
area and used the ramp coming off Old Middlefield Road~ It is a
hazardous ramp for those entering 101 and hazardous for t~ose already on
101. I feel that safetj requirements do demand that we have a ramp
coming off S;:;n Antonio and cTose th€ one cUI'rer'l~ly in that area going
southbound.
The staff and C.alTrans hay'€! worked out i reClsonably good compromise in
terms of what is needed for a ramp to work. and how to mitlgatE some of
the impacts on tns city. fn fact, we do have tc widen Charleston at the
intersection of San Antonio for the left·turn lane. We .... ill be taking
out five feet of curb and planting strip to get an additional tane. r
don't thtnk one (an do 'it wHh less tharl that. Or,e has to do this.
In terms of trees, they have wod:ed out all agreement to put trees on
private property, and that speaks to the effcrt they have gone through to
get to this point. I .... oLlld iike more trees, and like trees ev'?rywhere,
but for what we are getting out of this. I feel this is a good solution
fOr" us.
c.orrm;,ssioner Cullen: The ctty has e polic,Y on private property for the
remolJval of treas. "hat is the ratio? Isn't it two to b€ planted for
everyone that is removed?
Ms~: Yes, tnat is the standard that \lie L!SI?,
Ol/15/92
-16·~
I
f
I , J , -r ~I
J
-I
tj
__________ ---'L
.. ~:::~ ~'-. :""';:-'
r~IF_.
-
~~ ___ s$icner -Culler.: 1 see no reason .... h .... t~-:'y ~hoL:Td riot be h~Td to t~e
same standard.
~bairman Bef':::h:lm: Urofortwnat'E'Iy. we are nut rerr-o"ing tre.c:~ fro~ privat~
property, and this is not a pri~ate offer. The tr~es are on a city
rigMt~of-way, and there is no more city right-cf-\'!ay. It seems; to me
that th~ city has worked it out to put some Gn private propertYI but ~e
ar€ not dealing ~ith a devrloper ~ho has control over all of the
property. So it i~ u~fortunate that we ~re losi~g trees there, but for
safety redsons~ we have to do so~ethlng This is probably the best
solution we can ~ork out. You cannot take land and make it out of
nothing. You hav2 t~ take land ard turn it into an additional turn lane,
and lt must come frGm somewhere.
Regarding th~ metering ramps, in this area, we-may be the last ones to be
getting meterin'9 ramps as you go south. They have been proven fairly
widely to be effective in if;lprolJing fiow onto the r;ain h~g~·",ay. I fe-el
that it is part of the reglortal responsib+lity that we .~avE to agree and
support doir.g this. So I would happily support a ~otio'1 to mOl,le the
staff recommendation.
COlTIitfilloner Carrasco: To pursue this tree issue a 1 ittle fuy'ther. a.s
that is ~ssentially what bothers me about this intersection. If, indeed,
we are going to be taking some of Sun Micrors prop£>rt~ to put in trees,
car. y~u rna';£> that tree iine in four more-feet and add anoUi-er row of
trees in the middle? I think a six-lar.e street is rea1ly a huge street
that is not a residential feeling street. !t is going to look 1ike
Sunny'y'ale~
Commissioner Cunen: I \";11 reiterate what I Slid. know they are net
i private developer, but we hold our own city responsible for following
tity pol icies, and 1 don't see " .. hj 'We should not Mo1d the juri:;dictilJn
res.ponsible. I think it is a perfectly logical thing to find another
place to put in som~ more trees. How about on the other side w~ere ~e
are taking out that one tree and 1eaving three, Is there rODm to put in
more treES on that side?
Mr Overway: I would like to offi!r .a suggestion. \tie are not opposed to
putting in trees. If CaHrans is, maybe the a'1s .... er is tnat the cit) will
do it. But what I would suggest is, I would 1 ike to go o~t ther"e with
Tony and help llS both understand what some of the options are. Then we
can approach the property cwners. There are several property owners
there, and Sun Micro is one of them. There is also a Kenbd.y Fried
ChiCken place on the corner that may flot be nec(ssarily interested in
trees on their property becaus.e of the signag€ that they have, But I
would 1 ik! to Explore some of those options and maybe impro .... e on what is
being talked about here. I have trouble enwisioning a median in there,
b~t maybe I just do not see it. 1 remember several yea~s back when the
soundil/al1s ... ·ent in, we sat down a:ld talked it o .... er and arriVEd at il
product that \lias satisfactory t.o Heryone ~r. ... olved, on an informal ~
rather than a forma1 basis. Just a ~uggestio~.
Corrmissioner Chris~rl.sen: I think that is a good suggestion. ~'e hal,le
put in a lot of effort into gateways into the (lty. and I cannot see
destroying one just in the interest:> of moving tr.a.ffic better, when .... E
h~ve an option to do something that is a little better solutio~. JUst
-L
03/25/92
-17-
,
r··
I
~.
i
! ,
[
..... '1-
.:-14
for your infor";1a~1onj Bern, the~e w"ill Stl1l bE: the Old Midd1e-fjeld
oll-:'"amp. so if you are using that, you Cii;; still do so,
MOTION: ~ission~r.-.l?Jazi"'l:: I IT'o ... e that 101", find the prc-jeJ.:.t as being
consistent with the Comprehensi~e Plan and that the ne9ati~e declaration
pr-epared by (a!Trans is adequi3.te, alld we recommend approval of the
project to the city cou~ci1, the project being Parts P. alid 8; also
included in the motion is the recommendation thit W~ underscore the
importance of the c~lI'r'!1itment by CalTrans fer (aJ cr!-·~,')ing mOf:itori'1g of
operations, (b) a thorough operational e .. ·aluation, iT';c1~sive of
before-and-after conditions, and {cl remedial actions/projects to addre~s
any ad .... ers€ impac.ts on local city streets; also to add (d) that CaiTrans
and staff explore the possibility of additional landscaping along
Charleston P.oad where the trees ire being re:::o'led.
SECOND: By Commissioner Marsh_
MonON P.4SSES: Chairmar. Beedam: Is there ar:y further discussion on
this mot;on? The motion is that we find the praject as being consistent
with tile Compren.en:si'ie Plan and Hat the negative decTaration prepared by
Ca1Trans is adequate, and we reco~~end appro~al of the project to the
city councn, and that 'fie add a condition {d} that Ca1Trarls and staff,
along with COll'lll'issioner Carrasco if he is W'illing, e:tplore additional
landscaping. All those in favor, say Aye? All opposed? That passes on
a votE-of 7-C.
~--,,--lli: That goes to the city council on .4pril 20, 1992.
Chai~an Beec~am: Next is Item 4.
DESI.N IMPROVEMENT EXCEPTlQli SUBCOMMITTEE: Appointm.·
of two planning tommission members to the Oes.igt'1
Improvement Exc<ept i on $u be 0 rrnr.1t tee.
~LWi_ h.ill!: Ms. Lytle. -would you care
nedule?
In the second
wou1d go off
It is to b
stafF-
g. we wculd be looking at dra
draft 'What we agreed to, ilnd return
mposed of two co~mission members, two ARB
dr! Beecham: Do 'We have any volunteers?
issioner Carrasco ha~e vol~~te<ered.
03/25/92
-18
process,
~IE