Palo Alto Council to review El Camino Bus Rapid Transit, which would make the bus time-competitive with driving

The VTA Bus Rapid Transit project would make the El Camino bus time-competitive with driving, including in Palo Alto. This evening, Palo Alto City Council will review the project at a study session starting at 5pm.

VTA ECR BRT

For the El Camino route as a whole San Jose to Palo Alto, people using the bus would travel over 30 minutes faster, and a driving trip would be 3-4 minutes slower.  But, almost nobody travels on ECR from Palo Alto all the way to San Jose – most trips are 5-7 miles long, whether driving or taking the bus.

The proposed project has two main options – so-called mixed flow,which would have upgraded bus stops that allow people to pay before boarding, and dedicated lane, which would use a lane of El Camino exclusively for bus use.  If none of these changes were made (the so called no build alternative), VTA would still increase bus frequency from every 13 minutes to every 10 minutes.

For a more typical example – to travel from downtown Palo Alto to the San Antonio area in Mountain View, without any bus service changes, driving will take ~10 minutes and the express bus will take 22 minutes in 2018.  The mixed flow version saves only 1 minute in bus travel time.  With the dedicated lane version, the bus will take 10 minutes and driving will take 11 minutes.  So, at the cost of 1 minute in drive time, we get bus service that is time-competitive with driving!

Making the bus time-competitive with driving is *the* factor that attracts choice riders and causes ridership to increase.  When Caltrain introduced the Baby Bullet service, that’s when ridership spiked, increasing well over double in the following decade.   Recent BRT projects in Eugene, Oregon, Cleveland, and Los Angeles show that projects that made the bus much more time-competitive with driving exceeded their ridership projections.

El Camino BRT would be complementary with Caltrain.  Stops are closer together:  BRT will make 15 stops on El Camino Real and the Alameda, providing access to more destinations.  Caltrain electrification will enable more frequent service – potentially a BART-like 20 minute schedule. BRT service will still be more frequent, coming every 10 minutes.

Yes, some intersections would be worse for drivers with dedicated lanes.  Out of the 1 minute longer drive time, 20 seconds would be extra delay at Oregon and Page Mill. The dedicated lane version would divert some trips away from El Camino Real and add traffic to some side street intersections, but those impacts can be mitigated according to the EIR.  For example, Alma and Meadow would get 2 seconds slower, and by 2040 it would be 15 seconds slower.  Is that tradeoff worth creating a bus route that is 10 minutes faster, and time-competitive with driving?

Currently, Palo Alto’s land use plans include El Camino Real as a site for more housing.  If we want to use ECR as a site for more housing, a time-competitive bus would be extremely valuable to enable El Camino residents to have fewer cars, generate less traffic, and have a more attractive, safer streetscape with better pedestrian and bicycle accommodations.

TRAVEL TIME (2018) – UNIVERSITY AVE (Palo Alto) TO SHOWERS DR (Mountain View) – PM

No Build

Mixed Flow

Dedicated Lane

BRT (522)

22.1

20.9

9.7

Auto

10.2

10.2

11.1

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

SamTrans considers El Camino Real bus speedup

SamTrans has published a study about the potential to speed up El Camino Real bus service by up to 25%.  ECR is the highest ridership line in the system, with over 13,000 daily weekday boardings.   Ridership on the ECR line has increased about 15% since frequency has been increased to every 15 minutes (as of August 2014)

Screen Shot 2014-11-16 at 10.12.24 AM.png

The changes being considered are similar to features that created the VTA 522 Rapid service, which has “signal priority” allowing the bus to get a green light, and has fewer stops than the local 22.

SamTrans studied various options for the speedup – doing an “overlay” adding a route with fewer stops, on top of local service that would continue run but less frequently, and a “hybrid” concept that removes up to 50% of stops across the line.   SamTrans’ analysis shows that the changes would increase ridership by up to 35%.

As cities continue to add development along El Camino Real following the principles of the Grand Boulevard initiative, better bus service is likely to help the area handle more people with less driving.  All of the improvement options would increase ridership, but would cost more money.

Screen Shot 2014-11-16 at 8.56.50 AM.png

Current

Overlay (keeps local) in 2020

Hybrid (eliminates local) in 2020

Ridership

16,600 daily

19,000 to 22,000

17,700 to 22,500

Ridership % change

+ 19% to 34%

+ 6% to 35%

Cost

$14.5 Million

+ $5.7m to $10.3M

+ $1.3M to $8.4M

Cost % change

+ 34% to 59%

+ 8% to 51%

What SamTrans calls the “hybrid” option would be relatively less expensive to run.   But it wouldn’t have any close-together local stops. According to SamTrans’ analysis for its strategic plan, elderly people will represent an increasing share of ridership as the baby boom generation ages. People tend to outlive their ability to drive by 7-10 years. Elderly people with less mobility tend to prefer closer stops; eliminating local service entirely would be a problem for these riders.

A “Rapid” service could also transit signal priority, which would reduce travel time by 15 minutes over the line, and improvements to bus stops to provide a better rider experience.

Enhanced bus stops

Canopy, benches, windscreen, lighting, realtime info

$11 million

Transit signal priority

Reduces travel time by 15 minutes

$2.4 million

Improvements to the ECR route would complement Caltrain. Although though the routes are parallel and close together across much of the line, the bus stops will continue to be closer together. The ECR line has over 100 stops in each direction. The proposed Rapid service would have 37 to 76 stops.  Caltrain has only 11 stops in San Mateo County.

SamTrans is not considering a dedicated lane for the bus, unlike the Bus Rapid Transit project in Santa Clara County, which would make bus travel time-competitive with car travel. But slowing car travel, even by 3 minutes over the distance from San Jose to Palo Alto, is running into significant political pushback.

The proposal builds on the traditional highest performing North/South route on the Peninsula Corridor, and doesn’t area’s chronic weakness, east-west connectivity. The draft SamTrans strategic plan proposes using “pulse” scheduling to enable connections to less frequent routes, as well as continuing to experiment with on-demand service that might help with connectivity in lower density areas.

SamTrans will be taking public input on the proposed changes at a meeting on November 18 at SamTrans HQ in San Carlos at 6pm, as well as meetings of the Grand Boulevard Task Force and Working Committee on November 19 and December 15, the SamTrans Citizens Advisory Committee on December 3, and other groups on request.

What do you think about this idea to beef up El Camino Real bus service in San Mateo County?

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

VTA Bus Rapid Transit environmental report shows bus could be time-competitive with driving

VTA has recently released the environmental impact report for its its Bus Rapid Transit project on the El Camino line, the most heavily used transit route in the VTA system. The report shows that if the project is built with dedicated bus lanes, it will make taking the bus time-competitive with driving, for the first time in Santa Clara County history.   Currently, taking the express 522 bus is nearly twice as slow as driving.   Making transit 25-30 minutes faster would cost 2-3 minutes for drivers.

Travel time AM Peak Westbound PM Peak Eastbound
Auto

43

44

Current bus

71

85

BRT Dedicated Lane

47

52

However, obsolete environmental rules make the best transit project look bad, by measuring its transportation impact terms of vehicle delay, so saving 3 minutes for drivers outweighs saving 30 minutes for people taking transit.  Last year, the state legislature passed a law to change the rules; starting next year, a project that reduces vehicle miles will be seen as environmentally favorable.  For more information about the project – see TransForm’s blog post

If you are interested in learning more and commenting, there are several upcoming meetings:

  • Sunnyvale Council study session on November 11 at 5:15pm at City Council Chambers, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale, CA 94086

  • VTA community meetings in Mountain View on November 20, 8:30am to 10:30 am and 5:30pm to 7:30pm at Mountain View City Council Chambers, 500 Castro Street

  • VTA community meetings, Wednesday, December 3, 8:30 to 10:30am and 5:30 p.m.-7:30 p.m. at Santa Clara City Council Chambers, 1500 Warburton Avenue, Santa Clara, CA.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

SamTrans strategic plan looks to changes in demographics, technology, land use

SamTrans is working on an update to the agency’s strategic plan, with an eye toward changes in demographics and technology.   The relatively short-term plan, covering 2015 to 2019, is expected to be presented for board approval in December.

Although ridership has been down by 14% overall in the last five years, ridership has increased 3% since the introduction of the SamTrans service plan, which beefed up service on El Camino and some high-ridership areas.

SamTrans is looking to older and younger riders for potential ridership increases, for different reasons. Seniors represent a growing share of riders.  On average, women outlive their ability to drive by a decade, and men by 7 years. As people live longer and the baby boom generation ages, there will be many people more people dependent on transit.

According to a study from the AARP, seniors place a high priority on having a bus stop nearby, as well as nearby groceries, pharmacy services, and parks.

Screen Shot 2014-11-05 at 12.55.09 PM

The strategic plan also acknowledges the changing transportation preferences of younger people.  The draft cites a statistic from a US PIRG report showing that  car use among San Mateo County’s young adults (16 to 34) decreased by 23 percent from 2001-2009.

Historically in our area, most bus riders have been people who don’t have other choices – elderly, youth, and low-income who can’t drive or cannot afford a car.   People who have a choice have chosen to drive. It will be interesting to see if SamTrans’ research shows a population of younger people who prefer not to drive, and will use a bus if it is reasonably convenient.

A characteristic of the “smartphone generation” of transit users is that they may value low-stress productive or entertainment time more than absolute speed, when driving is faster but means you need to focus on driving. To appeal to these users, including students and commuters, SamTrans plans to consider adding wifi to buses.

SamTrans will also be looking to new service models and technologies to provide service to lower density communities.  The first experiment along these lines is the FLX service used in Pacifica and San Carlos which allows users to call ahead and schedule a custom pickup.  According to SamTrans, “The Pacifica FLX has been successful, carrying about 100 passengers a day while meeting the needs of a community previously underserved by transit.”    This sort of model could conceivably be combined with transportation network technology to provide even more flexible service for areas that are difficult to serve cost-effectively with fixed route buses.

Finally, SamTrans is seeking to be a stronger steward of the land it owns along its right of way.  The San Carlos Transit Village is nearing final approval  in a scaled down version, after a bumpy ride where opponents objected to size and traffic, while supporters were lukewarm due to lack of affordable housing commitments.   At the time, SamTrans had largely delegated its community interaction to the developer.

In the strategic plan, SamTrans asserts an intention to play a stronger role, to “work with community partners to influence synergistic land use development policies that support transit investments and promote sustainable communities through the Grand Boulevard Initiative.” This will require creating a stronger “Transit-oriented Development policy that both guides development of SamTrans assets and influences growth near major SamTrans transit hubs.”

The transit-oriented development strategy can help over time serving the needs of older and younger people.  Our region has an undersupply of smaller housing units that are close to transit and basic services, which would meet the needs of older and younger residents. Seniors preferences to also be near services (groceries, drugstores) and parks provide helpful information regarding the TOD strategy – it’s important not just to add housing next to transit, but for the area to have nearby services and public space, to enable residents to go about daily lives without needing to drive.

These are all positive developments that could help SamTrans keep up with the times, providing better service to growing segments of riders, and over time, enable more people to live walking distance from public transit.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Peninsula cities vote to support development near transit

Voters in San Bruno approved a ballot measure to raise height limits in the downtown area near Caltrain and El Camino Real.   An earlier ballot measure passed in 1977 required a vote of the people to build buildings taller than 3 stories in those areas, and the downtown has seen little change since.

Voters in Menlo Park opposed Measure M, which would have limited the amount of office space allowed near Caltrain (office workers near transit have the highest likelihood of transit use).  Two proposed mixed use developments, with offices, apartments, and a small amount of retail, are now in a position to move forward, although the development on Stanford-owned land will need an environmental study and some traffic reduction.

Voters in Mountain View elected Pat Showalter, Ken Rosenberg, and Lenny Siegel three candidates who support housing in North Bayshore where Google is, and progress on the city’s jobs housing imbalance, which has been contributing to price spikes and commute traffic increases.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Redwood City seeks to recover stranded private parking and research opportunities to reduce car commutes

In an effort to use available parking space more efficiently in Downtown Redwood City as new buildings open up, Redwood City is investigating opportunities to recover underutilized parking spaces that are “stranded” in private buildings.

Redwood City staff sought advice from an East Bay company that has a specialty in working with private property owners to make underutilized spaces available to the public, by using parking meters, permit parking, or valet parking.  This approach has been successfully used in East Bay cities including Walnut Creek, Concord, and Pleasant Hill.

Successful examples of this approach, taken from the staff report, include:

• One Walnut Creek Center – facility is managed dynamically through the app ParkMe where the owner decides how many spaces to make publicly available  and under what terms. They currently offer hourly, daily, and monthly paid parking as well as allowing parkers to reserve a space.

• Plaza Escuela Parking Garage, where parking meters were installed on the lower floors with the remaining upper floors remained free.  This which successfully shifted employees away from the prime spaces and into the upper floors.

Enabling parking efficiency from the start

Redwood City and other cities can make this process even easier with new developments by requiring parking spaces to be unbundled in the lease, and to be sold separately to tenants. This process, called “unbundled parking”, makes it easy for developers and the city to tell if parking spaces are underutilized and can be made available for the public pool.

Unbundled parking also allows property managers, and employers to offer “parking cashout” benefits – a cash payment to employees who choose not to take a parking space, up to the value of the least parking space.   Parking cashout is required by state law for companies with more than 50 employees, as long as the parking is unbundled in the lease, so that there is a cash value for the parking.  The state does not enforce the law, but allows cities to do so.

Conserve parking spaces with less driving

In order to reduce the burden on the parking supply, Redwood City is starting to conduct a survey of downtown employees, in partnership with Commute.org and 511.org.   The survey will ask commuters where they come from, what modes they use today, their commute priorities. If they drive, the survey asks questions to determine their reasons for driving, and to identify programs and improvements that might help them choose to drive less, such as a better shuttle to transit, transit pass discounts, help finding carpool partners, or bike lockers and showers at work.  This is the type of information gathered by Stanford and other successful programs at private employers that enable them to design programs to greatly reduce car commuting and parking demand.

Council members acknowledge and support the direction they’re seeing, especially with the new startups that are flocking downtown.  Council member Aguirre admired the startups with walls full of bicycles, and urged shuttles serving the city to include bike racks.

Opportunities for more parking efficiencies

Based on analysis of parking utilization, Redwood City made some changes to its parking pricing in August, increasing the hourly parking rate in the downtown core to $1 per hour to help visitors find parking in the most popular locations.

The change has been working to improve turnover in the popular downtown core locations, helping more people find parking when and where they need it, and has also encouraged more people to park outside the downtown core where rates are $.25 per hour.

Based on occupancy analysis and feedback from the city’s Parking Advisory Committee, Redwood City will consider more refinements in the future, such as 20-minute “Grab & Go” spaces in the downtown core once additional supply becomes available with the open of the Crossing/900 development near the Caltrain station.  Data from on-street sensors and the parking study suggest  that a majority of trips to Downtown are quite short (52% of trips on certain  blocks of Broadway and Jefferson are under 30 minutes.)

Measure, manage, improve

Following the adoption of an overall strategy to manage its parking supply in its General Plan, Redwood City is making steady progress at using its existing parking supply more efficiently, and getting started on the next steps in reducing demand.

Mayor Gee praised the iterative approach that the city is taking. “This plan will be adjusted over time – things will change, we’ll adjust and make improvements, knowing that when we make a decision, it’s not forever.”

This approach represents a major transformation from earlier approaches to parking, which were based on assumptions of cheap real estate, driving as the dominant form of transportation, and subsidize for driving in the form of plentiful, free parking.  Now, with real estate prices at a premium, and increasing preferences toward less driving, cities including Redwood City are changing their policies to focus on using parking space more efficiently, and changing the incentive structure to encourage more people to access jobs and services without driving.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Palo Alto moves forward with initiative to reduce car trips

Last week, the Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission got an update on the early stages of the formation of the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (TMA).  In the last year, the Palo Alto City Council started a major initiative major decision to address traffic and parking problems by investing in programs to reduce vehicle trips, in addition to strategies to manage parking more efficiently and build more supply.  To implement this trip reduction strategy, Palo Alto is starting a TMA, a nonprofit organization which will manage marketing and programs to reduce vehicle trips, such as shuttles, transit pass discounts, carshare, and other benefits, on behalf of businesses and residents.

The update about the first steps to get the TMA started was provided by staff member Jessica Sullivan, and consultant Wendy Silvani, who staffed the successful, pioneering Emeryville TMA which currently serves 1.4 million annual shuttle trips to BART, and the Mission Bay TMA which has an 85% non-drive alone mode share.

To start to get input and gather support for the program, the consultants have been interviewing various stakeholder groups including businesses, senior centers, and neighborhood groups, and asked the PTC for other groups to reach out to.  PTC members strongly recommended reaching out to the school system, including “safe routes to schools” leaders who have already made tremendous progress at restoring  the share of kids walking and bicycling to school to around half, up from a low of about 25%.

Commissioner Carl King expressed concern that the goal of the TMA, which is to reduce vehicle trips by 30%, based on a council directive, might be too aggressive.   In response, Commissioner Arthur Keller pointed out that Stanford has achieved deeper trip reductions than that over the last decade. (So have Google and other leading private sector programs, and Portland’s Lloyd District).  As the TMA gathers information about the opportunities for vehicle trip reduction in Palo Alto, they could refine the goal based on data, in the way that the Cities of Mountain View and San Mateo have set their goals by analyzing how much the use of transportation alternatives could be increased.

Commissioner King strongly encouraged trip reduction methods to require participation. “In Palo Alto, we tend to be very polite” – but in order to get results, the program can’t be purely optional and without accountability.

A PTC member asked about the relationship between the TMA and the city. The Transportation Management Association will be a nonprofit with its own board. Silvani and Sullivan mentioned that the current thinking is that city staff will serve on the board – a PTC member suggested ex officio representation by a Councilmember and a PTC member.

Commissioner Eric Rosenblum asked questions about funding mechanisms, which were not answered very clearly by consultants and staff. Based on research regarding other locations, TMAs can be funded with a variety of sources. In areas dominated by new development, TMAs are often funded substantially by development fees. TMAs can also be funded via membership fees, fees for services, assessment mechanisms, and parking revenues. Parking revenues are a major source of funds for Stanford, as well as TMA programs in Boulder and Portland.

King and other PTC members questioned the initial focus on downtown, when community members are concerned about traffic all around town. South Palo Alto neighborhoods have perennial concerns about getting fewer benefits than northern neighborhoods, and there is a particularly high driving rate at Stanford Research Park.

Based on case studies from other places, it would be desirable for TMA to evolve to provide programs to multiple areas across town – but this blogger thinks it would be a risk to try and serve all parts of the city identically, all at once. By focusing on a defined set of places that people come from and travel to, the TMA will be able to  create focused programs for clusters of people tailored for specific areas.  For example, a neighborhood GoPass would likely be more effective in the Downtown and Cal Ave areas than South Palo Alto neighborhoods two miles from the closest Caltrain station.

With regard to Stanford Research Park,  contributors to the high rate of driving likely include free parking, challenges with the schedules of the shuttles to/from Caltrain, and shuttles home provided only by the largest employers for a fee. So it is financially attractive for employees to drive.   The first things that Stanford University did when implementing TDM was to start charging for parking, add Caltrain shuttles designed based on data about employees needs, and provide employees with deep-discount Caltrain passes.  An alternative to charging for parking is offering “parking cashout” benefits – a cash payment in exchange for not using a parking space.

As for neighborhoods, there are examples of cities with successful residential TDM programs. Boulder offers a neighborhood EcoPass – a deep-discount transit pass that a neighborhood can vote to adopt.  Neighborhoods using this program drive 40% less on average than other Boulder neighborhoods.  Data about potential use, and active community buy-in should be needed to institute neighborhood programs.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Palo Alto advances plans to reduce driving, manage parking

Palo Alto has been taking next steps on programs to reduce driving and use parking more efficiently

In the last year, Palo Alto City Council took major steps to transform its transportation strategy.   Sparked by controversies about car parking, Council decided on a multi-pronged approach:

  • manage existing parking more efficiently, including residential permit parking
  • invest in reducing demand for driving
  • add more parking garages (see blog post)

Now, these programs are moving forward.  Here’s an update.

Monday 10/26 @ City Council - Shuttles and “Transportation Demand Management” (TDM)

Palo Alto – like other cities in the area – recently had a lightbulb moment: investing in services and incentives to reduce driving, can reduce the need to build expensive new garages.  Building a new parking space in a Palo Alto parking garage costs over $60,000.   By contrast, “Transportation Demand Management” (TDM) programs take a page from the playbook of private sector employers, like Stanford, who avoided spending $100,000,000 in parking structures by investing in the Marguerite shuttles and programs to reduce driving.

Before getting started with an overall TDM program, Palo Alto City Council decided to beef up the city’s shuttle programs.  On Monday, 10/26, the City Council decided to increase frequency on the Crosstown shuttle (which gets good ridership at a cost of less than $2 per ride, largely by serving seniors and youth) and to investigate the opportunity to get private funding for a shuttle that would connect Palo Alto Caltrain with Bayshore employers (where Google and LinkedIn are headquartered in Mountain View).  Council also directed staff to investigate the potential for a trolley connecting Downtown and Stanford Shopping Center, helping people on shopping expeditions to visit more stores and restaurants without driving across.

At the meeting, Council members also encouraged bolder approaches.

  • The shuttle improvements were based on surveying existing riders and planning incremental improvements.  They didn’t take into account the needs of people who don’t use the shuttles today.  The upcoming TDM survey will gather information from workers and residents who currently drive. There will be opportunities for further improvements based on that data.
  • The shuttle program uses medium sized vehicles travelling fixed routes.  Council directed staff to research opportunities to integrate newer rideshare services such as Uber, Lyft, and Bridj, to take advantage of more flexible, networked, on-demand services.
  • There was broader discussion that the program’s sights were set too low, and a resolution to discuss larger ambitions before the end of the year.

Wednesday 10/28 @ Planning Transportation Commission - Transportation Demand Management program update

In order for shuttles – and other programs – to help reduce driving, it will be critical to design and market options for people who are driving today.  On Wednesday, 10/28, the Planning and Transportation Commission will hear an update on the Transportation Demand Management program which is just getting started.

The first step – following Stanford’s playbook – will be to gather information about how people travel – where they come from, where they go to; if they drive alone, why is that, and what are the barriers that keep them from using alternatives.  Successful programs have an active marketing component – selling the benefits to individuals, workplaces and neighborhoods.  If you’re interested, you can watch the meeting online, and we’ll blog what happens.

November 12 @ PTC and December 1 @ CC - Residential Preferential Permit Parking - an important step toward parking efficiency

On November 12, the Planning and Transportation Commission will review a proposal for Residential Permit Parking for neighborhoods around Downtown, followed by a December 1 review by City Council.

Currently, with an unlimited amount of free parking available on neighborhood streets, the top floors of the city’s garages are frequently empty. Workers and visitors have a strong incentive to drive to Palo Alto and park for free.  UCLA Professor Donald Shoup says it best – if you give away free ice cream on a hot day, you will attract big crowds and a “shortage” of ice cream.  Similarly, if car parking is available for free, people will use a lot of it, and driving will look attractive compared to other options.  If you’re interested in the subject, read Shoup’s long but excellent book, the High Cost of Free Parking.

in order to provide effective incentives to reduce driving, and use existing parking more efficiently the city needs to stop making neighborhood parking available for free. Proposed details for the two-phase RPP program can be found here.  It’s not a perfect proposal and it’s possible to take issue with the details of the program – residential permits are too cheap or too expensive – there are too many worker permits, or not enough of them.  But it’s critical to take the step forward to stop providing parking for free on neighborhood streets and to help create good alternate transportation options.

The City Council meeting will review the the proposed RPP program on December 1, with a decision slated for two weeks following.

Moving forward on all fronts – step by step

This sounds like a lot, doesn’t it?  Stanford didn’t transform its transportation habits overnight either – it took a decade to reduce the share of people driving alone from 72% to 42%.  Progress was made incrementally – gathering data, adding shuttle routes, charging for parking, creating incentive programs.   Palo Alto can do it – but it will require support and encouragement.

For weekly updates on transportation and housing topics in Palo Alto, see Palo Alto Forward.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Caltrain corridor updates: San Bruno, Millbrae, Redwood City, Menlo Park, Mountain View

Here are updates on land use and transportation policy decisions in progress in cities along the Peninsula Corridor.  Do you live or work in these places and have information and thoughts? Share ideas in comments. Would you be interested in reporting and blogging? Let us know…

San Bruno Height Limit Ballot Measure

On Tuesday night October 21st at 7:30, the League of Women Voters will moderate a forum on a San Bruno ballot measure to raise the height limit near the Caltrain station and El Camino.   The city has seen minimal change in its downtown area since a ballot measure in the 70s set a 50 foot height limit.  The event will be at 1555 Crystal Springs Road, San Bruno.

Millbrae Station Area Plan

In Millbrae, City Council held a meeting to review the process for the Millbrae Station Area Plan, and comments were due on the Environmental Impact Report on Sunday October 19th. Refresh this page for an update on the meeting and next steps.

San Mateo Downtown Plan

San Mateo is starting a process to update its downtown plan.   The planning process may consider policies to increase housing for all incomes and age levels, policies to reduce vehicle trips, consideration to raise the current height limit, and better integration of the El Camino Real area to downtown.  Next step related to the project will be a review of the city’s draft sustainable Streets plan by City Council on November 3.

Redwood City Community Benefits 

On October 15, Redwood City held a meeting to solicit feedback on the community benefits that developers should help to fund.   Staff’s project plan calls for Council to review a draft Community Benefits Ordinance by March.   Such a plan would not apply to projects that have already been approved.

Update:  at the meeting, community members gathered around four tables and shared ideas about what should be included in the community benefits menu. A variety of ideas included library, arts, affordable housing, “complete streets”, and vehicle trip reduction benefits programs.  There was also a vocal contingent who attended the meeting expressing dissatisfaction with the changes in Redwood City’s downtown, and a desire to halt further change.

For folks not at the meeting, you can also contribute ideas in writing here, including funding for bicycle and pedestrian improvements, vehicle trip reduction benefits, and affordable housing with transit access.

Menlo Park Council requires Stanford project to reduce trips

Menlo Park City Council reviewed a traffic study conducted for a proposed Stanford development at 500 El Camino Real, with 199,500 square feet of  office space, 170 apartment units, and 10,000 square feet of retail space,  would exceed the city’s trip thresholds. The project will be therefore required to conduct an environmental impact report.

City Council members gave guidance that they want to see the excess vehicle trips reduced; approaches mentioned included stronger vehicle trip reduction programs or making the development smaller. However, the guidance to reduce trips would be moot if Measure M passes in November, which would require the Stanford development, and another proposed development on El Camino on the North side of the train station,  to be redesigned.

Proponents of Measure M contend that it will reduce traffic, although evidence shows that offices near transit are the easiest vehicle trips to reduce, and more retail may generate higher traffic.   Click here for material supporting Measure M, and here for material opposing Measure M.

Mountain View Council tones down recommendation for improved jobs/housing balance in San Antonio

On October 7, Mountain View City Council backed off of an earlier goal to improve the jobs/housing balance in the San Antonio Specific Plan area.  Council moved forward with rules allowing about 3000 new jobs and 1245 new homes, and rejected a staff proposal to require phasing of offices and homes. The reasoning is to enable offices near the train station, where people are most likely to take transit.

Instead, Council members  indicated they might be willing to reduce allowed office development in North Bayshore to compensate.  And the large Merlone Geier development was removed from the plan, so its provisions will also be negotiated separately. Council members  Bryant and McAlister opposed the changes, and Council member John Inks did not vote because he owns property in the area.

Update/correction: Council removed the prioritization of public benefits, since it is hard to determine years in advance. They did not remove the public benefits menu.

Next steps are an Environmental Planning Commission review of the plan is set a Nov. 17 meeting, and Council’s final vote is for December 2 – before new City Council candidates would be seated.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Menlo Park Council requires Stanford project on El Camino to reduce trips; moot if Measure M passes

Menlo Park City Council recently reviewed a traffic study conducted for a proposed Stanford development at 500 El Camino Real, with 199,500 square feet of  office space, 170 apartment units, and 10,000 square feet of retail space,  would exceed the city’s trip thresholds. The project will be therefore required to conduct an environmental impact report.

City Council members commented that they want to see the transportation impacts mitigated; approaches mentioned included stronger vehicle trip reduction programs or making the development smaller.  The analysis only took into account 10% reduction in trips taking into account a location on the El Camino corridor, about a half mile from Caltrain. By contrast, a recently approved office project in Sunnyvale, about 1.5 miles shuttle distance from Caltrain, required a 35% trip reduction.  Also, the Menlo Park analysis did not yet take into account reduced vehicle trips if residents or workers walk across the street to the supermarket or the nearby downtown.

However, the City Council guidance for the project to reduce trips would be moot if Measure M passes in November. This ballot measure would maintain the overall limit of of commercial space in the plan area, but would attempt to shift away from general office, to other kinds of office and retail, such as real estate, medical, educational services, product sales, etc.  The amount of general office space in the area near Caltrain, El Camino, and Downtown would be limited to 240,000 square feet, with a maximum of 100,000 square feet per development. If the ballot measure passes, the Stanford development, and another proposed development on El Camino on the North side of the train station, would both need to be redesigned.

Proponents of Measure M contend that it will reduce traffic, although evidence shows that offices near transit are the easiest vehicle trips to reduce, and retail may generate higher traffic.   Click here for material supporting Measure M, and here for material opposing Measure M.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment