SU0013380 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Item No. 2 PC: 4-9-92 GP-89-11 Page 8 Major improvements to local and regional roads would be required to accommodate this project. Order of magnitude cost estimates for roadway improvements that have been identified by the developer and the FEIR authors are described in Table 4.14-16 on the following page. However, it should be noted that no improvement costs for State facilities other than the two closest interchanges (Patterson Pass Road/1- 205 and Grant Line Road/1-580) are included in the table. Also, the project proponent would not be responsible for the entire cost of some of the listed improvements but rather would contribute a fair proportionate share, based upon further studies. The possible costs of additional interchange improvements, as well as mainline improvements to the 1-205 and 1-580 freeways, have not been included in the table. Caltrans Districts 10 and 4 specified in their comments on the Draft EIR that additional improvements (or their fair share) to the freeway system may be the project's responsibility. The appropriate timing and scope of Mountain House's responsibility for funding studies and the construction of actual improvements to regional facilities would be determined prior to the County's approval of any subsequent plans (see further discussion under the `Transportation Environmental Impacts and Mitigations' section below). The development of employment opportunities within the project site would be a critical factor in determining the amount of traffic added to County roads. The proposed land use mix, which balances housing and employment, could serve to maximize the level of internal trips which stay within the project. The project proponent has developed a phasing approach that is designed to keep a substantial portion of the total work trips and shopping trips within the site at each phase of the project. A monitoring program which would measure the amount of employment actually provided within the site at each phase would be implemented to ensure that the assumptions for a high rate of internal travel remain valid. If the rate of job creation were to lag substantially behind the phasing plan, more residents would travel to jobs and shopping outside of the project site, creating more traffic than projected. Transit and Transportation Demand Management: The proponent has proposed an ambitious TDM(Transportation Demand Management)strategy to reduce single-occupancy auto use. The project's work-end TDM strategy would include the provision of ridesharing matching services for all employees and the establishment and active involvment by the project sponsor's Transportation Management Organization (TMO) in promoting TDM programs at individual employment sites within the project site. The TMO would promote a broad transportation demand program that would include transit pass subsidies, ridesharing, flexible working hours, telecommuting, and other strategies. The project proponent is also planning the construction of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes along Grant Line Road leading westward to the Grant Line Road/1-580 interchange in Alameda County. The developer's plan attempts to emphasize the Grant Line Road/1-580 interchange for much of the commuter traffic, while de-emphasizing the overloaded Patterson Pass Road/1-205 interchange. The developer also proposes to construct ramp metering signals at the two interchanges. In terms of transit, at this time the proponent is not proposing any specific public transit improvements (e.g., funding bus, vanpool, or rail service). The developer has planned transit stops throughout the project and has set aside land for a multi-modal/transit station.