Logo


Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ 12/13 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]


Traffic Impacts of proposed revision of General Plan

From: domainremoved <George>
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:26:15 -0700

I want to follow up on the question of VMT vs LOS raised in the last
planning meeting. I believe a few points are crucial and critical.



1. Total VMT only measures the total # of projected trips of
development. Per capita VMT by dividing the total by Menlo Park residents
or workers only hides the significance by comparing relative numbers, not
additional total miles traveled. The EIR shows the total Vehicle Miles
Traveled projected from new development increases from the current 934,722
to between 1,655,624 and 1,449,338 certainly a substantial, if not
monumental (50% or 500,000 miles), increase on our local streets.



2. VMT does not determine which local streets or neighborhoods those
additional annual miles added by new development impact. LOS impacts
including specific street volume and delays projected by the current
Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines including it required
Circulation System Assessment (CSA) document based upon surveys and
interviews of Menlo Park residents and Customers would do so. The Menlo
Park CSA was not used in the EIR. New models, MPM, TAZ and DTA, not
included in Menlo Park TIA , nor approved by City Council, were developed
and used by consultants for this EIR and Facebook EIR.



3. Note, after the proposed Stanford project traffic studies concluded
neighborhood local streets were significantly impacted under the TIA and
CSA, Stanford reduced the size of its proposed office space 25%.



3. Proposed circulation element Circ-3-A, transportation impact metrics,
provides only the requirement to “*supplement Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
. . . with level of Service (LOS) in the transportation impact review
process, . .* .” The Staff report erroneously states the reverse:
supplementing LOS with VMT analysis.



4. LOS projections, including street volumes, particularly on formerly
little used local streets, is valuable if not essential in looking at other
proposed Circulation Element provisions such as Policy Circ-2-14: “*New
development should minimize cut-through and high-speed vehicle traffic on
residential streets*”; Program Circ 2l: “*Consider factors such as
preserving residential quality of life*” in reviewing the City’s
Transportation Impact Analys (TIA) Guidelines; Goal Circ-1 *provide a . .
.circulation system that promotes a healthy, safe, and active community and
quality of life throughout Menlo Park; *and Policy circ-2.5 “ . . .*minimizes
cut-through and high speed traffic that diminishes the quality of life in
Menlo Park’s residential neighborhoods." *



Nowhere do the general plan revisions state that infill development is more
important than neighborhood safety or neighborhood quality of life. Metrics
in addition to VMT are essential to manage our neighborhood safety and
quality of life and to provide a valid basis for the City’s transportation
impact fees.


Thank you for considering, George Fisher
Received on Sun Oct 23 2016 - 14:31:41 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]


Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)