Marin County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

2015/2016 Marin County Civil Grand Jury Traffic Congestion in Marin The Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Project

Published: June 30, 2016 40 pages
View Original PDF

Findings and Recommendations 17 findings

F1
The SFDB Project team provided extensive outreach and transparency with many public meetings and workshops, published information, and modified and sharpened direction based on the feedback received.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
There is no statement in the SFDB Project documentation of current congestion levels (except for specific intersections) and no quantified goals for congestion relief.
Related Recommendations (4)
R2
The County should publish current and expected post project Level of Service for the corridor: time to travel the corridor, average speed, fuel consumption, economic benefit and level of change in CO and toxic gas emissions. 2
R3
TAM and the County should include and publish the Level of Service and other actual benefits achieved in the project scope of work.
R4
Marin County Board of Supervisors and TAM Board of Commissioners should facilitate the identification and publication of project facts and both qualitative and quantifiable benefits to better inform the public and guide their future decision making.
R7
TAM and the County should evaluate the cost/benefit of adaptive signaling improvements in reducing congestion and fund once other more cost effective solutions have been implemented.
F3
The SFDB Project considered only roadway improvements for traffic operation, mass transit, and pedestrian and bicycle access and safety. More comprehensive analysis of traffic and congestion is possible as seen in the Mill Valley Traffic and Congestion Task Force Report. This could open the possibility for a wider range of solutions.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
The use of 11-foot traffic lane widths on SFDB is safe, will not materially slow traffic flow, is commonly used for roads with much higher traffic volumes and speeds and abides by standard guidance.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
Existing traffic signals are programmed and coordinated for multiple time-of-day and day- of-week schedules across 12 intersections. Adjustment of these programs to account for new and more efficient intersection configurations and new traffic patterns is expected to have moderate payoff.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
As demonstrated in the 2011-2012 project to synchronize traffic signals along SFDB,80 the County has the ability to model Level of Service measures including elapsed time to travel the corridor, average speed, calculated fuel consumption as a function of congestion, cost of time lost, cost of fuel, CO emissions, and toxic gas emissions before and after a project. 2 80 Final Project Report with Benefit/Cost Analysis, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Program for Arterial System Synchronization (PASS) for Marin County, City of Larkspur and Caltrans, Tables VII and XII, July 20, 2012 http://www.marincounty.org/~/media/files/departments/pw/transportation/proj_sfdb/pass--final-project-73112- 2rossll.pdf?la=en
No recommendations for this finding
F7
The cost of all components under consideration for this project is $19.2M, but the budget is $13.2M. $800,000 has been allocated for the work already completed and the upcoming development and filing of an Environmental Impact Report.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
TAM and the County should reconcile the $19.2M in desired work along SFDB with the $13.2M budget by giving priority to the traffic congestion reduction measures.
F8
Future leadership changes on the Marin County Board of Supervisors, TAM Board of Commissioners, as well as city and town councils during design-approval stages can cause a previously well conceived and vetted congestion reduction project to fall out of favor and be abandoned or seriously curtailed.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Funding and implementing school bus programs for Bacich Elementary School and Kent Middle School would reduce peak school traffic which makes up an estimated 20-30% of all peak hour morning trips on SFDB
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
TAM, Marin Transit District and the County should fund school buses for the Bacich Elementary and Kent Middle School population. Consider overall optimization of Measure A transit funds, including modification of the Measure A expenditure plan.
F10
Measure A funds provide for school bus transportation as a part of its transit implementation strategy.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
TAM has the authority to change the Measure A expenditure plan with a two-thirds majority vote of the TAM Board of Commissioners and approval of a majority of the towns and cities of Marin County.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Multi-use pathways constructed along Hwy 101 at a cost of $35M yielded insignificant conversion of motorized travel to biking and walking.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
Existing planned but not yet constructed highly expensive bicycle-pedestrian pathways should not be built if their only justification and funding depends on traffic relief or mitigation with no evidence indicating that peak traffic relief is reliably predicted to result. Such projects should be funded and supported only if justified on other grounds.
F13
Planning is underway for another bike bridge and pathway with a projected cost of $19.8M. And further south, studies are underway with vigorous advocacy support for converting the abandoned Alto Tunnel to a multi-use pathway at an estimated cost of $40M to $50M.
No recommendations for this finding
F14
Ramp metering on Hwy 101 from Marin City to north of SFDB is predicted to cut travel time by 24% for peak hour and reduce spillover and congestion on feeder streets (e.g. SFDB).
No recommendations for this finding
F15
MTC allocated funds to Caltrans for ramp metering in Marin but funding issues have the project suspended. Implementation is on hold even though lights have been installed.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
TAM and the County should negotiate implementation of ramp metering with MTC and Caltrans.
F16
TAM manages and funds a set of separate projects based on their individual merits and the support of the TAM Commissioners, each representing their district of the County or their local town or city.
No recommendations for this finding
F17
TAM does not structure sets of integrated projects to produce cohesive programs that holistically solve traffic issues that cross jurisdictional and project boundaries.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
TAM should coordinate with other agencies to produce sets of integrated projects prioritizing solutions that have engineered and predicted benefits for areas of the County, not just for individual road segments.

Conclusions 1