1. Dumbarton Transportation Corridor Study
Good afternoon.
My name is Melissa Reggiardo and I’m the project manager for the Dumbarton Transportation Corridor Study.
I’ll be giving you an update on the Study.
Menlo Park
City Council
November 9, 2016

2. Dumbarton Corridor
This is an aerial photo of the Dumbarton Corridor, which includes both the Highway Bridge and the Rail Bridge to the south.
The Highway Bridge, or State Route 84, is a state highway managed by Caltrans.
SamTrans owns the Rail Bridge.

3. Transportation Study Initiated due to recent growth Study partners:
SMCTA
ACTC
AC Transit
Facebook
Kicked off in March – 15-month schedule
As owner of the Dumbarton Rail Bridge, SamTrans is managing Dumbarton Transportation Corridor Study – a study of transportation improvement options in the Dumbarton Corridor.
While the Dumbarton Corridor has been studied many times before, it is being studied again with a focus on recent employment growth in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties.
SamTrans is working with several key project partners including the transportation authorities on each side of the Bay as well as AC Transit, who operates commuter bus services that utilize the Highway Bridge.
SamTrans is also working with Facebook, who is providing funding support for the Study as well as private sector perspective.
SamTrans kicked off the study in late February/early March and identified a 15-month study schedule.
The Study Area is shown on the right.
The Study Area primarily includes Redwood City, Menlo Park, East Palo Alto and Palo Alto on the peninsula and Newark, Fremont and Union City in the East Bay.

4. Scope of Work
Study mobility improvements on highway bridge, approach arterials and rail bridge
Focus on short-term (2020) and long-term (2030) improvements and phasing
Unlike previous studies of the Dumbarton Corridor, this Study examines improvements to the Highway Bridge and arterial approaches on each side of the Bay, as well as the Rail Bridge.
Also, the study focuses on both short- and long-term improvements and the phasing of potential improvements over time.
For the purposes of this Study, short-term includes improvements that can be implemented by or around while long-term improvements are those that can be implemented by or around 2030.

5. Outreach Outreach at major milestones:
May 2016: Existing conditions, goals and evaluation metrics, initial alternatives
September 2016: Initial screening, alternatives carried forward
May 2017: Evaluation of alternatives carried forward, funding plan
We are reaching out to the Board, stakeholders and the public at three major Study milestones of which this is second.
We first reached out in May and reported on existing conditions, project goals, draft evaluation metrics and initial transportation alternatives to be examined in the Study.
We reached out in September to discuss the initial screening process and the alternatives being carried forward for further study.
We will also be reaching out toward the conclusion of the study – around May 2017 – to discuss the evaluation of alternatives and recommendations.

6. Study Goals Enhance mobility
Identify cost effective improvements with return on investment
Minimize environmental impacts, financial risk and maximize safety
Ensure local communities are protected from adverse impacts
We identified four main goals and related performance metrics to guide the evaluation and scoring of alternatives.
The goals are to…

7. Initial Highway Bridge Alternatives
Express bus enhancements/expansion
Variety of highway bridge lane configurations, including managed lanes:
Carpool lanes
Toll lanes
Bus-only lanes
In terms of initial transportation alternatives appropriate for the Highway Bridge, we looked at Dumbarton Express enhancements/expansion as well as a variety of Highway Bridge lane configurations, including managed lanes options.
Managed lanes can mean a few different things – they can be carpool lanes, toll lanes or also bus-only lanes.

8. Initial Approach Alternatives
Improvements to:
Make tolling more efficient
Improve carpool connections
Manage and/or increase park-and-ride capacity
Provide additional capacity/improve flow on key arterials and at intersections
Improve connections to US 101
In terms of approach improvements, we identified several well-known problems at each end of the Highway Bridge and also examined past studies that identified potential improvements.
We developed a list of approach improvements that could potentially:
Make tolling more efficient
Improve carpool connections on the Highway Bridge
Manage or increase park-and-ride capacity
Provide additional capacity or improve flow on key arterials and at intersections, and
Improve connections to US 101

9. Initial Rail Bridge Alternatives
Transit modes:
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Commuter Rail
Bike/ped
Light Rail Transit (LRT)
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
Personal and Group Rapid Transit
People Mover
Hyperloop
Tunnel (BRT, LRT, Commuter Rail)
Ferry
Gondola
In terms of initial transportation alternatives appropriate for the Rail Bridge, we looked at a variety of transit modal alternatives.
These modal alternatives include many that you recognize as well as some innovative or unique technologies.
They are as follows…

10. Initial Screening Process
Evaluated:
Highway configurations for highway bridge
Approach improvements per potential benefit to transit
Transit modes for rail bridge
Carried forward all short-term options
The initial screening process was a high-level, qualitative one, used to narrow a very large list of initial alternatives to a short-list of the most viable alternatives.
With our project goals and evaluation metrics in mind, we evaluated and scored the highway configurations appropriate for the Highway Bridge.
Due to project scope and timeline limitations, we did not evaluate and score each approach improvement, but rather identified those that would most benefit transit service in the long-term and developed an approach improvement package – a package of potential approach improvements to be considered at a high level in this study and to be examined in more detail in future studies.
Then we evaluated and scored transit modes appropriate for the Rail Bridge per our project goals and evaluation metrics.
We carried forward all short-term options because there are not that many viable short-term transportation solutions.

11. Highway Bridge Alternatives Carried Forward
Short-term: Express bus enhancements/expansion
Long-term: 3 managed lane options
Alternatives that will be examined further on the Highway Bridge include enhanced and expanded Dumbarton Express service in the short-term and three managed lanes alternatives in the long-term.
The proposed short-term improvements will include both enhanced Dumbarton Express service as it exists today as well as a new route from Union City BART to Menlo Park and Redwood City.
It has not yet been determined which type of managed lane would be pursued for the three managed lane alternatives carried forward.
These lanes could potentially be carpool, toll or bus-only.
We will be studying this further over the next few months.

12. Highway Bridge Alternatives Carried Forward
Contraflow managed lane in median with movable barrier
The first managed lane option is a contraflow lane in the median with a movable barrier.
This contraflow lane would flow westward in the morning with peak traffic.
The lane would be reversed to flow eastward in the evening peak.
This option would operate similar to the Golden Gate Bridge.

13. Highway Bridge Alternatives Carried Forward
Reversible managed lanes in median with fixed barriers
The second managed lane option includes two reversible managed lanes in the median with fixed barriers.
The two reversible managed lanes would flow westward in the morning peak and eastward in the evening peak.

14. Highway Bridge Alternatives Carried Forward
Managed lane in each direction
Reversible managed lanes in median with fixed barriers
The third managed lane option is similar to what is being investigating on 101 – one managed lane in each direction.

15. Approach Package Short-term: Bike/ped approach improvements
FasTrak lane extensions and operational improvements
Park-and-ride management/expansion
Operational improvements such as transit signal priority and queue jump lanes on key roadways
Again, due to project scope and timeline limitations, we did not evaluate and score each approach improvement, but rather we identified those that would benefit transit service in the long-term.
From this, we developed an approach improvement package – a package of potential approach improvements to be considered at a high level in this study and to be examined in more detail in future studies.
Short-term approach improvements as part of the package are listed here.

16. Approach Package Long-term: All electronic tolling
Carpool/toll direct access ramps
Dedicated lanes for buses
Grade separations (improve flow at key intersections)
Managed lanes connections
Long-term approach improvements as part of the package are as follows.

17. Transit Alternatives Carried Forward
Short-term:
Bike/ped on peninsula
Long-term:
BRT from Union City BART to Redwood City Caltrain
Commuter Rail from Union City BART to Redwood City
Alternatives that will be examined further on the Dumbarton right-of-way and Rail Bridge include a bike/ped path in the short-term and BRT and commuter rail options in the long-term.
The bike/ped path in the short-term would only operate on the peninsula right-of-way only and could be either a temporary amenity, giving way to a transit mode in future years, or it could potentially exist next to another transit mode such as BRT or commuter rail.
In terms of BRT, we are examining a service that would primarily operate with two lanes, except on the Rail Bridge, which has a current width that can only accommodate one vehicle lane.
In terms of commuter rail, we are examining services that would primarily operate with two tracks.
We are looking at both a single and double track commuter rail option on the Rail Bridge.
The two-track option on the Bridge would require a Bridge expansion.
We are also looking at two commuter rail operating scenarios that were examined in previous studies – a shuttle that would operate between Union City BART and Redwood City and a commuter option that would operate from Union City and interline with the Caltrain mainline, with some trains heading north to San Francisco and other trains heading south to San Jose.
Also, we are going to examine the feasibility of placing BRT next to commuter rail, which may or may not be possible due to right-of-way constraints.

18. Next Steps
October – December: Further study alternatives carried forward
Conceptual engineering
Ridership modeling
Financial analysis including public-private partnerships
January: Comparative alternatives analysis
February: Recommend phasing and financial plan
Our task over the next few months will be to develop the alternatives carried forward in more detail through operations plans, conceptual engineering drawings, capital and operating cost estimates, ridership modeling, operations modeling and financial analysis.
This will include an evaluation of public-private partnership opportunities.
With this additional analysis, the alternatives will proceed through a comparative analysis that will once again consider the project goals and associated evaluation metrics.
Once a preferred alternative(s) has been selected, we will proposed phasing and a financial plan.

19. Comments / Questions