Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />2 of 2 <br />To accomplish these goals, the City’s traffic model was used to model traffic generation <br />associated with different development scenarios, based on the projects’ anticipated <br />construction timelines. <br /> <br />The Study first establishes a baseline level of service at key intersections, then adds the <br />projects individually, and for each successive project evaluates its impact on the <br />circulation network. <br /> <br />The projects were assumed to develop in the following sequence and per the following <br />project profiles: <br /> <br />1. Kiewit - 310 single family homes (SFH), 102 multifamily homes (MFH), 57 ADU’s <br />2. Arroyo Lago - 194 SFH, 49 ADU’s <br />3. East Lakes - 357 age-restricted SFH, 88 assisted and independent MFH <br />4. Amazon - 650,000 square foot distribution center <br /> <br />The Study evaluates traffic volumes on key roadway segments, and intersection level of <br />service (LOS) at 16 intersections with and without El Charro; it also provides analysis of <br />future travel patterns to determine the effect of the extension on cut-through traffic. <br /> <br />Broadly, the study concludes that El Charro is needed as a four-lane roadway from <br />Stoneridge Drive to El Charro Road, and the extension is needed at or near the <br />completion of the first project (Kiewit). Additional development would further contribute <br />to the need for the extension. The modeling further concludes that the extension would <br />not substantially change the overall volume of cut-through traffic, but would benefit <br />Santa Rita Road, the most heavily used cut-through route, by shifting traffic to the new <br />El Charro. <br /> <br />As described in the February 18, 2025, City Council Agenda Report, since the East <br />Lakes project was submitted to Alameda County, new alternatives have been <br />formulated that include more units and a mix of non-age-restricted and senior housing. <br />The modeling for the Traffic Study was well underway at the time these alternatives <br />were proposed, and so they are not reflected in the attached study. <br /> <br />In staff’s initial review, the proposed alternatives would increase the project’s trip <br />generation but would not change the overall conclusions of the study as outlined above. <br /> <br /> <br />Attachments: <br />1. El Charro Road Extension Assessment (Fehr & Peers) with Exhibits <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />