DRAFT TREASURE ISLAND TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING & ANALYSIS DOCUMENTATION MEMORANDUM

DRAFT TREASURE ISLAND TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING & ANALYSIS DOCUMENTATION MEMORANDUM PREPARED FOR: PREPARED B Y: JULY 21, 2016 1

Table of Contents Table of Contents... 2 Table of Figures... 3 Table of Tables... 4 List of Acronyms... 5 1 Travel Demand Analysis... 6 1.1 Baseline Assumptions... 6 1.1.1 Scenario Description... 6 1.1.2 Land Use... 9 1.1.3 Base Network... 12 1.1.4 Policy Scenario Assumptions... 17 1.2 Findings... 19 1.2.1 Person and Vehicle Trip Forecast... 20 1.2.2 Transit Ridership Forecast... 22 1.2.3 Household Income Discount Effects... 26 2

Table of Figures Figure 1: Proposed Conceptual Land Use Plan... 10 Figure 2: Proposed Treasure Island Ramp Configuration... 13 Figure 3: Transportation Vision for Treasure Island... 16 3

Table of Tables Table 1:Champ Toll Policy Scenarios... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 2: Treasure Island Land Use Assumptions... 9 Table 3: Treasure Island Residential Auto Ownership... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 4: Bridge Tolls... 12 Table 5: Treasure Island Toll Policy (per TITIP)... 14 Table 6: Proposed Treasure Island Transit Service... 15 Table 7: SF-CHAMP Toll Policy Scenarios... 17 Table 8: Transportation Plan Performance Measures... 18 Table 9: Person Trips, Daily Total... 20 Table 10: Person Trips, AM and PM Peak Period Total... 20 Table 11: Vehicle Trips and Toll Revenue Transactions... 21 Table 12: Off-Model Procedure for Estimating Transit Boardings, Baseline Scenario... 22 Table 13: Daily Transit Boardings... 23 Table 14: Peak Period Transit Boardings... 23 Table 15: Daily Person Trip Mode Split... 24 Table 16: Peak Period Person Trip Mode Split... 24 Table 17: Resident Person Trips Mode Split by Household Income... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 18: Transportation Plan Performance Measures... 26 4

List of Acronyms Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) Compressed natural gas (CNG) Consumer Price Index (CPI) Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) Dwelling Unit (DU) High-occupancy vehicle (HOV) License Plate Recognition (LPR) Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) National Transit Database (NTD) Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTA/SFMTA) Single-occupant vehicle (SOV) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Treasure Island (TI / the Island) Treasure Island Community Development LLC (TICD) Treasure Island Development Authority (TIDA) Treasure Island Mobility Management Agency (TIMMA) Treasure Island Transportation Implementation Plan (TITIP) Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) Yerba Buena Island (YBI) 5

1 Travel Demand Analysis The purpose of this memo is to document the principal results and findings from the travel demand forecasts prepared for the Treasure Island Mobility Study. Detailed summaries of the model output were prepared for each model run and are available in Excel workbooks, archived along with the model input memoranda. The travel demand forecasts were prepared with the San Francisco Chained Activity Modeling Process (SF-CHAMP) as modified for this project in late 2013 through 2014. Certain outputs were post-processed as described below to account for project policies that cannot be modeled in CHAMP, or to adjust the results for reasonableness. The objective of the travel demand analysis is to develop toll traffic forecasts for Treasure Island in order to examine how travel demand changes under a variety of policy scenarios. 1.1 Baseline Assumptions The following section outlines the baseline assumptions used to develop the Treasure Island Mobility Study 2030 Baseline scenario, followed by the assumptions used for four additional toll policy scenarios. 1.1.1 Scenario Description A complete description of all the scenarios modeled is provided in the Model Inputs Memoranda prepared for each model run. All the travel demand forecasts were prepared for a 2030 horizon year. The 2030 Baseline Scenario is designed to reflect: a. The 2030 land use and population estimates from the Jobs-Housing Connection Strategy projection. b. The 2012 nine-county San Francisco Bay Area transportation infrastructure. c. Transportation system changes between 2012 and 2030 that occur in the model area as a result of other planned and foreseeable projects that are not part of the Treasure Island Transportation Improvement Plan (TITIP). d. The land use development and transportation plan described in the Treasure Island Transportation Improvement Plan (TITIP), in particular the Full Build-Out scenario. This scenario assumes 8,000 housing units and more than 800,000 square feet of commercial, office and community development on the ground by 2030. The TITIP calls for improved accessibility via transit to and within Treasure Island, priced visitor parking, and tolled access to and from Treasure Island, among other improvements. In addition to the 2030 Baseline, four Build Scenario travel demand forecasts were prepared and analyzed in order to understand the mobility impacts and system performance of different toll policies. The toll policies tested as part of this Study are shown in Table 1. The exact discounts applied under Scenarios 4 and 5 to Eastbay traffic and low income resident traffic are described in the corresponding model input memoranda. The low income toll was applied to Treasure Island residents that exhibit household income equal to or less than $34,000 in today s dollars, equivalent to $17,700 in $1989. 6

Toll Scenarios As Modeled in SF- CHAMP Baseline Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Who is tolled? Residents Residents and Non- Residents Residents and Non-Residents Residents and Non-Residents Residents and Non-Residents Toll exemptions Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools 1 Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools Vanpools Vanpools Hours of operation 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM 2 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 6:00 AM to 3:00 AM 3 6:00 AM to 3:00 AM Directions to toll On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge 1 Federal vehicles, although considered as a potential exemption, are not modeled in SF CHAMP 2 As modeled, using SF-CHAMP s pre-defined time-of-day periods. In practice, start and end times of tolling periods could differ (e.g., 4-7 pm). 3 SF-CHAMP uses a pre-defined evening time period that extends from 6:30 PM 3 Am. In practice, the toll hours of operation would end earlier in the evening (e.g., 7:30 PM or 10:00 PM) 7

Toll ($2013) $5 per trip $5 per trip AM and PM peak periods: $8 per trip Midday period: $4 per trip Representation of credit to EB-to-TI drivers for SFOBB toll: No toll charged to Eastbay-to-Treasure Island traffic AM and PM peak periods: $8 ($2018) per trip Midday and evening period: $4 ($2018) per trip Discounted toll charged to Eastbay-to- Treasure Island traffic AM and PM peak periods: $8 per trip Midday and evening period: $4 per trip Discounted toll charged to Eastbay-to- Treasure Island traffic 50% Discounted toll charged to low income residents Table 1: CHAMP Toll Policy Scenarios 8

1.1.2 Land Use 1.1.2.1 Regional Land Use This regional land use scenario reflects the Jobs-Housing Connections Strategy (JHCS), which is the Preferred Land Use Scenario for Plan Bay Area. Plan Bay Area is a joint effort led by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as well as the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The JHCS land use revision was drafted by ABAG in April 2013 and revised again in September 2013. This scenario adopts the JHCS land use forecast for all Bay Area counties except San Francisco. For San Francisco County, the land use forecast is a refined version of the JHCS forecast prepared by the San Francisco Planning Department (SF Planning). 1.1.2.2 Treasure Island Land Use According to the TITIP, at full build-out of the planned development in 2030, there will be 8,000 housing units in Treasure Island. JHCS projects an average household size of approximately 3.5 persons per household for Treasure Island, which is larger than the average household size for all of San Francisco, projected at approximately 2.4 persons per household. The project team determined that Treasure Island is more likely to exhibit dwelling unit occupancy patterns similar to San Francisco, and therefore an average of 2.36 persons per unit will be used to project Treasure Island population. The TITIP indicates that at full build-out there will be more than 800,000 square feet of commercial, office and community development (including adaptive reuse, excluding Jobs Corps and Coast Guard), and 500 hotel rooms. Table 2 lists the current 2030 residential, employment and commercial projections (SFCTA) and the planned development floor area (TITIP). 9

Table 2: Treasure Island Land Use Assumptions Scenario (1) Excludes Job Corps and Coast Guard Source: SFCTA Data Source SFCTA TITIP (1) 2010 Base 2030 Baseline Housing Units 656 8,000 2030 Full Build-out 8,000 (25% affordable) Population 19,105 n/a Persons living in Group Quarters 225 n/a Employment 793 jobs 2,868 jobs Managerial, Information, 635 344 Commercial and Professional Services Adaptive Reuse Production, Distribution and Repair 4 72 344,000 sq.ft Retail 26 1012 Retail 207,000 sq.ft Cultural, Institutional and Education 127 884 Community and Medical and Health Services 1 0 Civic Facilities 273,500 sq.ft Visitor Related 0 556 Hotel 500 rooms Figure 1 on the following page shows the conceptual land use plan. 10

Figure 1: Proposed Conceptual Land Use Plan Source: Final EIR 11

The TITIP assumes that residential parking will be sold separately from the residential units, and that on average the residential parking supply will not exceed one stall per residential unit, or 8,000 stalls total. To reflect this policy, SF-CHAMP was adjusted to meet the target auto ownership distribution shown in Table 3. The unconstrained distribution reflects the 2030 CHAMP forecast obtained assuming unlimited residential parking supply. Table 3: Treasure Island Residential Auto Ownership Share of Total Treasure Island Residential Units Auto Ownership Level Unconstrained Target 0 cars 30% 30% 1 car 29% 49% 2 cars 32% 16% 3+ cars 9% 5% Total autos (veh) 9,400 7,850 1.1.3 Base Network The base network for this project is 2012 existing conditions road and transit networks, as provided by SFCTA. Relevant projects from the San Francisco Transportation Plan (SFTP) 2040 baseline investment plan and the 2013 Regional Transportation Plan - Bay Area Plan are added to represent 2030 conditions of the regional road network outside of Treasure Island. The Treasure Island baseline transportation infrastructure reflects the TITIP assumptions. 1.1.3.1 Regional Road Network A full list of near-term and long-term projects that will impact the regional road network can be found in the Input Assumptions for Treasure Island Mobility Study 2030 Baseline memorandum. 1.1.3.2 Bridge Tolls Bridge tolls reflect the toll costs in 2010 except on the Golden Gate Bridge, where the toll costs reflect the planned 2018 tolls (Table 4). The travel demand forecasts use CHAMP s pre-identified time-of-day periods, which define the AM and PM peak periods as 6:00 AM -to 9:00 AM and 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM, respectively. Those periods differ slightly from the anticipated toll hours of operation, although both assume three-hour peak periods. 12

Table 4: Bridge Tolls Tolls ($2010) Bridge 2010 2030 2018: $8.00; HOV: $5.00 Golden Gate Bridge $5.00; HOV: $2.50 Factored to 1989$ using CPI 0.4404 San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge Peak: $6.00; Off-Peak: $4.00; PK-HOV: $2.50 PK: $6.00; OP: $4.00; PK-HOV: $2.50 Bay Area Toll Authority (Antioch Bridge, Benicia-Martinez Bridge, Carquinez Bridge, Dumbarton Bridge, Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, and San Mateo-Hayward Bridge) $5.00; HOV: $2.50 $5.00; HOV: $2.50 1.1.3.3 Regional Transit Network A full list of service changes to rail and bus service can be found in the Input Assumptions for Treasure Island Mobility Study 2030 Baseline memorandum. 1.1.3.4 Treasure Island Road Network Road network improvements on Treasure Island and adjacent Yerba Buena Island include reconstruction of Bay Bridge ramps, ramp metering implementation, and development of a network of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Figure 2 shows the proposed ramp configuration (Treasure Island/Yerba Buena Island Redevelopment Project DEIR). The connectivity and level of service provided by these facilities will be included in the 2030 baseline. The eastbound on-ramp is being reconstructed as part of the East Span Seismic Safety Project. This ramp will be metered. The westbound on-ramp on the west side of Yerba Buena Island will be reconstructed. This ramp will be metered. The westbound on-ramp on the east side of Yerba Buena Island will be reserved for transit and emergency vehicles. This ramp will remain stop-controlled. 13

Figure 2: Proposed Treasure Island Ramp Configuration Source: Treasure Island/Yerba Buena Island Redevelopment Project Draft Environmental Impact Report The TITIP includes the following projects to encourage biking and walking on the Island: A comprehensive network of Class 1 and Class 2 bikeways will be built to provide access to all parts of the Island and connect to the pedestrian/bike path on the new East Span of Bay Bridge. Bicycle parking throughout the Island and a bicycle "library" for bicycle rentals to residents and visitors will also be provided. A pedestrian network consists of a hierarchical web of primary and secondary pedestrian routes will be built. It will be connected by a Bay Trail ringing around the Island and a series of smaller pedestrian paths filling in the remaining gaps. 1.1.3.5 Treasure Island Parking The 2030 Baseline reflects the following residential and visitor parking policies: At most one residential parking space per housing unit. This parking policy will be reflected in SF-CHAMP by restricting the number of vehicles owned by Treasure Island households to no more than 8,000 vehicles. Hourly parking cost of $1.50 for all visitors ($2010), with no daily maximum. 1.1.3.6 Treasure Island Tolls The 2030 Baseline scenario, which is based on TITIP assumptions, models the toll policies shown in Table 5. The peak periods used for demand forecasting purposes are pre-defined in CHAMP and differ slightly from the actual proposed toll hours of operation in each scenario. Federal government vehicle toll discounts/exemptions are not modeled. 14

Table 5: Treasure Island Toll Policy (per TITIP) Toll (2010$) $5.00 Tolled population Treasure Island residents only Toll exemptions 3+ person carpools Federal government vehicles (not modeled) Direction Both (onto Bridge and off Bridge) AM peak & PM peak Toll hours 6:00 AM 9:00 AM & 4:00 PM 7:00 PM (TITIP) 6:00 AM 9:00 AM & 3:30 PM 6:30 PM (CHAMP) 1.1.3.7 Treasure Island Transit Network The following transit improvements are proposed in the TITIP and are included in the 2030 baseline: A new ferry service will be provided in conjunction with WETA between San Francisco's Ferry Terminal (Ferry Building) and Treasure Island. At full build-out the Island will be served by a fleet of two ferries in operation. SFMTA will operate two bus routes to San Francisco - one between the Transit Hub on Treasure Island and the Transbay Terminal, and one between the Transit Hub and the Civic Center Area. AC Transit will operate a new direct bus service from Treasure Island to Oakland Civic Center, with two stops at Broadway/20th Street and Broadway/14th Street. A free on-island shuttle system will be provided for residents, employees, and visitors on Treasure Island, allowing for easy circulation around the Island and offering frequent connection to the Transit Hub for transit riders using the Transbay buses or ferry service. The shuttle would operate primarily on three routes, two serving primarily Treasure Island and one primarily serving Yerba Buena Island. Table 6 provides more details on the proposed transit service described above. 15

Table 6: Proposed Treasure Island Transit Service Transit Service Operating Agency Operating Hours A M Headway (min) 4 M D P M EV EA Boarding Cash Fare Vehicle Capacity (per) Ferry $3.75 ($2013) To/from SF Ferry Terminal WETA 5:00 AM- 9:00 PM 15 30 15 5 30 0 $3.50 ($2010) $1.91 ($1989) 400 Local Bus To/from SF Transbay Terminal SFMTA 24 hours 7. 5 1 5 5 1 5 3 0 MUNI Local 94 Local Bus To/from SF Civic Center SFMTA No owl service 12 30 12 30 0 MUNI Local 63 Express Bus To/from Oakland Civic Center AC Transit 5:00 AM - 10:00 PM 10 3 0 10 30 0 AC Transit Transbay $4.20 ($2013) 54 $2.14 ($1989) Local Bus Island Shuttles Route A Island Shuttles Routes B and C 24 hours 5:00 AM - 10:00 PM 10 10 10 10 30 15 15 15 15 30 Free 28 4 AM refers to AM peak period; MD refers to midday; PM refers to PM peak period; EV refers to evening (EV); EA refers to early AM. 5 Later in the study process, WETA revised the estimated cycle time for a two-vessel operation, from 15 to 20 minutes peak (two-vessel), and from 30-50 minutes (1 vessel). 16

Figure 3 illustrates the frequency of transit service to and from Treasure Island at full build-out. Figure 3: Transportation Vision for Treasure Island Every 10 min. Every 20 min. Every 7.5 min. Every 12 min. Source: TI Mobility Management Program: Draft Policy Recommendations 1.1.4 Policy Scenario Assumptions In addition to the 2030 Baseline scenario described in the previous section, four different build scenario travel demand forecasts were sequentially prepared and analyzed in order to understand the mobility impacts and system performance of different toll policies, described in Table 7 below. 17

Table 7: SF-CHAMP Toll Policy Scenarios Toll Policy Choices Baseline Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Who is tolled? Residents Residents and Non-Residents Residents and Non-Residents Residents and Non- Residents Residents and Non- Residents Toll exemptions 6 Federal vehicles Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools Federal vehicles Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools Federal vehicles Vanpools 3+ Person Carpools Federal vehicles Vanpools Federal vehicles Vanpools Hours of operation 7 6:00 AM to 9:00 AM 3:30 PM to 6:30 PM 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 6:00 AM to 6:30 PM 6:00 AM to 3:00 AM 6:00 AM to 3:00 AM Directions to toll On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge On and off Bridge AM and PM peak periods: $8 per trip AM and PM peak periods: $8 ($2018) per trip AM and PM peak periods: $8 per trip Midday period: $4 per trip Midday and evening period: $4 ($2018) per trip Midday and evening period: $4 per trip Toll $5 ($2013) per trip $5 per trip No toll charged to Eastbay-to- Treasure Island traffic Discounted toll charged to Eastbay-to-Treasure Island traffic Discounted toll charged to Eastbay-to-Treasure Island traffic 50% Discounted toll charged to low income residents 8 6 The federal vehicle and vanpool exemptions were not modeled, as doing so is beyond the scope of CHAMP. 7 The hours of operation for demand modeling purposes reflect time periods as defined in CHAMP. 8 Low income toll was applied to Treasure Island residents that exhibit household income equal to or less than $34,000 in today s dollars, equivalent to $17,700 in $1989. 18

1.2 Findings Table 8 illustrates how each toll policy scenario (presented in Table 7) performs under the transportation plan performance measures established in the project description. All scenarios perform better than the baseline with fewer vehicles loaded onto the Bay Bridge, fewer vehicle-miles traveled, higher transit ridership and non-auto mode shares. The high demand for transit between Treasure Island and San Francisco results in high transit load factors, particularly for the MUNI 25 1 route to the Transbay Terminal. Scenario 4, which encompasses the most inclusive toll policy, performs the best. Scenario 4 observed the largest reduction in person trips, on/off Island vehicle trips, Island-generated vehicle-miles traveled, and Bay Bridge traffic volume. The inclusiveness of the toll policy also resulted in a large increase in toll transactions (tolls assessed, in addition, during the evening period and on 3+ person carpools). The low income toll discount somewhat worsens transportation performance in that it increases vehicle trips by 3.4% and vehicle miles traveled by 2.8%. In spite of the reduction in transit ridership, Scenario 5 meets the performance goal of at least a 50% non-auto mode split during peak periods. Table 8: Transportation Plan Performance Measures Policy Goal/Objective 1.Support walking and biking as primary modes 2. Discourage auto use via parking policies and pricing of driving 3. Create a disincentive for residents to use their cars for commute trips 4. Provide competitive and attractive transit for commute trips Performance Measure Performance Target Intra-island non-auto person trip mode share (Daily) >50% Island-generated VMT (AM & PM Peak) In 000s Island-generated VMT (Daily) In 000s Non-auto person trip mode share (AM & PM Peak) Transit mode share (AM & PM Peak) Transit mode share (Daily) Holding land use constant, fewer = better At 50% buildout, transit mode share for peak-period trips on/off Island must be 50% or more. Holding land use constant, greater = better Scenarios Base 2 3 4 5 82% 82% 80% 79% 79% 131 122 116 116 120 324 293 289 283 291 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% 34% 36% 38% 43% 41% 1 Formerly MUNI 108 19

Policy Goal/Objective 5. Mitigate peak period impact of trips generated by development on the regional road network and ramp queues 6. Provide high quality transit services Performance Measure Vehicle trips to & from Island (Peak) Vehicle trips to & from Island (Daily) Maximum peak period load factor: MUNI 108 (Transbay Terminal) MUNI 109 (SF Civic Center) AC Transit (Oakland Civic Center) Ferry (SF Ferry Terminal) Performance Target Holding land use constant, fewer = better Scenarios Base 2 3 4 5 10,711 9,917 8,909 8,873 9,238 27,295 24,387 23,219 22,510 23,273 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.41 0.41 0.79 0.83 0.87 0.83 0.74 0.57 0.61 0.66 0.77 0.73 Intra-island Shuttles - - - - - The following sections describe the travel demand forecast findings (i.e., person and vehicle trip, transit ridership, household income discount) in more detail. 1.2.1 Person and Vehicle Trip Forecast In 2030 under the baseline scenario CHAMP forecasts 72,800 person trips, including trips by Treasure Island residents and trips by non-residents. More than 80% of all the person trips have one trip-end outside Treasure Island. Non-residents account for approximately 20% of all the person trips, or 25% of the on/off Island trips. All the build scenarios result in fewer person trips relative to the baseline, both during peak and off-peak periods. As expected, as the toll and/or toll coverage increases, the number of person trips decreases. The largest reduction in person trips (-3%) is observed in Scenario 4, which exhibits the most comprehensive toll policy. Non-residents are more sensitive to toll increases than residents, particularly to peak period toll increases: the proportional decrease in person trips is higher for non-residents than for residents, and higher during the peak than for the entire day. Increasing the toll results in substitution of off-island destinations with on-island destinations, as evidenced by the increase in intra- Island trips forecasted for all the build scenarios relative to the baseline. 20

Table 9: Person Trips, Daily Total Person Trips Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 All Person Trips 72,800 72,300 71,200 70,500 70,700-500 -1,600-2,300-2,100 Intra-Island Trips 13,400 13,400 13,700 14,100 14,200 0 300 700 800 On/Off Island Trips 59,400 58,900 57,500 56,400 56,500-500 -1,900-3,000-2,900 Residents 43,900 43,800 43,400 43,100 43,300-100 -500-800 -600 Visitors 15,200 15,100 13,800 13,200 13,100-100 -1,400-2,000-2,100 Departing from TI 29,700 29,500 28,800 28,200 28,200-200 -900-1,500-1,500 Arriving at TI 29,700 29,400 28,800 28,200 28,200-300 -900-1,500-1,500 Table 10: Person Trips, AM and PM Peak Period Total Person Trips Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 All Person Trips 31,800 31,700 31,100 30,900 31,000-100 -700-900 -800 Intra-Island Trips 4,600 4,500 4,700 5,000 4,900-100 100 400 300 On/Off Island Trips 27,200 27,200 26,400 25,900 26,100 0-800 -1,300-1,100 Residents 21,000 21,200 20,900 20,600 20,600 200-100 -400-400 Visitors 6,200 6,100 5,400 5,200 5,200-100 -800-1,000-1,000 Departing from TI 15,000 15,100 14,600 14,400 14,500 100-400 -600-500 Arriving at TI 12,200 12,100 11,800 11,500 11,600-100 -400-700 -600 Corresponding to the reduction in person trips, relative to the baseline all build scenarios exhibit a decrease in on/off Island vehicle trips, a decrease in Island-generated vehicle-miles traveled, and a reduction in Bay Bridge traffic volume (Table 11). The largest reduction is observed under Scenario 4, corresponding to a reduction in on/off Island trips of approximately 4,800 vehicles, or 17% of the baseline vehicle trips. For the same scenario the VMT reduction is 13% of the Baseline VMT, indicating that trips shorter than the average trip length tend to decrease more with increasing tolls than the longer trips. The number of revenue toll transactions reflects the inclusiveness of the toll policy (i.e., who is tolled) as well as the amount of toll assessed. As expected, as the toll policy becomes more inclusive the number of toll transactions increase. This is reflected in the large increase in toll transactions observed in Scenario 2 (tolls assessed on non-residents and during midday period) and in Scenario 4 (tolls assessed, in addition, during the evening period and on 3+ person carpools). Similarly, as the average toll decreases the number of toll transactions increase. The effect of a toll decrease in toll transactions can be observed between Scenarios 4 and 5, since the only difference is a reduced toll assessed on low income travelers in Scenario 5. 21

Table 11: Vehicle Trips and Toll Revenue Transactions Person Trips Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 Vehicle Trips 27,300 24,390 23,210 22,510 23,270-2,910-4,090-4,790-4,030 VMT (in 000s) 324 293 289 283 291-31 -35-41 -33 Bay Bridge Traffic (in 000s) 311 309 308 307 308-2 -3-4 -3 Toll Transactions 5,840 14,290 10,220 22,480 23,440 8,450 4,380 16,640 17,600 Residents 5,840 9,520 7,360 15,750 16,690 Visitors 0 4,770 2,860 6,730 6,750 Peak (AM & PM) 5,840 8,290 5,440 8,860 9,200 Off-Peak 0 6,000 4,780 13,620 14,240 1.2.2 Transit Ridership Forecast Methodology The transit boardings estimates produced by CHAMP were adjusted off-model for two reasons. First, CHAMP s transit capacity constraining procedure failed to keep Treasure Island boardings below or at capacity because the procedure does not apply to the first stop on a route, and therefore did not apply to the Treasure Island Transit Center stop, where the vast majority of boardings occur. Second, it was observed that the model shows Eastbay to San Francisco trips transferring from AC Transit Transbay routes to the MUNI 25 at the Treasure Island Transit Center (and vice-versa), a behavior that is not likely to occur in reality. The off-model procedure is applied as follows: i. The total number of transit trips between Treasure Island and San Francisco, and Treasure Island and Eastbay, is obtained from the CHAMP trip mode choice output. ii. Boardings on AC Transit are set equal to transit person trips between Eastbay and Treasure Island, by time period and direction iii. Treasure Island to San Francisco transit trips are distributed among the two MUNI routes and the ferry service in the same proportion as the CHAMP estimated boardings. In cases where this allocation resulted in more boardings than route capacity, the excess transit trips were assumed to use the ferry service. The only route with insufficient capacity to meet demand was the MUNI 108 in the AM period, westbound direction. Initial (CHAMP) and adjusted boardings for the Baseline Scenario are shown in Table 12, along with the transit trip and route capacity estimates which are used to revise the initial CHAMP boardings forecast. The same procedure was applied to all the scenarios. 22

Table 12: Off-Model Procedure for Estimating Transit Boardings, Baseline Scenario Daily AM Peak PM Peak Off-Peak CHAMP Transit Trips To San Francisco 8,078 3,960 1,126 2,992 From San Francisco 7,907 439 3,426 4,042 To Eastbay 1,508 766 235 507 From Eastbay 1,633 242 709 682 Route Capacity 2 (persons per direction) MUNI 108 12,032 2,256 3,384 6,392 MUNI 109 3,780 945 945 1,890 AC Transit 3,564 972 972 1,620 Ferry 10,746 2,388 2,388 5,970 CHAMP Transit Boardings Westbound MUNI 108 9,189 3,545 2,426 3,218 MUNI 109 527 332 95 100 AC Transit 2,612 334 1,769 509 Ferry 631 525 33 73 Eastbound MUNI 108 8,046 602 3,361 4,083 MUNI 109 341 32 152 157 AC Transit 1,664 885 341 438 Ferry 324 13 190 121 Adjusted Transit Boardings Westbound MUNI 108 6,165 2,256 1,070 2,839 MUNI 109 462 332 42 88 AC Transit 1,633 242 709 682 Ferry 1,451 1,372 15 64 Eastbound MUNI 108 7,302 408 3,110 3,784 MUNI 109 308 22 141 146 AC Transit 1,508 766 235 507 Ferry 297 9 176 112 Results Relative to the baseline scenario, all the toll policy scenarios result in increased transit ridership during peak and off-peak periods and across all transit services bus service to/from San Francisco, bus service to/from the Eastbay, Ferry service and internal Treasure Island shuttles. The results shown in Table 13 and Table 14 do not reflect the corrective post-processing steps described above. The transit boardings 2 Route capacity per direction is calculated as vehicle capacity * (period duration in minutes) / headway. Vehicle capacities and headways are shown in Table 6. 23

estimates were constrained to available capacity off-model. Based on these forecasts the expectation is that at full build-out under any of these scenarios, including the baseline, the demand for transit to and from San Francisco in the peak commute directions will be near or at capacity. Table 13: Daily Transit Boardings Daily Transit Boardings Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 MUNI 108 13,467 14,430 14,468 15,845 15,345 963 1,001 2,378 1,878 MUNI 109 770 809 860 973 939 39 90 203 169 AC Transit 3,141 3,512 3,504 3,754 3,544 371 363 613 403 Ferry 1,748 1,848 2,115 2,571 2,320 100 367 823 572 Island Shuttles 776 826 854 959 919 50 78 183 143 Table 14: Peak Period Transit Boardings Peak Period Transit Boardings (AM & PM) Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 MUNI 108 6,844 7,157 7,227 7,558 7,445 313 383 714 601 MUNI 109 536 540 592 666 653 4 56 130 117 AC Transit 1,952 2,127 2,193 2,349 2,194 175 241 397 242 Ferry 1,571 1,661 1,849 2,257 2,026 90 278 686 455 Island Shuttles 429 445 472 534 514 16 43 105 85 The mode split across the entire day and for the two peak periods combined is shown in Table 15 and Table 16, respectively. As expected, the vast majority of intra-island trips, approximately 80% across all scenarios, are non-auto trips. The share of non-auto trips increases as the toll policy becomes more inclusive, and achieves the expected 50% minimum peak period target in Scenarios 4 and 5. The increase in transit trips results primarily due to shifts from carpooling to transit during the peak periods, and from drive alone and carpooling during the off-peak periods, relative to the baseline. In Scenarios 4 and 5, when the toll is applied to carpools, some low-income transit riders shift to driving, either alone or in carpools. 24

Table 15: Daily Person Trip Mode Split Mode Share Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 Intra-Island Trips Non-Auto 82% 82% 80% 79% 79% 0% -2% -3% -3% Island On/Off Trips Auto 66% 64% 62% 57% 59% -2% -4% -9% -7% DA 32% 27% 27% 27% 29% -5% -5% -5% -3% SR2 19% 17% 15% 17% 18% -2% -4% -2% -1% SR3+ 15% 20% 20% 13% 12% 5% 5% -2% -3% Non-Auto 34% 36% 38% 43% 41% 2% 4% 9% 7% Transit 34% 36% 38% 43% 41% 2% 4% 9% 7% Non-Motorized <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 0% 0% 0% 0% Table 16: Peak Period Person Trip Mode Split Mode Share Difference Relative to Baseline Base S2 S3 S4 S5 S2 S3 S4 S5 Intra-Island Trips Non-Auto 81% 82% 79% 78% 77% 1% -2% -3% -4% Island On/Off Trips Auto 58% 56% 53% 48% 50% -2% -5% -10% -8% DA 27% 24% 23% 24% 26% -3% -4% -3% -1% SR2 14% 13% 9% 12% 13% -1% -5% -2% -1% SR3+ 16% 19% 20% 11% 11% 3% 4% -5% -5% Non-Auto 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% 2% 5% 10% 8% Transit 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% 2% 5% 10% 8% Non-Motorized <1% <1% <1% <1% <1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 25

1.2.3 Household Income Discount Effects Scenario 5 examined the effect of a toll discount to low income residents on transportation system performance and toll revenues. As expected, Scenario 5 exhibits few differences in mode split among high income travelers relative to Scenario 4, since the same toll policy applied to high income households in both scenarios (Table 17). Among trips by low income travelers, there is a significant (7%) mode shift away from transit and 3+ person carpools, and towards drive alone and 2 person carpools, directly due to the low income toll discount. No change in mode split was observed among visitors, as expected since these travelers were exposed to the same toll policy in Scenario 5 as in Scenario 4. Table 17: Resident Person Trips Mode Split by Household Income Mode All Resident Trips Scenario 5 Scenario 4 Difference High Income Trips Low Income Trips All Resident Trips High Income Trips Low Income Trips All Resident Trips High Income Trips Drive Alone 22% 23% 14% 21% 22% 7% 1% 1% 7% Shared Ride 2 14% 14% 15% 14% 14% 12% 0% 0% 3% Shared Ride 3+ 10% 10% 7% 10% 10% 9% 0% 0% -2% Transit 34% 34% 40% 36% 35% 47% -2% -1% -7% Walk/Bike 20% 19% 24% 19% 19% 25% 1% 0% -1% Low Income Trips PERFORMANCE MEASURES Table 18 shows a comparison of transportation plan performance measures across all scenarios. All scenarios exhibit better performance measures than the baseline fewer vehicles loaded onto the Bay Bridge, fewer vehicle-miles traveled, higher transit ridership and non-auto mode shares. The high demand for transit between Treasure Island and San Francisco results in high transit load factors, particularly for the MUNI 108 route. The best performing scenario is Scenario 4, which corresponds to the most inclusive toll policy. The low income toll discount somewhat worsens transportation performance in that it increases vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled, albeit modestly (3.4% and 2.8%, respectively). In spite of the reduction in transit ridership, Scenario 5 meets the performance goal of at least 50% non-auto mode split during peak periods. 26

Table 18: Transportation Plan Performance Measures Policy Goal/Objective Performance Measure Performance Target 1.Support walking and biking as primary modes 2. Discourage auto use via parking policies and pricing of driving 3. Create a disincentive for residents to use their cars for commute trips 4. Provide competitive and attractive transit for commute trips 5. Mitigate peak period impact of trips generated by development on the regional road network and ramp queues Intra-island non-auto person trip mode share (Daily) >50% Island-generated VMT (AM & PM Peak) In 000s Island-generated VMT (Daily) In 000s Non-auto person trip mode share (AM & PM Peak) Holding land use constant, fewer = better At 50% buildout, non-auto mode share for peak-period trips to/from the Island should be 50% or more. Scenarios Base 2 3 4 5 82% 82% 80% 79% 79% 131 122 116 116 120 324 293 289 283 291 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% Transit mode share (AM & PM Peak) Holding land use constant, 42% 44% 47% 52% 50% Transit mode share (Daily) greater = better 34% 36% 38% 43% 41% Vehicle trips to & from Island (Peak) Holding land use constant, 10,711 9,917 8,909 8,873 9,238 Vehicle trips to & from Island (Daily) fewer = better 27,295 24,387 23,219 22,510 23,273 Maximum peak period load factor: 6. Provide high quality transit services MUNI 108 (Transbay Terminal) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 MUNI 109 (SF Civic Center) 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.41 0.41 AC Transit (Oakland Civic Center) 0.79 0.83 0.87 0.83 0.74 Ferry (SF Ferry Terminal) 0.57 0.61 0.66 0.77 0.73 Intra-island Shuttles - - - - - 27