City of Coronado, California

Frequently Asked Questions

What cause(s) traffic to backup on the San Diego - Coronado Bridge, Third Street and Fourth Street?
Traffic congestion on City streets is the cause of the majority of backups. Traffic congestion is a function of the number of vehicles vs. the capacity of the roadway and is typically measured in terms of Level of Service (LOS). Level of Service is a report-card scale used to indicate the quality of traffic flow. Level of Service (LOS) ranges from LOS A (free flow, little congestion) to LOS F (forced flow, extreme congestion). Traffic analysis(1) reveals that several intersections along the SR75/282 corridor operate at LOS D or worse during the morning and/or afternoon peak hour. Approximately 60% of the peak hour traffic is attributable to the vehicles traveling to/from NASNI. Daily traffic fluctuates and is heavily influenced by the number of carriers in port. This transportation corridor is one of the most heavily traveled residential corridors in San Diego County. Traffic conditions (existing and forecasted) will be addressed in the Project Report and Environmental Document (PR/ED).

1. City-Wide Major Traffic Study Prepared by Parson Brinkerhoff Quade & Douglas in Cooperation with Wilbur Smith Associates, March 15, 2005.

Why is traffic predicted to continue to increase if the City is built out?
Over 80,000 vehicles travel on SR-75 everyday and forecasts based on SANDAG growth assumptions predict that number to increase to 117,000 by 2030. Increases in traffic volumes are projected based on regional growth assumptions, historical traffic volumes trends and computer modeling with the data available at the time. Most of the projected growth in the project area is attributable to general growth in the region, especially in the South Bay area. The purpose of the project is to address these anticipated changes in congestion and the anticipated growth in the region. Future traffic projections will be addressed in the PR/ED. The study also looks at ways to reduce congestion and quantify the likely impacts of each of the alternatives.

How would a tunnel project or other construction alternative be funded?
The Navy, being a stakeholder in the SR-75/282 Corridor Project is a participating agency assisting the City on a long term solution to the congestion problem. Any solution that involves a tunnel or any other major construction project would require funding from Federal, State, regional and local sources. Potential Federal sources include the Federal Highway Administration, the Department of Defense, and Department of Homeland Security. Potential State sources include the State Interregional Transportation Improvement Program, and the State Infrastructure Bond Program. Regional sources include $25 million already designated through TRANSNET to help fund construction of a tunnel project, and local sources could include the use of reserves, tolls(2), or taxes (which would require a vote of the people). The Financial Strategy Report dated July 2007 provides an in-depth look at all potential funding sources.

2. Draft Tolling-Project Delivery Study, April 2009

What about using mass transit, rideshare, and the commuter Ferry to reduce congestion?
The use of mass transit, rideshare, and other alternative means of transportation are included in the Study under the Transportation Demand Management/Transportation System Management (TDM/TSM) alternative and could be selected as the preferred alternative.

Why is the Study only looking at variations of a tunnel, an underpass, and traffic demand management?
Numerous potential capital projects including those identified in the City's unified transportation plan and possible short term relief measures have been examined in the Major Investment Study (MIS). The initial screening of these numerous options narrowed the list to 13 alternatives that were evaluated as those most likely to be recommended for implementation. Under the policies promoted by the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), the MIS is an integral part of the transportation planning process that is designed to provide decision makers with better and more complete information on the options. The initial set of 13 alternatives resulted in the advancement of six alternatives that were subjected to further detailed evaluation in the subsequent phases of the MIS. Based on the MIS recommendation, the PR & ED was initiated to study six alternative strategies including a No-Build strategy, Transportation Demand Management/ Transportation System Management strategy, and the four future build alternatives. The overall reduction in the number of alternatives allowed for study resources to be focused for a more comprehensive evaluation and presentation of pertinent study results. Subsequently, based on input from the Navy and Caltrans, three additional build alternatives were added during the Study phase for a total of nine alternatives.

Why has it taken so long to study the potential traffic reduction alternatives?
In order to qualify for federal, state, regional, and local funding the Project Report and Environment Documents (PR/ED) needed to be prepared in compliance with both the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This process requires significant analysis of each alternative, including the existing environment that could be affected by the project and the potential impacts from each of the alternatives. This requires extensive engineering, geotechnical, fiscal, traffic, and environmental analysis. The formal Study began in FY 2004 and was originally scheduled to be completed in FY 2009. Based on input from the Navy and Caltrans, three additional alternatives were added (Alternative 5B, Alternative 4B, Option 2, and Alternative 4B, Option 3), extending the schedule. The draft PR/ED is now scheduled to be completed in July 2010 with the final Environmental Document presented to the City Council in September 2011.

Why does the City need lobbyists during the study phase?
In 1998 83% of the Coronado electorate voted in "favor of the City of Coronado seeking funding sources to construct a bored tunnel between the Coronado Bridge and the Naval Air Station." With this direction the City hired federal and regional lobbyists to assist the City in obtaining support from national and regional policy makers for federal, state and regional funding. These lobbyists have thus far been successful in helping the City obtain $9.9 million in federal grants to be used for traffic relief studies related to this project, and $25 million in regional TRANSNET funding towards constructing a tunnel, if or when the City determines that is the preferred alternative to pursue.

Why are not all the Project Report / Environmental Documents available to the public?
Typically the Project Report / Environmental Documents (PR/ED) are released in total once the entire report is complete. Caltrans as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) lead must review and approve the documents as complete prior to the final draft being released for public review and comment. Drafts do not get released to the public for review, because information could change prior to the final draft being released to the public. The City is working with Caltrans to determine if any sections of the PR/ED can be released prior to the entire final draft being released to the public. The City has prepared a list of all the reports that have been prepared so that people can get a better understanding of the thoroughness required in the PR/ED. That list can be viewed under the Project Documents section of the City's Understanding Prop H web site.

Are there earthquake faults in the study area that would preclude the construction of a tunnel?
As part of the study, an extensive geotechnical investigation was undertaken to identify geologic conditions that would have to be addressed for all the build alternatives. Fault zones were identified and evaluated. All build alternatives proposed take into consideration seismic activity and the tunnel options each take into consideration the possibility of a maximum probable seismic event for the given fault. Earthquake faults and other geotechnical information can be found in the Geotechnical Information report which explored seismic design criteria for the proposed alternatives. Unlike most reports contained in the PR/ED which cannot be released, Caltrans has authorized release of the Geotechnical report. An Executive Summary of Volume 1 and Volume 2 of the Final Preliminary Engineering Geotechnical Investigation report can be viewed under the Project Documents section of the City's Understanding Prop H web site. A full copy of the 500 plus page report is available on CD by contacting the Project Manager at 619-522-2426.

What has been the impact in 2010 of three aircraft carriers being in port at the same time?
As of April 2010, the City has not yet experienced the full impact of the three carriers given the typical leave provided to most of the returning ship's personnel. However, the following chart documents the traffic counts taken near the old ticket booth location on the Coronado side of the Bridge (both in-bound and outbound traffic) from January 4 to April 23, 2010:

2010 Weekday Traffic Volumes
Across San Diego-Coronado Bay Bridge

What are the possible consequences of not completing the Study (PR/ED) if our community wants or needs to build a traffic mitigation capital project in the future?
There is no way to determine that at this time. It would depend on a number of factors, such as the type of project desired and how much time has passed since the Study was discontinued. For example, if it was determined to build underpasses at the interchange at Third and Fourth Streets at Orange Avenue, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would be required. Such an EIS would have to consider all "reasonable" alternatives and would have to include many of the options included in the current Study (PR/ED). Depending on the length of time that had elapsed, much of the current draft reports would likely have to be re-written or at least updated. The cost to update EIS reports pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would be significant. While the engineering work might not change, the environmental analysis could require significant re-analysis due to the passage of time.