The new downtown arena for the Sacramento Kings is going to cause lots of traffic in downtown Sacramento. I know, duh, but there are, like, official traffic guys saying this, so:
Jim Calkins, the head of freeway operations for the Sacramento area, wrote in one email, “I think the minimum number of vehicles would be 8,000 — not 3,600.”
In another email, a transportation planner for Caltrans wrote, “There was no feasible way to mitigate those impacts.”…
The Kings, as the developers of the new arena, are required to pay impact fees to mitigate the costs of traffic projects.
The initial calculations based on the building size required a $310,000 fee.
The Kings have agreed to pay more: $500,000.
But Caltrans officials said that’s a drop in the bucket compared to what any other transportation project would cost.
There are plans for a new streetcar line and expanded highway ramps, but neither will be in place by the time the new arena opens in 2016, so there are likely to be some decent-sized traffic nightmares, at least at the start. Think this is maybe something that Cobb County should be paying attention to as well?
“Drop in the bucket” is seriously inadequate. $500,000 is a drop in the ocean for any traffic mitigation project. That’ll buy you a couple hundred feet of curb.
While it certainly may make tragic worse. If you really get into how the highway department does there numbers in downtowns, the process is pretty messed up. Almost all their metics are for planning either suburban or rural highways, on of the few larger money sinks than stadiums and worst ROI on gov spending has been DOT involvement in city centers.
Oh be fair, it will buy a couple thousand feet of curb and sidewalk if you don’t touch the street :)
Maybe you could redo the street-scape on 1/4 a block, or redo one minor intersection?
I can tell you, Neil, that there will be absolutely no way to build new freeway ramps in that area. I’ll even go one step further: The onramp to southbound I-5 currently has one lane, and there is no possible way to expand its size. It cannot be done, because there’s another ramp that exits onto P Street about 1/4 mile from where the J Street onramp enters I-5 South.
It’s already too densely-packed with onramps and offramps; further expansion is absolutely not possible.
And furthermore, this is precisely what the Council was told, on numerous occasions.
When you combine this with the set-in-stone fact that the freeways near the current arena are set up way better for this kind of traffic, after the public spent tens of millions of dollars to get it that way, this makes this tragedy even deeper.
This will have fiscal issues. I tell you, this is setting up to be North America’s worst arena debacle. Sacramento will WISH it was Indianapolis after this.
Yeah, I was thinking that $500,000 probably gets them a few ticket kiosks.
What’s really moronic is that this project isn’t even approved. The Feds have told them they’ll pay for half of the study. So if the study comes back, “Yeah, stupid idea, don’t build it”, does that mean SBH is entirely off-the-hook for traffic mitigation expenses? I’d bet it does.
Also this, Neil:
http://www.sacbee.com/2014/10/09/6772763/judge-finds-flaw-in-sacramentos.html
I’d think there’s a process the City now has to go through. They probably can’t make changes to the mitigation plan without Council approval. So what does that mean? Would that then re-open the public comment period on the EIR? Does that reset the 270-day clock? Does the Council have to have open meetings about changes to the EIR?
I just don’t know what the process is.
All it means is that SacPD will attempt to reroute as many people as possible up to Richards Boulevard or across J street to 16th and up SR-160 toward Roseville.
Gotta remember – even though ARCO is a block and a half off of the freeway, the way ARCO Sports Complex is designed, you have to go through three or four bottlenecks just to get to Del Paso Road.
All in all, it’ll probably be similar in scope to what the team has now.
sierraspartan:
Going north through the railyards won’t get you southbound I-5. That’s no help at all, to send people back past the I-5 onramp at the end of I Street.
I got onto I-5 South using the P Street onramp tonight. Even that doesn’t help, because it’s also a single lane.
No, sorry, but there just isn’t anywhere near as much capacity downtown. Worse yet, there’s no way to expand that capacity.
sierraspartan:
Have you ever driven in downtown Sacramento? You can’t get to Richards Boulevard expect by getting onto Interstate 5 or by going down 16th Street. The only other roads that connect are one-way in the wrong direction. Directing traffic to exit at Richards to get into downtown is even worse. The first street that goes through, 7th, is only one lane. The other street, 12th, is the exit from Highway 160 and is usually busy, near gridlock, during rush hour.
J Street is also already busy and near gridlock. The stoplights at every intersection just compound the problems. If they lock all of those lights green, a solution that has been mentioned by the city , those who plan to use Highway 160 or Highway 50 will be prevented from getting to those routes as they will need to either cross J Street or merge into that traffic.
The I Street interchange is also a current nightmare – to be made worse by this project. There is, from left to right. one lane going into Old Sacramento, one lane going to south-bound I-5, one lane going over the river to West Sacramento, and one lane going to north-bound I-5. That intersection also includes the exit from the Amtrak parking lot, the exit from one of the designated parking garages, a pedestrian cross-light from the Downtown Plaza area toward that parking. Motorists now cross from the far left lane to the far right to avoid waiting in the longer line of traffic. How much worse will this be when there is abundant foot-traffic trying to get to the parking and cars exiting the parking structures?
The city did not think this through and relied on “analysis” from the kings.
In addition to what RA said, when they wrote their analysis for their traffic study, they relied on data from only the month of May. I think it can be shown that May has, on average, the lightest traffic.
Schools are letting out; vacations have not yet started; the weather is better; the days are pretty long; and so forth.
If they had used an average of November-March — which is the bulk of the basketball season — it would have been far more accurate. Fewer daylight hours, all schools are in session, fewer bicycle and motorcycle commuters, holiday traffic, weather is much worse, and the basketball season is on.
When’s the last time the Kings have even played basketball in May, for Pete’s sake?
Now the lawsuits have been completely dismissed:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/city-beat/article2956009.html
The CEQA suits have been completely rejected. I expected nothing less when I heard that Frawley got the case. He tends to rule for government against citizens. I do hope they appeal. http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/city-arena/article2958188.html
I gave you the wrong link. My story is interesting, but unrelated.
It’s just beyond ridiculous that SBH has pledged to spend $500,000 to help build a trolley system that might never get built at all. It’s 1/3 of 1% of the projected cost of construction.
I-5 will be blocked to I-80 on a regular basis, with no hope for a way to correct that; traffic will be affected severely across 50. And yet, $500,000 towards a $150M system that may never be built is somehow enough. It’s really stupid.
And yet, like RA, I expected nothing else. I’m now in favor of calling this the Mayor Kevin Johnson Arena.
In about 5 years, when the traffic actually turns out to be worse than the predictions in these lawsuits, and the project is about $10M/year short on its revenue predictions, I’d say Frawley is going to be feeling pretty stupid.
It’s not entirely Frawley’s fault; more like the seven Council members who actually think this arena will pencil. It doesn’t pencil now, and it never will.
Another North American city commits financial suicide.
And when I say, “It doesn’t pencil now”, I’m being literal.
Hundreds of jobs at that mall are gone, and have been replaced by dozens of construction workers. They’re already missing projections.
If there ever actually are 4,000 people working in that area all at once, it’ll only be because of another $200M in subsidies from the City. We’ve funded the arena; we should not fund the outside development.
In addition to the jobs lost and not being created, all of the promises that local people and local businesses would be put to work have been broken. Except for the apprenticeships, none of the workers belong to the local union and all of the companies mentioned in the media and blazoned on trucks entering and leaving are from outside the City of Sacramento.
The News and Review is keeping a tally of businesses who are closing their doors as a result of this boondoggle. The latest casualty is Marilyn’s on K Street.