The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About13 - Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology - PowerPointDecember 10, 2019 Item No. 13 SB 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Tony Brine, PE, TE City Traffic Engineer City Council Meeting June 9, 2020 Tony Petros Principal Transportation Planner, LSA Senate Sill 743 His • September 2013 - Law Passes. • December 2013 - Preliminary CEQA Guidance published — transportation goals shift from reducing motorist delay to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. • Au ust 2014 - Office of Planningand Research (OPR) - Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) to replace delay or level -of -service (OS), as metric for transportation impacts. • November 2017 - Draft CEQA Guidelines — VMT analysis required after July 1, 2020. • December 2018 - Final Guidelines Adopted - OPR provides Technical Advisory (TA) on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Vehicle Miles Traveled vs. Level of Service Vehicle Miles Traveled = daily trips generated by new development multiplied by estimated number of miles those trips travel to their destination. Level -of -Service (motorist delay) = traffic volume on roadway divided by capacity (number of lanes). Typically, delay has been improved by adding roadway capacity or lanes. OPR Technical Advisory (TA) • Provides recommendations for: • VMT analysis. • Impact significance thresholds. • Mitigation measures. • Agencies may choose to use the OPR recommendations; or agencies may develop their own local thresholds if supported by substantial evidence. Citv VMT & Traffic Anal ses • VMT Screening review for all non-CEQA exempt projects • VMT Analysis for all projects above screening threshold • Screening/VMT analysis provided in CEQA Document (ND, MND or EIR) • VMT is not the end of Level of Service (LOS) analysis. • Traditional Traffic studies will continue per Traffic Phasing Ordinance. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysi O� Three primary steps in VMT analysis process: 1. Screening Criteria — Which projects do not require detailed VMT analysis. 2. Significance Thresholds - Compare calculated VMT against thresholds to determine if there is an impact. 3. Mitigation — To reduce or eliminate project impact. VMT Trip Types & Metrics �a • "Home-based work trips" is primarily the subject of the thresholds. Trips are associated with residential, office, and retail land uses as they have the greatest influence on VMT. • Residential uses are expressed as VMT per capita (or per person) • Office uses are expressed as VMT per employee • Retail uses are expressed as total VMT attributable to the project • For mixed-use projects, each component is evaluated independently Screening Criteria - (Less than Significant Im 1. High Quality Transit Areas — projects within 1/z mile of major transit stop, or along transit corridor with service intervals less than 15 minutes. 2. VMT Maps - Projects located in area with low VMT area. Maps prepared using City traffic model and County average VMT estimates. 3. A local-servingretail etail project less than 50,000 sduare feet. 4. High percentage of affordable housing(TBD). 5. Proiects that increase 300 or less net dailv trios Der ITE Manual. 6. Institutional/government or public serving uses. * Variation from OPR guidance. High Quality Transit Areas O i l 1 LSA Existing VMT per capita map LOA ..__..__ Cf QA Transportation ThreshaWsa)Significance Guitle Existing VW per Population souea: mm,Compared to Regional Average Existing VMT per employee map LSA"Uu"ts CEGA➢onsporteriw'hmaholdsofSigm)imnae Guide Existing VMT per Emplevee Compared to Regional Average Significance Thresholds County Average = 17.9 VMT per capita (residential) — Home based trips 24.1 VMT per employee (office) — Home based and work based trips OPR Technical Advisory provides various thresholds for significance. Most agencies have adopted OPR's goal of 15 percent reduction from County VMT average for residential and office projects. Staff Recommends OPR 15% reduction goal. Proposed thresholds 15.2 VMT per capita for residential projects 20.5 VMT per employee for office projects - OPR Net increase in total VMT for retail projects Step -by -Step Process a Step -by -Step a 1. Project application submitted. 2. City staff reviews Screening Criteria. 3. If project does not meet screening criteria, a detailed VMT analysis is required. 4. For projects with daily trips of 300 ADT —1,000 ADT, or with one predominant land use, then the VMT can be calculated manually. 5. For large or mixed-use projects, use of City's NBTM model is required to calculate VMT. 6. If VMT per capita (residential), or per employee (office), or total VMT (retail) exceed City thresholds, project has significant impact and mitigation required. Imposed lana uevelopment project Application Fecewea Step -by -Step Process Mho d` mitianal MEASURAR sum�onv inacnm mVV oi�.x 1 my mnuare mpact dna uaata No naclnonal ll NO VES AddHlonal A—W, Anehxle Complete vnmcant llnm, antatt Impatt antl Se�temein of Ovetndng [nnxltlerxlnnx LSA han 518niMam MehIm CampleR w¢MKpo"..xc..— VAIT PER CAPITA �1� UK 1 1 y .! owl � m�l µ: �i_ :1�,MODELING ANDAEREESIKENt .1INIPAAT I LESS THAN OR GREATER THAN THRESHOLD? mitianal MEASURAR sum�onv inacnm mVV oi�.x 1 my mnuare mpact dna uaata No naclnonal ll NO VES AddHlonal A—W, Anehxle Complete vnmcant llnm, antatt Impatt antl Se�temein of Ovetndng [nnxltlerxlnnx LSA han 518niMam MehIm CampleR w¢MKpo"..xc..— General Plan Update - Use Traffic Model to calculate VMT for: a) Existing General Plan land uses — current year b) Existing General Plan land uses — future year c) General Plan Update land uses — current year d) General Plan Update land uses — future year - Compare General Plan Update VMT against Existing General Plan VMT. - Target is to achieve a lower VMT in General Plan Update than 2006 General Plan. - Establishing goals, policies, as well as implementation measures could reduce VMT. Mitiiiation Measures • The City VMT Implementation Guide includes possible measures. • Potential measures include improving transit access, bike and pedestrian improvements, ride sharing, telework options, on-site showers and lockers, etc. • Mitigation improvements (reductions to VMT) can be difficult to quantify and assumptions have to be made. • Regional VMT impact fees could be established in future. LAYM, t to Citv Council Policv K-3 VMT Analysis procedures added to the existing City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ■ It includes a framework for completing necessary VMT transportation analysis. ■ Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution 2020-57, Amending City Council Policy K-3. Questions ? Tony Brine, PE, TE City Traffic Engineer Tony Petros Principal Transportation Planner, LSA Associates