Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13 - Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis MethodologyQ �EwPpRT O c — '9 TO: FROM CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Staff Report PREPARED BY: PHONE: TITLE: ABSTRACT: June 9, 2020 Agenda Item No. 13 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL David A. Webb, Public Works Director - 949-644-3311, dawebb@newportbeachca.gov Antony Brine, City Traffic Engineer, tbrine@newportbeachca.gov 949-644-3329 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013 and effective July 1, 2020, changes the way transportation studies are conducted in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) replaces motorist delay and level of service (LOS) as the new metric for transportation impact determinations in CEQA. The State requires all cities to adopt a VMT policy to include transportation impact thresholds. Staff has prepared a framework for completing a CEQA-level VMT transportation analysis for proposed land development projects and transportation improvement projects. Staff recommends approval of an Procedures for the California Traveled (VMT) Methodology. RECOMMENDATION: a) Conduct a public hearing; Amendment to City Council Policy K-3 "Implementation Environmental Quality Act" to incorporate Vehicle Miles b) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly-, and c) Adopt Resolution No. 2020-57, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Amending City Council Policy K-3 "Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental QualityAct,"to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Methodology. FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: There is no fiscal impact related to this item. 13-1 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology June 9, 2020 Page 2 DISCUSSION: VMT as a CEQA impact metric was adopted by the State to address traffic impacts with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to achieve long term climate change goals. For a proposed land development project, vehicle miles traveled is the product of the daily automobile trips generated by the project, multiplied by the estimated number of miles those trips travel to their destination. Typically, development located farther from key destinations, such as job centers, may result in longer driving distance and higher VMT values. Development located close to job centers and transit may result in lower VMT. Prior environmental laws addressed traffic impacts with the goal of reducing automobile delay, measured by level -of -service (LOS). Excessive delay has traditionally been improved by increasing capacity on a roadway with the construction of new lanes, or improving traffic flow with signal timing improvements, etc. The unintended consequence of the LOS methodology is vehicle dependency, large roadway and intersection infrastructure, and increased vehicle emissions. In December 2018, the Office of Administrative Law approved updates to the formal CEQA implementing regulations prepared by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR). The regulations are generally referred to as the CEQA Guidelines. OPR also released their Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory), which contains guidance regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures. It is stated within the document that "OPR provides this Technical Advisory as a resource for the public to use at their discretion". The proposed City methodology outlines a framework for completing the VMT analysis. The framework includes a) screening criteria, b) significance thresholds for land development projects (residential, office, retail, other), c) significance thresholds for transportation projects, and d) mitigation measures for significant impacts. The discussion below summarizes each step. The step-by-step analysis is outlined in detail in the proposed Amendment to City Council Policy K-3 (see Attachment A). Transportation project screening criteria are also outlined in the Amendment. In the discussion here, the focus will be on land development projects. Screening Criteria Criteria can be used to identify when a project can be expected to cause a "less -than - significant impact" without conducting a detailed study. The criteria may be size, location, proximity to transit, or trip -making potential. The following screening criteria would be established by the proposed policy amendment and used to determine when a detailed VMT study is not required for a land development project: There are exceptions for the first screening criteria detailed below regarding transit. 13-2 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology June 9, 2020 Page 3 Projects with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) less than 0.75, projects that provide more parking than required by Code, projects inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan, or projects that reduce affordable housing units would not go through the transit screening, but would go through the remaining screening criteria. • The project is located within half -mile distance of an existing major transit stop, or along an existing high quality transit corridor (with fixed bus route service intervals of no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute time). • The project is located in an area with low VMT per capita (residential) or low VMT per employee (office). Maps have been prepared using the Newport Beach Transportation Model to define specific areas in the City where existing VMT is currently below the defined thresholds of significance, as outlined below. • The project involves local -serving retail space of less than 50,000 square feet. • The project has a high percentage of affordable housing units, as defined by the Community Development Department. • The project generates 300 or less net daily trips, utilizing the most current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual to calculate trip generation. Credit is given for existing uses generating traffic on site, as outlined in the City Traffic Phasing Ordinance. • Institutional/Government and public service uses such as police stations, fire stations, community centers, refuse centers, are screened out and no VMT analysis would be conducted. Sianificance Thresholds for Land Develoament For all projects that do not meet the Screening Criteria, a more detailed VMT impact analysis will be required. The typical threshold metrics used in a VMT analysis are VMT per person (capita) for residential projects, VMT per employee for office projects, and total VMT for retail projects. For other land uses not specified in the OPR Technical Advisory, the metric best fitting the predominant trip -making variable for that use shall be used. The Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) provides regional (County) daily averages for VMT per person (or per capita) for residential projects and daily VMT per employee for office projects. The County average is 17.9 VMT per capita, and 24.1 VMT per employee. 13-3 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology June 9, 2020 Page 4 The OPR Technical Advisory suggests various thresholds for the significance of VMT impacts but does not prescribe the use of a particular threshold. It is important to note that cities have the discretion to select their own preferred significance thresholds that would need to be supported by substantial evidence, or the city could use the thresholds suggested in the State OPR Technical Advisory. Staff recommends, and the Planning Commission concurred, that the City should use OPR significance thresholds. Most metropolitan planning organizations and transportation planning agencies have agreed to the goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) by approximately 15 percent by 2035. Staff recommends using the OPR guidance and setting the goal of reducing VMT per capita for residential projects, and VMT per employee for office projects, by at least 15 percent below that of the existing County VMT averages. Thus, a proposed residential project should have a calculated VMT per capita of 15.2 or less or there will be a significant impact. Similarly, a proposed office project shall have a calculated VMT per employee of 20.5 or less or there will be a significant impact. For a retail project, any net increase in total VMT will be considered a significant impact. Land Development Project Review Process A step-by-step process is summarized below for a CEQA-level VMT analysis. • The project application shall provide a full project description with intensity/density, proposed parking supply, number of affordable housing units (if residential), and any other project features that may affect VMT generation, project access, and alternative modes of travel. • Project screening is conducted by staff to determine if the project meets any of the screening criteria outlined above. If any criteria are met, no further VMT analysis is necessary. • If the project does not meet the screening criteria, a detailed VMT analysis is required. VMT rates shall be calculated, including VMT per capita for residential, VMT per employee for office, and total VMT for retail. For mixed-use projects, each land use shall be calculated separately. Credit for internal capture can be applied for mixed-use projects. • For projects with a daily trip generation of between 300 and 1,000 trips per day, or those with one predominant land use, VMT can be calculated manually. The VMT figure would be the product of the daily trip generation and trip length in miles for the specified land use. For large or multi -use projects, use of the City NBTM traffic forecasting model shall be required. A project generating 1,000 or more daily trips shall use the NBTM model to calculate the project VMT rates. 13-4 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology June 9, 2020 Page 5 • The project VMT rates of per capita for residential, per employee for office, or total VMT for retail shall be compared to the established city thresholds. If the calculated VMT metrics exceed the city thresholds, the project has a significant impact and mitigation measures are required. Mitigation Measures When the VMT analysis indicates a project has a significant impact, the applicant is required to identify feasible mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the impact. The City SB 743 Implementation Guide (Attachment C) includes possible strategies that can be selected. The City will ultimately decide what is feasible mitigation. If the mitigation measures fully mitigate the project impact, the project is presumed to have an impact mitigated to less than significant. No further VMT analysis would be required. If the project mitigation cannot reduce the VMT level to below the applicable thresholds, the City may require the project be re -designed, relocated or realigned to reduce the VMT impact, or a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) would need to be prepared if the City chose to approve the project. Transportation Projects Detailed screening criteria for transportation projects are included in the proposed Amendment to City Council Policy K-3. The City shall be required to consider the potential VMT impacts for any type of roadway improvement project. The addition of a new through lane on an existing roadway would be an example of a transportation project. If a proposed transportation project meets the screening criteria outlined in the Amendment, then a detailed VMT analysis is not required for the project. For projects on the State highway system, Caltrans will use and will require the City to use VMT as the CEQA metric. e0i=- ., NZIUM SB 743 should not be considered as the end of level -of -service (LOS). SB 743 explicitly states that it applies only to CEQA and does not affect the general plans of local agencies. This allows cities and counties to use LOS to set traffic standards for their communities. General Plan Policy 2.1.1 and Newport Beach Municipal Code Chapter 15.40 establishes LOS standards for city intersections. For all environmental documents, new development will be evaluated under both CEQA VMT requirements and the City's Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO). The difference will be that project -related changes to LOS will no longer be considered a potential environmental impact pursuant to CEQA. 13-5 Resolution No. 2020-57: Amend City Council Policy K-3 to Incorporate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology June 9, 2020 Page 6 Summary To comply with the new state CEQA Guidelines, staff has prepared a "Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology", which would become a part of City Council Policy K-3. The methodology provides for a step-by-step process to complete a VMT analysis for land development and transportation projects subject to CEQA. The screening criteria, significance thresholds, and mitigation measures in the proposed methodology are substantially consistent with the State OPR Technical Advisory. The one exception is in the screening criteria, where the City recommends a criteria of an increase of 300 or less net daily trips as a screening tool. This screening figure of 300 daily trips is consistent with the City Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO), and modeling has shown that emissions of GHG for projects that increase up to 300 daily trips would be less than significant. OPR recommends 110 daily trips as a project screening tool. The Planning Commission reviewed and approved the proposed VMT Methodology at their May 7, 2020 meeting. In addition to the VMT Methodology outlined, the City Attorney's Office has completed some clean-up items to language in other sections of the K-3 Policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Staff recommends the City Council find this action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. NOTICING: The agenda item has been noticed according to the Brown Act (72 hours in advance of the meeting at which the City Council considers the item). ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Resolution No. 2020-57 Attachment B — Planning Commission Resolution 2020-017 Attachment C — City SB 743 Implementation Guide Attachment D — Current K-3 Redlines 13-6 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. 2020-57 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CITY COUNCIL POLICY K-3 (IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT) TO INCLUDE A VEHICLES MILES TRAVELED METHODOLOGY TO COMPLY WITH SENATE BILL 743 WHEREAS, the City of Newport Beach ("City") is governed by the Charter of the City of Newport Beach, Newport Beach Municipal Code, and Council Policies; WHEREAS, City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures For The California Environmental Quality Act) outlines implementation procedures intended to satisfy the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. ("CEQA") and the CEQA Guidelines set forth in the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"); WHEREAS, the State of California Legislature passed and Governor Brown executed Senate Bill 743, which modifies the traffic impact analysis for projects analyzed under CEQA from automobile level of service ("LOS") to a new metric referred to as vehicle miles traveled ("VMT"); WHEREAS, the City has developed criteria for analyzing traffic impacts under the VMT methodology, for projects that are subject to CEQA, including screening criteria, thresholds of significance, and potential mitigation measures; WHEREAS, on May 7, 2020, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of the proposed amendment to City Council Policy K-3 by a majority vote (6 ayes, 1 absent, 0 noes); WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the City Council on June 9, 2020, in the Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act") and Section 15064.7 of the CEQA Guidelines. Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at this public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend City Council Policy K-3 to adopt a VMT methodology, applicable to Newport Beach, in compliance with SB 743. 13-7 Resolution No. 2020 - Page 2 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach resolves as follows.- Section ollows: Section 1: The City Council hereby amends City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures For The California Environmental Quality Act) as provided in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Section 2: All prior versions of City Council Policy K-3 that are in conflict with the revisions adopted by this resolution are hereby repealed. Section 3: The recitals provided in this resolution are true and correct and incorporated into the operative part of this resolution. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this resolution, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 5: Except as expressly modified in this resolution, all other City Council Policies, sections, subsections, terms, clauses and phrases set forth in the Council Policy Manual shall remain unchanged and shall be in full force and effect. Section 6: The City Council finds the adoption of this resolution and the amendment to City Council Policy K-3 is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Additionally, the amendment to City Council Policy K-3 is categorically exempt pursuant to Sections 15307 (actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources) and 15308 (actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment). The proposed amendment was initiated to comply with Senate Bill 743 which is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by mandating transportation analysis under CEQA as analyzed based upon vehicle miles traveled. 13-8 Resolution No. 2020 - Page 3 of 3 Section 7: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. ADOPTED this 9th day of June, 2020. Will O'Neill Mayor ATTEST: Leilani I. Brown City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ,"— C , ( - Aaron C. Harp City Attorney Attachment: City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures For The California Environmental Quality Act) 13-9 IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT A. Intent. K-3 The intent of this policy statement is to protect the environment of the City of Newport Beach, to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and to implement the basic principles, objectives, and criteria contained in the Guidelines adopted by the Secretary for Resources pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, as amended. These implementation procedures are intended to satisfy the requirements of Section 15022 of the CEQA Guidelines, or any successor guideline, and are designed to be used in conjunction with the CEQA statutes and Guidelines. In the event that any provision of this policy is found to be inconsistent with CEQA, the Guidelines or case law, this policy shall be revised to comply with applicable law. B. Definitions. As used in this policy statement, the following definitions shall apply: 1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) means Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq., or any successor statutes. 2. CEQA Guidelines means the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", prepared by the Secretary for Resources. 3. Community Development Director means the Community Development Director for the City of Newport Beach or his/her designee. 4. Decision Making -Body means the officer or body that has the authority to review and approve a project or application under Titles 20 and/or 21of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, including, but not limited to, the Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, Hearing Officer, Planning Commission, and City Council. 5. All definitions contained in CEQA and the Guidelines shall also apply to this policy statement. 1 13-10 K-3 C. General Policies. The following general policies shall apply: 1. The City, in implementing the requirements of CEQA, shall, wherever possible, integrate these procedures into the existing planning and review procedures of the City. 2. In reviewing and assessing the significance of environmental impacts, the City shall be guided by the applicable General Plan and Local Coastal Program policies and standards. D. Environmental Determinations. 1. Activities Not Subject to CEQA. This policy statement shall apply only to activities that are subject to CEQA. Activities that are not "Projects" as defined in Guidelines Section 15378, or any successor guideline, and activities that are "Ministerial" as defined in Guidelines Section 15369, or any successor guideline, are not subject to CEQA or this policy statement. Examples of City activities that are not normally subject to CEQA include but are not limited to, the following: Business licenses Parking permits Sign permits Demolition permits Grading permits Building permits Final subdivision maps Certificates of use and occupancy Approvals in Concept for Coastal Commission Exceptions. There may be instances where unusual circumstances cause one of these activities to be considered a discretionary action subject to CEQA. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following: 2 13-11 K-3 a. Any building permit or grading permit application or other action which is normally considered ministerial but due to special circumstances is determined to have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. Examples may include the following: Work in an area of unusual erosion potential or ground instability Work affecting scenic or sensitive biological resources An activity that may generate substantial public health impacts, such as noise, odors, or toxic materials b. Any building or grading permit in a sensitive area for which no prior CEQA review has occurred and no discretionary permit (e.g., use permit, site plan review) is required. Determination. The Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision - Making Body. The Decision -Making Body charged with reviewing a project or application under Titles 20 and/or 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall have the final authority to determine whether an activity is subject to CEQA. Action by the Decision -Making Body. No findings or discussion of CEQA compliance shall be required for activities that the Decision -Making Body has determined not to be subject to CEQA. 2. Projects that are Exempt from CEQA. CEQA and the Guidelines provide that the following types of projects are exempt from the requirement to prepare an Initial Study unless there are special circumstances that could result in significant environmental effects. a. Statutory Exemptions. Activities that qualify for a statutory exemption as provided under Sections 15260 et seq. of the Guidelines or any successor guidelines, do not require further environmental review. 3 13-12 K-3 b. Categorical Exemptions. The various classes of categorical exemptions are contained in Sections 15300 et seq. of the Guidelines, or any successor guidelines. The discussion of exceptions contained in Section 15300.2, or any successor guideline, shall apply particularly to projects and activities that would affect the shoreline, bluffs, wetlands, public views and other sensitive environmental resources. The Decision -Making Body shall have the authority to interpret the applicability of Categorical Exemptions to particular projects, including City -sponsored activities (e.g., Zoning Code amendments, assessment districts, construction and maintenance of utilities) and privately - initiated applications. C. "General Rule" Exemptions. During the preliminary review of an application, each discretionary project that is not covered under a statutory or categorical exemption shall be evaluated to determine whether it qualifies for an exemption under the general rule contained in Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline, which states, "Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA." The Guidelines further encourage agencies to adopt a list of project types that would qualify for the general rule exemption. Project types which qualify for this exemption include, but are not limited to: Minor changes to the Municipal Code which do not authorize physical development. ii. Minor changes to public infrastructure such as installing trees, replacing or upgrading streetlights, traffic signals, etc.; and other public improvements of a minor nature. iii. Administrative City actions such as budget amendments, professional services agreements, etc. which do not involve projects which affect the physical environment. Determination. When the Community Development Department is not the Decision - Making Body, the Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision -Making Body. The Decision - Making Body charged with reviewing a project or application under Titles 20 and 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall have the authority to determine the applicability of exemptions for all public and privately -initiated projects. 4 13-13 K-3 Notice of Exemption. After approval of a project that was found to be exempt, the Community Development Director may prepare and file a Notice of Exemption as provided under Section 15062 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 3. Initial Studies. If a project is subject to CEQA and is not exempt under one of the provisions listed under Section D.2, the Community Development Director shall conduct an Initial Study according to the requirements contained in Section 15063 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Where it is determined that consultant assistance is required to complete the Initial Study, the procedural requirements contained in Section E shall apply. Applicant's Responsibilities. The applicant shall submit all information determined by the Community Development Director to be necessary for the preparation of the Initial Study. In addition, when consultant assistance is required the applicant shall be responsible for all costs as provided under Sections Eand F. Determining Significant Effects. In determining whether a project may have a significant effect the City will generally follow the guidance contained in Section 15064 and Appendix G of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline or appendix. In addition, the following shall be considered in determining whether a project may have asignificant impact, in view of the particular character and beauty of Newport Beach: a. A substantial change in the character of an area by a difference in use, size or configuration is created. b. Substantial grading, excavating or other alteration to the natural topography. C. Substantial alteration of the shoreline or waters of the bay or ocean either directly or indirectly. Determination. The Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision -Making Body. On the basis of the information and analysis contained in the Initial Study, the Decision -Making Body shall determine whether a Negative Declaration or EIR should be prepared, as provided by Section 15063(b) of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 5 13-14 K-3 4. Negative Declarations. As provided in Section 15070 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline, the Community Development Director shall prepare a proposed Negative Declaration for a project subject to CEQA when either: a. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment; or b. The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects, but: i. Revisions in the project made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed Negative Declaration is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and ii. There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. Notice and Posting of a Proposed Negative Declaration. The Community Development Director shall provide notice of a Negative Declaration as required by Section 15072 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Action by the Decision -Making Body. Prior to approval of any project for which a Negative Declaration was prepared, the Decision -Making Body shall adopt the Negative Declaration prepared by the Community Development Director. Additionally, prior to approval of any project for which a Negative Declaration was prepared, appropriate findings shall be prepared by the Community Development Director for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. The Decision -Making Body shall approve or modify, or disprove the findings prepared by the Community Development Director. The Decision -Making Body may also take no action or not adopt the Negative Declaration. Notice of Determination. Within 5 working days following the Decision- Making Body's approval of a project for which a Negative Declaration was prepared, the Community Development Director shall prepare and file a Notice of Determination as provided under Section 15075 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 0 13-15 M1 5. Environmental Impact Reports. If the Initial Study shows that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the Community Director shall either have prepared a Draft EIR or use a previously certified EIR which adequately analyzes the project. Applicant's Responsibilities. The applicant shall submit all information determined by the Community Development Director to be necessary for the preparation of the EIR. In addition, when consultant assistance is required, the applicant shall be responsible for all costs as provided under Sections E and F, below. Consultant Assistance/Legal Counsel. If consultant assistance or legal counsel is required in the preparation of a Draft EIR, the procedures contained in Section E, below, shall be followed. Notice of Preparation. The Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Notice of Preparation as provided by Section 15082 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Screencheck Draft EIR. If a consultant is retained to assist the City in preparing a Draft EIR, the Community Development Director may require the consultant to submit one or more screencheck drafts for review prior to finalizing the Draft EIR for publication. Notice of Completion of a Draft EIR. The Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Notice of Completion as provided by Section 15085 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Final EIR. After completion of the Draft EIR public review period the Community Development Director shall prepare a Final EIR as provided by Section 15089 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 7 13-16 K-3 Action by the Decision -Making Body. Prior to approval of any project for which an EIR was prepared, the Final EIR shall be certified as provided by Guidelines Section 15090 and appropriate findings as required by Sections 15091, 15092 and 15093, or any successor guidelines, shall be prepared by the Community Development Director for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. The Decision -Making Body shall modify, certify, or disprove any EIR prepared by the Community Development Director. Additionally, prior to approval of any project for which an EIR was prepared, the Decision -Making Body shall approve or modify the findings prepared by the Community Development Director. The Decision -Making Body may certify an EIR and deny the underlying the project. Notice of Determination. Within five working days following the Decision- Making Body's approval of a project for which an EIR was prepared, the Community Development Director shall prepare and file a Notice of Determination as provided under Section 15075 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. E. Consultant/Outside Legal Counsel Assistance. When the Community Development Director determines that consultant assistance or outside legal counsel is required for the preparation of an Initial Study, Negative Declaration or EIR, the following procedures shall be followed: 1. Consultant List. The Community Development Director shall maintain a list of consultants having a sufficient variety of expertise to assist in the preparation of Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, or EIRs when required. 2. Consultant/Outside Legal Counsel Selection. When outside assistance is required, a consultant shall be selected by the Community Development Director from the City's consultant list based on the nature of the project and the expertise of the consultant. If it is determined by the Community Development Director or requested by the applicant that proposals should be solicited from more than one consultant, the Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or Request for Proposals (RFP). Following receipt of proposals or statements of qualifications, the Community Development Director shall evaluate the submittals and select the best -qualified consultant to assist in the preparation of the EIR. The applicant may submit recommendations regarding the selection of a consultant, but the final decision regarding consultant selection shall be made by the Community Development Director. When outside legal counsel is required, the City Attorney may select legal counsel based on the nature of the project and the expertise of the attorney. 8 13-17 K-3 3. Scope of Work and Budget. After a consultant or outside legal counsel has been selected, a detailed scope of work and budget shall be prepared by the consultant and the Community Development Director and/or the City Attorney, as applicable. 4. Contract Approval and Administration. The proposed scope of work and budget shall be submitted to the applicant for approval. If the proposal is acceptable, the applicant shall submit a deposit to cover the consultant or legal costs plus reasonable City administrative expenses. The consultant or legal counsel shall not be authorized to commence work until such deposit is received from the applicant. The amount of the deposit will normally be the total project budget; however, for large projects the deposit may be made in two or more payments subject to approval by the Community Development Director. After receipt of the applicant's deposit the Community Development Director or City Attorney shall prepare and execute a contract for consultant services in a form meeting the approval of the City Attorney, and shall administer the contract through project completion. At the conclusion of the project, any unused deposit shall be returned to the applicant. F. Fees. The preparation of an Initial Study, Negative Declaration, or EIR shall be subject to the following fees: 1. For Initial Studies and Negative Declarations prepared by the Community Development Director without consultant assistance, a reasonable fee shall be collected as established by resolution of the City Council as part of the Community Development Department's Schedule of Rents, Fines and Fees. 2. For Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, and EIRs prepared with consultant or outside legal counsel assistance, there will be a City fee as required by the Schedule of Rents, Fines and Fees. 3. No future applications shall be accepted from any applicant, and no permits or entitlements shall be approved or issued until all prior indebtedness to the City incurred under this section by such applicants has been paid in full. 9 13-18 K-3 4. The amount of any applicable fee shall become an obligation of the applicant to the City whether or not the permit or entitlement is issued, or whether or not the applicant exercises the right to obtain the permit or entitlement. Such fees accrue and become payable when the City gives notice to the applicant of the amount of such fees. This liability shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction. In the event suit is filed by the City, in addition to the amount of the fee, applicant shall indemnify the City as required by Section 1.07.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and pay the City's reasonable attorney's fees. G. Authority of the Communily Development Director. The Community Development Director shall have authority for the interpretation of CEQA, the Guidelines, and this policy statement as they may affect any particular activity or project, including private development projects and City public works projects. In addition, the Community Development Director shall have authority for the following actions: 1. Making recommendations as to whether activities are subject to CEQA. 2. Making recommendations regarding the applicability of Categorical, Statutory and "General Rule" Exemptions for consideration by the Decision - Making Body. 3. Preparing Initial Studies for projects that are not exempt from CEQA. 4. Preparing, posting, and distributing Notices of Preparation, Exemption, Completion, and Determination; Negative Declarations;, and Environmental Impact Reports for City -sponsored projects and projects for which the City has approval authority as Lead Agency. 5. Preparing responses to comments on Negative Declarations and EIRs, and preparing draft findings, resolutions, and mitigation monitoring programs for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. 10 13-19 K-3 6. Making recommendations to the Decision -Making Body regarding the requirements of CEQA or the adequacy of environmental documents. 7. Developing administrative procedures for implementation of CEQA and these policies. 8. Reviewing and commenting on Negative Declarations, Notices of Preparation, Draft EIRs, or other environmental documents prepared by other lead agencies. H. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology_. 1. Introduction. This Section H establishes the framework for analyzing transportation/traffic impacts under vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with Senate Bill 743. The City's VMT analysis methodology is supplemented by the City SB 743 IMT Implementation Guide dated April 6, 2020, the General Plan, Coastal Land Use Plan and Newport Beach Municipal Code and any policies adopted by the Community Development Director. 2. Project Screening. A Land Use Project and/or Transportation Project that meet one or more of the criteria provided in Subsection (2)(a) and or (2)(b) below are considered to have a less than significant impact on transportation/traffic and no further VMT analysis is required. a. Land Use Project Screening. For Land Use Projects, the screening criteria includes: The Land Use Project is located within 0.5 mile of an existing Major Transit Stop, Transit Priority Area or a High Quality Transit Corridor unless the Land Use Project is inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Transportation Communities plan, has a floor area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75, provides parking in excess of the Newport Beach Municipal Code requirements, or reduces the number of affordable residential units. 11 13-20 K-3 ii. The Land Use Project is located in areas with lower than 85 percent of the countywide average VMT per capita trips for residential projects or lower than 85 percent of the countywide average VMT per employee for office or other employee -based Land Use Projects average. See Figures 2 and 3 of the City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide. iii. Locally serving retail space of less than 50,000 square feet. iv. The Land Use Project has a high level of affordable housing units, as determined by the Community Development Department. V. The Land Use Project generates a net increase of 300 or less daily trips, utilizing the most current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. Credit may apply for existing uses generating traffic on the site, as outlined in Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. vi. Institutional/Government and public service uses including, but not limited to, police stations, fire stations, community centers, and refuse centers. b. Transportation Project Screening. For Transportation Projects, the screening criteria includes: i. Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets and that do not add motor vehicle capacity. ii. Roadside safety devices or hardware such as median barriers or guardrails. iii. Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide breakdown space, dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety so long as the shoulder enhancements do not function as automobile travel lanes. iv. Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than 1 mile in length designed to improve roadway safety. 12 13-21 1:103 V. Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left-, right-, and U-turn pockets, two-way left -turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes. vi. Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets, provided the transportation project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and if applicable, transit. vii. Conversion of existing general-purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel. viii. Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted for use only by transit vehicles. ix. Reduction in the number of through lanes. X. Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians, or bicycles, or to replace a lane to separate preferential vehicles (e.g. high -occupancy vehicles (HOV), high -occupancy toll (HOT) lane traffic, or trucks) from general vehicles. xi. Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority features. xii. Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs, and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow. xiii. Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow. xiv. Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles. xv. Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices. xvi. Adoption of, or increase in tolls. xvii. Addition of toll lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase. 13 13-22 K-3 xviii. Initiation of a new transit service. xix. Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in the number of traffic lanes. xx. Removal or relocation of off-street or on -street parking spaces. xxi. Adoption or modification of on -street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs). xxii. Addition of traffic wayfinding signage. xxiii. Rehabilitation of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way. xxiv. Addition of Class 1 bike paths, trails, multi -use paths, or other off- road facilities that serve non -motorized travel. xxv. Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure. xxvi. Passenger rail projects, bus and bus rapid -transit projects, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. 3. Significance Thresholds. Land Use Projects and Transportation Projects that do not meet one (1) or more of the criteria identified in Subsection (14)(2) above, will require a more detailed VMT analysis. Impacts are determined based upon the significance thresholds set forth below. a. Significance Thresholds for Land Use Projects. Lands Use Projects that meet the following criteria are considered to have a significant impact on transportation/traffic: Residential projects with VMT exceeding 15 percent below the existing County average VMT per capita. ii. Office projects with VMT exceeding 15 percent below the existing County average VMT per employee. 14 13-23 K-3 Retail projects with any net increase in total VMT as a result of the Land Use Project. iv. For other uses, any net increase in VMT per capita or per employee for uses that are consistent with the General Plan. V. For any Land Use Projects with VMT exceeding 15 percent below the existing County average VMT per capita or per employee that require an amendment to the General Plan. For other land uses not specified in the OPR guidance, the metric most applicable to the predominant trip generating variable for that use shall apply. For example, hospitality uses would be VMT per employee, industrial uses would also be VMT per employee. Where there are uses that have multiple trip purposes, the total service rate (per capita and per employee) may be used. For mixed-use projects, the VMT should be evaluated for each component of the project independently. If the mixed-use project includes 50,000 square feet or less of local serving retail use, then that portion of the project shall be exempt from further VMT analysis. b. Significance Thresholds for Transportation Projects. The City shall consider the effects of transportation projects on vehicle travel. Projects that lead to additional vehicle travel are referred to as "induced vehicle travel" and would be required to analyze the growth impacts under CEQA. The addition of new through lanes on an existing roadway would be a typical project that could induce a VMT impact. For transportation projects on the State highway system, Caltrans will use and will require the City to use VMT as the CEQA metric. An assessment of a transportation project's VMT should disclose the VMT without the transportation project, and the VMT with the project. Any growth in VMT attributable to the transportation project would result in a significant impact. 4. Land Use Project Application Review Process In addition to the application submittal requirements set forth in the Newport Beach Municipal Code or by the Community Development Director, an application for a Land Use Project shall include the following: 15 13-24 K-3 a. As part of the application submittal, the applicant shall submit a full and complete project description including the intensity/density of the project, proposed parking supply, number of affordable housing units (if residential) or any other project features that may affect trip generation, VMT generation, project access, and alternate modes of travel. b. Once the application has been filed, project screening will be conducted as the first step of analysis. Project screening will be completed by City staff and reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer. If the Land Use Project meets any one of the screening criteria set forth in Subsection (H)(2), the Land Use Project is considered to have a less than significant impact on transportation/traffic and no further VMT analysis is required. The CEQA document shall enumerate the screening criterion, and how the project meets or does not meet the criteria. C. If the Land Use Project does not meet one or more of the criteria set forth in Subsection (H)(2)(a), a detailed VMT analysis will be required. For residential projects, the VMT per capita rate shall be calculated. For commercial office projects, the VMT per employee rate shall be calculated. For a retail project, the total VMT shall be calculated. For mixed-use projects, the VMT per land use shall be calculated. Credit for internal trip capture can be applied for mixed-use projects. d. For Land Use Projects with a trip generation rate of between 300 and 1,000 net trips per day, or those with one predominant land use, the determination of project VMT may be calculated manually as the product of the daily trip generation (land use density/intensity multiplied by the City -approved trip generation rate) and the trip length in miles for the specified land use. Trip lengths can be found in California Emissions Estimator Model (CaIEEMod) or derived from the Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model (NBTAM). e. For large or mixed-use projects, use of the NBTAM traffic forecasting model shall be required. For purposes of City review, a Land Use Project generating 1,000 average daily trips (ADT) or more should use the NBTAM model to calculate the project VMT rates. 16 13-25 K-3 f. The project -generated VMT per capita for residential projects, VMT per employee for office projects, or total VMT for retail projects shall be compared to the City Thresholds outlined previously. If the calculated VMT metrics exceed the City Threshold, the project has a significant impact and mitigation measures are required. If the project VMT metrics are less than the City Thresholds, the project has less than significant impacts. 5. Mitigation Measures When the detailed VMT analysis indicates that a project has a significant impact, feasible mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the impact created by the project shall be identified. The mitigation measures can come from strategies outlined in the SB 743 Implementation Guide. The City will decide what is feasible mitigation for the project, and the related VMT percent reduction. If the mitigation measures fully mitigate the transportation/traffic impact(s), the project is presumed to have an impact mitigated to a less than significant level. No further analysis is required. If the project's VMT impact cannot be fully mitigated, the City may (a) request the project be re -designed, relocated or realigned to reduce the VMT impact, or (b) prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the transportation/traffic impacts associated with the project. All feasible mitigation measures must be assigned to and carried out by the project even if a SOC is prepared. 6. Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) Analysis In addition to the CEQA-level VMT analysis, all non -transportation projects generating 300 or more daily trips shall require a level -of -service (LOS) analysis of transportation impacts consistent with Chapter 15.40 (Traffic Phasing Ordinance) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. Adopted K-3 - 5-8-1972 ("Environmental Action Reports to the City Council") Adopted K-3 - 3-26-1973 ("Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act") Amended K-3 - 7-23-1973 Amended K-3 - 9-10-1973 Amended K-3 - 5-13-1974 Amended K-3 - 6-10-1974 Amended K-3 -10-15-1974 Amended K-3 - 5-27-1975 17 13-26 Amended K-3 - 5-10-1976 Amended K-3 - 5-23-1977 Amended K-3 - 8-8-1977 Amended K-3 - 5-22-1978 Amended K-3 - 6-25-1979 Amended K-3 - 6-9-1980 Amended K-3 -1-26-1987 Amended K-3 -10-26-1987 Amended K-3 - 11-27-1989 Amended K-3-1-24-994 Amended K-3 - 3-22-1999 Amended K-3 - 4-13-2004 Amended K-3 - 9-27-2011 Amended K-3 - 5-12-2015 Amended K-3 - 8-8-2017 Amended K-3 - 6-9-2020 K-3 18 13-27 ATTACHMENT B RESOLUTION NO. PC2020-017 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CITY COUNCIL POLICY K-3 (IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT), TO INCORPORATE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH HEREBY FINDS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FACTS. In 2013, the State of California Legislature passed and Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg). Senate Bill 743 directed the California Office of Planning and Research ("OPR") to produce new California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") guidance for cities that remove automobile Level -of -Service ("LOS") from transportation analysis under CEQA and replace it with Vehicle Miles Traveled ("VMT"). For land development projects, the VMT is the product of the daily trips generated by a new development and the distance those trips travel to their destinations. 2. OPR prepared a Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, dated December 2018. This document states that it is a resource for lead agencies in preparing environmental documents subject to CEQA. The OPR also states that the choice of methodology to analyze VMT impacts is left to the discretion of lead agencies. 3. The City of Newport Beach ("City") has developed technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, including screening criteria, thresholds of significance, and potential mitigation for proposed land development and transportation projects to incorporate into City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) ("K-3 Amendment"). 4. At the May 7, 2020 meeting in the City Council Chambers located at 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, California, the Planning Commission considered the K-3 Amendment. A notice of time, place and purpose of the public hearing was given in accordance with California Government Code Section 54950 et seq. ("Ralph M. Brown Act"). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented to, and considered by, the Planning Commission at the meeting. SECTION 2. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT DETERMINATION The K-3 Amendment is not a project subject to CEQA pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 ("CEQA Guidelines"), because it has no potential for resulting in 13-28 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 2 of 10 physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. Additionally, the K-3 Amendment is categorically exempt pursuant to Sections 15307 (actions by regulatory agencies for protection of natural resources) and 15308 (actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment). The K-3 Amendment is being initiated pursuant to Senate Bill 743 which is intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by mandating transportation analysis under CEQA as analyzed based upon vehicle miles traveled. SECTION 3. FINDINGS 1. Senate Bill 743 mandates that jurisdictions can no longer use automobile delay, commonly measured by LOS when doing transportation analysis under CEQA. 2. The K-3 Amendment would provide a framework for analyzing land development and transportation projects using VMT as the metric for transportation impacts. 3. The K-3 Amendment outlines a step-by-step process for completing a CEQA-level VMT transportation analysis including: a) screening criteria under which projects are not required to submit a detailed VMT analysis; b) significance thresholds for land development projects (residential, office, retail, other); c) significance thresholds for transportation projects; and d) requirements for projects to mitigate significant and unavoidable impacts. SECTION 4. DECISION NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Planning Commission finds the proposed Amendment is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly. 2. The Planning Commission of the City of Newport Beach hereby recommends approval of an Amendment to City Council Policy K-3 (Implementation Procedures for the California Environmental Quality Act) as set for in Exhibit "A," which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 13-29 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 3 of 10 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 7T" DAY OF MAY, 2020. AYES: Ellmore, Klaustermeier, Kleiman, Koetting, Lowrey, and Weigand NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Rosene AR 13-30 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 4 of 10 *:/:11111 iTi_VA H. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Methodology 1. Senate Bill (SB) 743 Signed in 2013, SB 743 changes the way transportation studies are conducted in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) replaces motorist delay and level of service (LOS) as the new metric for transportation impact determination in CEQA. For land development projects, VMT is the product of the daily trips generated by a new development and the distance those trips travel to their destinations. For transportation projects, impacts are identified as the new VMT attributable to the new transportation improvement project. In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency and the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) codified Senate Bill 743 into the Public Resources Code (PRC) and the State CEQA Guidelines. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b) states that a lead agency (City) has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project's impacts within their jurisdiction. The City has prepared a City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide, dated April 6, 2020, which will be used as a reference document for each project during the VMT analysis process. The various terminology used in the Policy are defined in the City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide. This subsection of City Council Policy K-3 establishes the framework for completing a CEQA-level VMT transportation analysis for proposed land development projects and transportation projects. A Flow Chart outlining the step process is included in the City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide as Figure 4. The framework includes the following: a. Screening Criteria under which projects are not required to submit a detailed VMT analysis. b. Significance Thresholds for Land Development projects (Residential, Office, Retail, Other). c. Significance Thresholds for Transportation projects. d. Requirements for projects to mitigate significant and unavoidable impacts. 2. Land Development Project Screening Certain conditions may exist that would presume that a proposed land development project has a less than significant VMT impact. Land development projects that have one or more of the following attributes may be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact. 13-31 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 5 of 10 a. The project is located within 0.5 mile of a Transit Priority Area or a High Quality Transit Corridor unless the project is inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Transportation Communities plan, has a floor -to -area ratio (FAR) less than 0.75, provides parking in excess of the City Municipal Code requirements, or reduces the number of affordable residential units. A "High Quality Transit Corridor" means a corridor with fixed bus route service with a service frequency of 15 minutes or less during the peak morning and evening peak hours. A "Transit Priority Area" means an area within 0.5 mile of a major transit stop. A "Major Transit Stop" means a site containing a bus transit station, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a service frequency of 15 minutes or less during the peak morning and evening peak hours. Figure 1 in the City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide shows Transit Priority Areas in the city. b. The project is located in areas with low VMT per capita when compared to the average regional VMT per capita. Figure 2 in the City SB 743 VMT Implementation Guide shows VMT per capita, in a map -based format, for all existing residential areas in the city. Proposed residential projects located within the green zones identified on the map that share project attributes with local development patterns (i.e. intensity, density, trip generation) would be deemed to be less than significant. Figure 3 shows the VMT per employee. The employment based VMT within Newport Beach tends to be higher than the Orange County Regional average. c. Locally serving retail space of less than 50,000 square feet. d. The project has a high level of affordable housing units, as defined by the Community Development Department. e. The project generates a net increase of 300 or less daily trips, utilizing the most current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. Credit is considered for existing uses generating traffic on the site, as outlined in the City Traffic Phasing Ordinance. f. Institutional/Government and public service uses such as police stations, fire stations, community centers, refuse centers, would not require CEQA VMT analysis. 13-32 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 6 of 10 3. Transportation Project Screening Listed below are a series of transportation projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measureable increase in vehicle travel, and would not require a detailed VMT analysis. a. Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity. b. Roadside safety devices or hardware such as median barriers or guardrails. c. Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide "breakdown space", dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile travel lanes. d. Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than 1 mile in length designed to improve roadway safety. e. Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left-, right-, and U-turn pockets, two-way left -turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes. f. Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets, provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and if applicable, transit. g. Conversion of existing general-purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel. h. Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles. i. Reduction in the number of through lanes. j. Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians, or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g. high -occupancy vehicles [HOVs], high -occupancy toll [HOT] lane traffic, or trucks) from general vehicles. 13-33 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 7 of 10 k. Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority features. I. Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs, and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow. m. Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow. n. Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles. o. Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices. p. Adoption of, or increase in tolls. q. Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase. r. Initiation of a new transit service. s. Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in the number of traffic lanes. t. Removal or relocation of off-street or on -street parking spaces. u. Adoption or modification of on -street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs). v. Addition of traffic wayfinding signage. w. Rehabilitation of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way. x. Addition of Class 1 bike paths, trails, multi -use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non -motorized travel. y. Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure. z. Passenger rail projects, bus and bus rapid -transit projects, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. 13-34 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 8 of 10 4. Significance Thresholds for Land Development Projects For all projects that do not meet the Project Screening criteria, a more detailed VMT impact analysis will be required. In outlining the project thresholds, the type of trips used in the VMT calculation are defined as "home-based work trips". A detailed VMT analysis will cover residential uses, office uses and retail uses. The metric used is the Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) per person (capita), or per employee per day, or total VMT. For residential projects the metric used is "VMT per capita". For office projects, the metric used is "VMT per employee". For retail projects, the metric is "total VMT". For other land uses not specified in the OPR guidance, the metric best fitting the predominant trip making variable for that use shall be used. For example, hospitality uses would be VMT per employee, industrial uses would also be VMT per employee. Where there are uses that have multiple trip purposes, the total service rate (per capita and per employee) may be used. a. SB 743 covers the State goals for reducing green house gas emissions by 15 percent below existing conditions by 2035. Most regional planning agencies have agreed to these goals through land use and transportation planning. The defined City VMT Thresholds are as follows: i. A proposed residential project exceeding a level of 15 percent below the existing County average VMT per capita would indicate a significant transportation impact. ii. A similar threshold applies to office projects — exceeding 15 percent below existing County average VMT per employee indicates a significant impact. iii. For retail projects, any net increase in total VMT for the project would indicate a significant impact. iv. For other uses, any net increase in VMT per capita or per employee would indicate a significant impact for uses consistent with the General Plan. For projects seeking a General Plan Amendment, a project exceeding a level of 15 percent below the existing County average VMT per capita or per employee would indicate a significant transportation impact. b. According to the Orange County Transportation Authority, the average VMT/capita in Orange County is 17.9. The average VMT/employee is 24.1. Based on the goal of 15 percent below County average, the City's thresholds would be: i. Residential — 15.2 VMT per capita. ii. Office — 20.5 VMT per employee. iii. Retail — No net change in total VMT. iv. Other Land Uses — No net change in VMT per capita or per employee. 13-35 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 9 of 10 For mixed-use projects, the VMT should be evaluated for each component of the project independently. Should the mixed-use project include 50,000 square feet or less of local serving retail use, then that component can be screened out. 5. Significance Thresholds for Transportation Projects The City shall be required to consider the effects of transportation projects on vehicle travel. Projects that lead to additional vehicle travel are referred to as "induced vehicle travel" and would be required to analyze the growth impacts under CEQA. The addition of new through lanes on an existing roadway would be a typical project that could induce a VMT impact. If a proposed transportation project meets the screening criteria previously outlined, then a detailed analysis will not be required for the project. More detail on transportation project VMT analysis in outlined in the SB 743 Implementation Guide. For projects on the State highway system, Caltrans will use and will require the City to use VMT as the CEQA metric. An assessment of a transportation project's VMT should disclose the VMT without the project, and the VMT with the project. Any growth in VMT attributable to the transportation project would result in a significant impact. 6. Land Development Project Review Process a. At the beginning of the project development process, the applicant shall submit a full and complete project description including the intensity/density of the project, proposed parking supply, number of affordable housing units (if residential) or any other project features that may affect trip generation, VMT generation, project access, and alternate modes of travel. b. Once the development application has been filed, project screening will be conducted as the first step of analysis. Project screening will be completed by city staff and reviewed by the City Traffic Engineer. If the project meets any one of the screening criteria outlined previously, the project will be presumed to create a less than significant impact. No further VMT analysis is necessary. The CEQA document shall enumerate the screening criterion, and how the project meets or does not meet the criteria. c. If the project does not meet the screening criteria, a detailed VMT analysis will be required. For residential projects, the VMT per capita rate shall be calculated. For commercial office projects, the VMT per employee rate shall be calculated. For a retail project, the total VMT shall be calculated. For mixed-use projects, the VMT per land use shall be calculated. Credit for internal trip capture can be applied for mixed use projects. d. For projects with a trip generation rate of between 300 and 1,000 net trips per day, or those with one predominant land use, the determination of project VMT may be calculated manually as the product of the daily trip generation (land use density/intensity multiplied by the City -approved trip generation rate) 13-36 Planning Commission Resolution PC2020-017 Paae 10 of 10 and the trip length in miles for the specified land use. Trip lengths can be found in CaIEEMod or derived from the City Model NBTM. e. For large or multi -use projects, use of the NBTM traffic forecasting model shall be required. For purposes of City review, a project generating 1,000 ADT or more should use the NBTM model to calculate the project VMT rates. The project -generated VMT per capita for residential projects, VMT per employee for office projects, or total VMT for retail projects shall be compared to the City Thresholds outlined previously. If the calculated VMT metrics exceed the City Threshold, the project has a significant impact and mitigation measures are required. If the project VMT metrics are less than the City Thresholds, the project has less than significant impacts. 7. Mitigation Measures When the detailed VMT analysis indicates that a project has a significant impact, the applicant is required to identify feasible mitigation measures to avoid or reduce the impact created by the project. The mitigation measures can come from strategies outlined in the SB 743 Implementation Guide, or selected by the applicant. The City will decide what is feasible mitigation for the project, and the related VMT percent reduction. If the mitigation measures fully mitigate the project impact, the project is presumed to have an impact mitigated to a less than significant level. No further analysis is required. If the project's VMT impact cannot be fully mitigated, the City may (1) request the project be re -designed, relocated or realigned to reduce the VMT impact, or (2) prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the transportation impacts associated with the project. All feasible mitigation measures must be assigned to and carried out by the project even if a SOC is prepared. 8. Traffic Phasing Ordinance (TPO) Analysis To establish consistency with the City General Plan and other city requirements, all proposed land use projects generating 300 or more daily trips will continue to be required to prepare a level -of -service (LOS) analysis of transportation impacts consistent with Chapter 15.40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, in addition to the CEQA-level VMT analysis. 13-37 ATTACHMENT C .............. �.. � .aid J �� _ � """w -•..r a - _ �� = r ' - - ,,,,yell ��� �. —e"r a �._ .•*.� ��}��,-1 -^'""°�— {ys^ i .-��- _ �If Y�6 '�'�- OM1. .. •-Y � ��� :%7y ��, •%� � _ - -2 EWW 11 � L -k f.. t t , !•`..rY� .� L �,� ,t .r�� _r `T . ti. m �'* Lam'. _'-�'�p� �. �.� �� IW This page intentionally left blank 13-39 CEQA TRANSPORTATION THRESHOLDS OF dM10112[dl_1011460 CITY OF NEWPORT LSA April 2020 13-40 This page intentionally left blank 13-41 CEQA TRANSPORTATION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE GUIDE LSA Apri 12020 13-42 This page intentionally left blank 13-43 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLEOF CONTENTS............................................................................................................................... i FIGURESAND TABLES............................................................................................................................ iii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS............................................................................................. v 1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................... 1 2.0 DEFINITION OF REGION: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED CONTEXT .............................. 5 3.0 PROJECT SCREENING........................................................................................ 7 3.1 Land Development Projects........................................................................................... 7 3.2 Transportation Projects........................................................................................... 17 4.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR LAND DEVELO N ECTS ..................... 21 4.1 Agency Communication ................................. ....................................................... 25 4.2 Project Screening...................................................................... ........................... 25 4.3 Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis..... ........................................................... 25 4.3.1 Small Project Vehicle Miles Traveled An.............................................................25 4.3.2 Large Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analy..............................................................25 4.3.3 Traffic Phasing Ordinanc . ..............................................................................26 4.4 Mitigation Measures .................. ..... ............................................................. 26 5.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR NSP N PROJECTS ......................... 27 6.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRES OR LA NS ................................................... 29 7.0 MITIGATION STR IES ... ...................................................................... 31 7.1 Definition of Miti n........................................................................ 31 7.2 Mitigation Measure roject atives.................................................................. 33 7.2.1 opme jects and Community/General Plans.............................................33 7.2 Transpo Proj....................................................................................................34 7.3 F 'ng Mechanis........................................................................................................ 34 APPENDIC A: CARB AND LOCAL JURVDICTION VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS B: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FROM ACADEMIC RESEARCH C: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR COMMUNITY PLANS AND GENERAL PLANS 13-44 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-45 FIGURES AND TABLES FIGURES Figure 1: Newport Beach Transit Priority Areas..................................................................................... 9 Figure 2: Existing VMT per Population Compared to Regional Average .............................................. 11 Figure 3: Existing VMT per Employee Compared to Regional Average ................................................ 15 Figure 4: Transportation Impacts Flow Chart for Land Development Projects .................................... 23 TABLES Table A: Rep ......................... 13 13-46 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-47 ADT CalEEMod Caltrans CAPCOA CARB CEQA City COze EIR EO FAR GHG GWP HOT HOV LOS LRTP mi MT MPO NBTAM OCTA LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS average daily trips California Emissions Estimator Model California Department of Transportation California Air Pollution Control Officers Association mile metric ton Metropolitan Planning Organizations Newport Beach Traffic Analysis Model Orange County Transportation Authority v 13-48 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH OPR Governor's Office of Planning and Research PRC Public Resources Code RTP/SCS Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency SB Senate Bill SCAG SOC TA TDM VMT Statement of Overriding Consideration transportation demand ma vi 13-49 1.0 INTRODUCTION Senate Bill (SB) 743, signed in 2013, changes the way transportation studies are conducted in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) replaces motorist delay and level of service (LOS) as the metric for impact determination. For land development projects, VMT is simply the product of the daily trips generated by a new development and the distance those trips travel to their destinations. For capital projects, impacts are identified as the new VMT attributable to the added capital project, both from the installation of the facility and the induced growth generated as a result of induced land use. In January 2019, the Natural Resources Agency and the Governor's (OPR) codified SB 743 into the Public Resources Code (PRC) andthe CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b) states: 1. Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects w transit stop or a stop along an existing high quala a less than significant transportation impact. Proj project area compared to existing conditions should transportation impact. _ 2. Transportation Projects. Transportatiorll miles traveled should be presumed to ca roadway capacity proje transportation impact c that such impacts havJ regional transportation 15152. 3. QualitatiAWn miles tra1W project's veli such as the ave qualitative ana of Planning and Research CEQA Guidelines. The Id of significance may �r an existing major presumed to cause !'rease vehicle miles traveled in the med to have a less than significant duce�6r have no impact on, vehicle is ificant transportation impact. For to determine the appropriate measure of To the extent ddressed at a programmatic level, such as in a y tier from that analysis as provided in Section 1s or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle roject being considered, a lead agency may analyze the aalitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a ruction traffic may be appropriate. 4. Methodology. A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project's vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project's vehicle miles traveled, and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revisions to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section. The OPR provides a Technical Advisory (TA) as a guidance document to establish thresholds this new VMT metric. The laws and rules governing the CEQA process are contained in the CEQA statute (PRC 13-50 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Section 21000 and following), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 15000 and following), published court decisions interpreting CEQA, and locally adopted CEQA procedures. The TA is intended as a reference document; it does not have the weight of law. Yet, deviating from the TA is best undertaken with substantial evidence to support the agency action. The State of California is committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and achieving long-term climate change goals. To achieve these climate change goals, California needs to reduce VMT. As the chart shows, transportation is the single largest sector contributing to the State's GHG emissions. More than 40 percent of the GHG emissions come from the transportation sector, primarily passenger cars and light-duty trucks. Removing these vehicle trips and/or reducing the length of existing trips is expected to result in reduced VMT and reduced GHG emissions. As illustrated below, over the last 40 years, VMT has grow faster than population growth. The new S CEQA Guidelines and the establishment of T thresholds for CEQA analyses is linked to GH change goals. 3.5 3.0 0.5 0 15% • Electricity 10% • Commercial & Residential 8% • Agriculture 5% - High GWP 2%• Recycling & Waste ies and overall statewide climate 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Population The State and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), the metropolitan planning organization for Southern California, have provided guidance that the number of vehicle trips and the length of vehicle trips can be reduced by locating new development near available transit and a mix of other land uses. This is one example of a strategy to reduce project -related ra 13-51 VMT. SB 743 intends to promote infill development, encourage multimodal transportation networks, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In one example, the Draft Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) (SCAG 2019) includes data showing that the number of walking trips greatly diminishes for distances longer than 2 miles. If a person's destination or a transit station are within 2 miles of a person's home, the person may choose a non -vehicle travel mode. While many portions of Newport Beach are automobile dependent, some neighborhoods, such as Corona del Mar, demonstrate the tendency of people to walk or bike from home to services if services are close and parking supply is constrained. FIGURE 16 Total Number of Walking Trips, by Distance 2.000.000 1600.000 1600000 1.400.000 1,200.000 1000.000 600.000 600,000 400.000 200.000 This document provides a guide and substantial evidence for the City of Newport Beach (Cit in its thresh transportation studies. It is divided into ch cluding: e Chapter 2 — Definition of Region: Here to analysis purposes. Each proje ill be co geographical area that clefiMPRIftegion e Chapter 3 — Project Scei generators, or by virtue use these scr would lea less t • Chapter 4 nifica threshold thalw1c specific travel m [VMT per capita !%r variable]) is describe 3 Miles 5 Md- '5 M, significance for CEQA Ibes what the comparative is for ane ting regional average. The ed and described. W&gwleVs that certain projects are either low VMT 7940dhave a less than significant impact. The City will offer substantial evidence for other circumstances that rpact. Ftholds for Land Development Projects: In this chapter, the significant CEQA impact is identified. This threshold is linked to a of trip purposes. The actual VMT metric (either an efficiency rate ment] or total VMT [the VMT number independent of a rate or e Chapter 5 — Significant Thresholds for Transportation Projects: This chapter describes the method to evaluate significant CEQA impacts associated with transportation projects. Many non -vehicular capital projects are presumed to have a less than significant impact. Capacity enhancing projects may have significant impacts and will be subject to a detailed analysis that will include measuring induced travel. e Chapter 6 — Significance Thresholds for Land Plans: This chapter provides guidance and substantial evidence to support the City's treatment of land use plans and their CEQA transportation analysis. 3 13-52 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Chapter 7 — Mitigation Strategies: Potential mitigation strategies are indicated in this chapter. It is noted that this discussion is not intended as a full list of measures the City sanctions as feasible. As in previous CEQA practice, it is generally the practitioner who identifies mitigation measures to offset the specific project -related impacts identified in individual environmental document. The discussion here is intended as a reference and guide for possible strategy applicants who may wish to investigate to offset their specific project -related significant impacts. 4 13-53 2.0 DEFINITION OF REGION: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED CONTEXT The question of context is the definition of the scope of the VMT analysis. The common term for this in previous delay -based LOS analyses is project study area. In the delay -based LOS analyses, a project study area is generally determined based on the incremental increase in traffic from the project and its potential to create a significant LOS impact. This generally includes intersections and roadway segments where the project would add a prescribed number of peak -hour trips. Many times, lead agencies stop study area boundaries at their jurisdictional borders. Unlike delay -based LOS analyses, VMT is a regional effect not defined by roadway, intersection, or pathway. The OPR acknowledges this in its TA (page 6), which states,,& Lead agencies should not truncate any VMT analysis other boundaries.... Furthermore, the recommendations for thresholds for office) are based on a comparison to a regional aver, Instead, the OPR offers the following suggestion: In cases where the regionis sus workers would be expected to live, geography, such as county, that inc would be expected to live (page 16). LSA surveyed other large or established for VMT thresh region selected for VMT ana indicated that most o e tr Because the4ina ' percent) andy other la recommenduse of coui consistency ach;ons traffic analyses. jurisdictional or s (residential and Mrther in the TA. iraphy over which most refer to a smaller nearly all workers the State to identify what region has been unty boundary has been identified as the port Beach Traffic Analysis Model (NBTAM) m New-PgWBeach are contained within Orange County. trips are contained within Orange County (approximately 61 IV reas are defining their region as their counties, LSA definition of region. The other OPR guidance recommends n is established, that region should be used for all subsequent It should be recognized ?Wse of the county as the region defines the comparative, or the denominator, in the identification of project -related impact. The numerator is the project's VMT contribution. This project -related VMT profile may go beyond the county boundary and not be truncated by a jurisdictional boundary. For example, a new, large employment generating land development proposed in Newport Beach may include VMT from as far away as Riverside County. In that case, it would be the responsibility of the applicant and their traffic study preparer to include the project VMT regardless of geographical limit to the satisfaction of the City staff. This project - related VMT profile would be compared against the Orange County regional average. 13-54 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-55 3.0 PROJECT SCREENING The TA does acknowledge that certain activities and projects may result in a reduction in VMT and GHG emissions and therefore a less -than -significant impact to transportation and circulation. A variety of projects may be screened out of a complicated VMT analysis due to the presumption described in the TA regarding the occurrence of less -than -significant impacts. 3.1 Land Development Projects The TA acknowledges that conditions may exist that would presume that a land development project has a less than significant impact. These may be size, location, proximity to transit, or trip - making potential. For example, land development projects that hav or more of the following attributes may be presumed to create a less than significant imp The project is within 0.5 mile (mi) of a Transit Priority A the project is inconsistent with the RTP/SCS, has a flgA provides an excessive amount of parking (parking t require), or reduces the number of affordable rEWnti "Transit priority areas" are defined as "an area wit is existing or planned, if the planned sto is schedule horizon included in a Transportation Irent Prod containing an existing rail transit station service, or the intersection of two or mo minutes or less during the m Transit Area or Corridor i than 15 minutes durin k Figure 1 depicts transit pr corridors serve nge minutes or On n quality t it service, an 57, and 7 lifies as a m While the area'111110ai areas would be prN anticipated to take a lity Transit Area unless 1) less than 0.75, LI Code would J`W with SB 743, off mile of a major transit stop that completed within the planning 1� Major Transit Stop means: "a site ft by either a bus or rail transit s with a frequency of service of 15 eak mute periods." A High -Quality ute bus service with service intervals no longer lfte!wport Beach including high-quality transit s - po7 ation Authority (OCTA) with service intervals of 15 OCTA Route 47 and OCTA Route 55 qualify as high - Transportation Center, which serves OCTA Routes 1, 55, rigure 1 are transit priority areas, not all projects proposed in these o have a less -than -significant transportation impact. Projects not ntage of transit proximity such as projects with an FAR less than 0.75, projects with an excessive amount of parking, projects inconsistent with the RTP/SCS, or projects that reduce the number of affordable residential units would still be required to prepare a VMT analysis, regardless of location. The project is a residential or office development located in areas with low VMT and has similar characteristics to the surrounding development (such as density or mix of uses) if other screening criteria are not met. Figure 2 presents a map of VMT per capita for all existing Newport Beach residential areas. This data was obtained from NBTAM. VMT per capita in each area is compared to the regional average VMT per capita for Orange County to identify VMT efficient areas for future residential 13-56 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-57 C,o�s1ttaMe-sa LSA LEGEND FIGURE 1 O Transportation Center High Quality Transit Areas OCTA Major Bus Routes o z000 a000 CEQA Transportation Thresholds of Significance Guide FEET Newport Beach Transit Priority Areas SOURCE: OCTA (11/2019); SCAG (6/2019) I:\CNB1702.02\GIS\MXD\City_NewportBeach.mxd (3/31/2020) 13-58 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 10 13-59 405 E -BAS TYWIDE HOME -BAS D VMT PER CAPI 'ting E -BAS TYWIDE HOME -BAS D VMT PER CAPI SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 12 13-61 development. Figure 2 shows that Newport Beach has several areas (mostly located near employment districts) where residential development generates lower VMT than the Orange County regional average. Land development project proposals that may be located in green zones that share project attributes with the local development patterns (i.e., intensity, density, trip generation characteristics) would likely be low VMT generators and, according to the TA, would be deemed to have a less than significant impact on transportation. Figure 3 presents a map of VMT per employee throughout Newport Beach (including employment occurring in primarily residential neighborhoods). Again, this data was obtained from NBTAM and is compared to the regional average VMT per em loyee for Orange County to identify VMT efficient areas for future office development. Figur hows that employment based VMT within Newport Beach tends to be higher thanth nge County regional average. This is partially a function of the distance traveled by emp ich is not always under the control of employers. The project involves local -serving retail space of The project has a high level of affordable -housing A project generates a low volume of dJ average daily trips (ADT). This recomm but was instead based on the potential categorically exempt under correlate the effect of char) model was selected beaW used statewide for dev� default trip lengths and typ of ADT. TableQdIIIINIIIIIIIIIirlie r Wd recommend a volume of 110 many analysis of GHG reduction, i office project that would be nalysis and used CalEEMod to !Q ADT to the resulting GHG emissions. This California Air Resources Board (CARB) to be emissions. CalEEMod was used with the built-in cular GHG emissions from incremental amounts annual VMT and GHG emissions from the incremental ADT. and GHG Emissions from CalEEMod verage ATrips ) Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) GHG Emissions (Metric Tons CO2e per year) 2 683,430 258 300 1,021,812 386 400 1,386,416 514 500 1.703,020 643 600 2,043,623 771 Source: CalEEMod version 2016.3.2. Example project used: 50 single-family Homes in Orange County. CaIEEMod = California Emissions Estimator Model CO2e = carbon dioxide equivalent GHG = Greenhouse Gas 13 13-62 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 14 13-63 405 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 16 13-65 A common GHG emissions threshold is 3,000 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalent' KOM per year. The vehicle emissions are typically more than 50 percent of the total project GHG emissions. Thus, a project with 500 ADT would generally have total project emissions that could be less than 1,300 MT CO2e/year (i.e., 50 percent or 643 MT CO2e/year coming from vehicle emissions and the other 50 percent coming from other project activities). As this level of GHG emissions would be less than 3,000 MT CO2e/year, the emissions of GHG from a project up to 500 ADT would typically be less than significant. The City's current regulatory precedent for the preparation of traffic impact studies (i.e., Traffic Phasing Ordinance) establishes screening criteria of net 300 ADT associated with the project. As stated above, projects generating 500 ADT or fewer are typicall w the GHG emissions threshold. Therefore, the City could establish screening criter' r small projects of up to net 300 ADT associated with the project. Credit is considered the site within 1 year of application of a development e1 City maintain a database of projects preparing VMTjia identify the minimum ADT of projects resulting i number of data points are available to provide s screening criteria in the future. The development of institutional/gov4 health, safety and welfare are also scre facilities (e.g. police stations, fire statio of the community and, as a average. Many of these f passenger -cars or ligh � of CEQA, such as CARB 3.2 Transport cts The primary ute to con travel. While ity has discr transportation p ts, Chang series of projects t ould and that, therefore, w following: uses generating traffic on recommended that the swat regular intervals, ­noaZ9Wnce a sufficient the CRT could adjust the id publicce uses that support community Pin eque7rs' EQA VMT analysis. These efuse stations) are already part acc u ntedd for in the existing regional than 500 ADT and/or use vehicles other than tehicle fleets are subject to regulation outside Wlity Management District. with�sportation projects is the potential to increase vehicle n to continue to use delay analysis for CEQA disclosure of vehicle travel must also be quantified. However, the TA listed a ikely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel These include the • Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a concept developed to provide one metric that includes the effects of numerous GHGs. The global warming potential (GWP) of each GHG characterizes the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to another GHG. The GWPs of all GHGs are combined to derive the CO2e. 17 13-66 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity • Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such median barriers and guardrails • Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide "breakdown space," dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes • Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than 1 mi in length designed to improve roadway safety • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes tAarfor through traffic, such as left-, right-, and U-turn pockets, two-way left -turn lanes, y breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes • Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, anil • Conversion of existing general-purpose lanes (includll or changing lane management in a ma that woul • Addition of a new lane that is permane res461 • Reduction in the number of • Grade separation to se lane in order to separat occupancy toll [HOT] lane I'%• Installatio oval, Priority f res • Installation and other e ect also substantially s) to managed lanes or transit lanes, bstantially increase vehicle travel by transit vehicles transit, pedestrians, or bicycles, or to replace a ., high -occupancy vehicles [HOVs], high - m general vehicles n of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs, to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Timing of signals to oMmize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles • Installation or reconfiguration of traffic calming devices • Adoption of or increase in tolls • Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase • Initiation of a new transit service 18 13-67 • Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in the number of traffic lanes • Removal or relocation of off-street or on -street parking spaces • Adoption or modification of on -street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs) • Addition of traffic wayfinding signage • Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor v le capacity • Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities o g streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way • Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi -use path o nonmotorized travel • Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/ch Additionally, transit and active transporta is presumed to cause a less than significant i ct all passenger rail projects, bus and bus rapid- sit infrastructure projects. Th^'s,, this aid in the prioritization of as th CLA be more streamlined than-enhanc cz 19 ies that serve generalWduce VMT and are, therefore, kwortatOWThis presumption may apply to r7!Nd bicycle and pedestrian flo'n of less than significant impact to process for any of these project types would pital projects. 13-68 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 20 13-69 4.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS The TA states that SB 743 and all CEQA VMT transportation analyses refer to automobiles. Here, the term automobile refers to on -road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light-duty trucks (page. 4). Heavy-duty trucks can be addressed in other CEQA sections and are subject to regulation in a separate collection of rules under CARB jurisdiction. This approach was confirmed by Ellen Greenberg, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Deputy Director for Sustainability, at the San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Association meeting (January 9, 2020). The OPR has identified the subject of the thresholds as the primary trips in the home-based typology: specifically, home-based work trips. This includes reside uses. The home-based work trip type is the primary tripmaking du traffic in the morning and evening periods. The impact of transportation has shifted from congestio CEQA analysis is to disclose and ultimately reduce GHCy length of automobile trips. This change in CEQA anal require a level of service analysis to confirm accessibill, Traffic Phasing Ordinance and General Plan policies, or and welfare discretion and authority. As pgi@bLhe SB 3 process and the GHG goal setting, most mcg transportation planning agencies have agre transportation planning by approximately 15 Plan -Identified VMT ReductionuiddlMilation total VMT per capita rates The TA therefore recommen ;es, office uses, and retail e peak hours of commuter and the purpose of the the number and �iminish thWy's ability to ct site, conformance with the in of their general health, safety e/transportation integration anizations and regional gh integrated land use and lWurthermore, in its 2017 Scoping Climate Goals, the CARB recommends below existing conditions. ling a level of 15 percent below existing indicate a significant transportation impact. to office projects (15 percent below existing regional tail projects would indicate a significant impact for any net increase in total VMT. While regional planning documents such as the RTP/SCS calculate a single VMT rate by dividing total VMT for the SCAG region by the total service population, it should be noted that the TA identifies a different denominator for the residential and office comparison rates. If regional average VMT per capita and VMT per employee were calculated using the service population (population plus employment), the denominator would be the same, which would be inconsistent with the TA. Furthermore, using service population to calculate regional average rates would complicate future project analyses. The environmental document for a proposed land use project will identify population for a residential project and employment for an office project. These values should be used in the transportation analysis to calculate the project's VMT per capita or VMT per employee. If 21 13-70 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a project's VMT per capita (VMT/project population) or VMT per employee (VMT/project employment) is compared to a regional average based on service rate (VMT/[regional population + employment]), the comparison is not equivalent. To avoid this future complication in project -level analysis, LSA calculated regional average rates consistent with the descriptions in the TA. LSA separated the data categories of population - generated VMT and employment -generated VMT, separated the data categories of population and employment, and calculated two rates. According to the OCTA calculations using the Orange County Transportation Analysis Model, the average VMT/capita in Orange County is 17.9. The average VMT/employee in Orange County is 24.1. _ No discrete land use types other than residential, office, or retail development in the TA. Mixed-use projects should be evaluate independently, or the lead agency may use the predominantW( the mixed-use project include 50,000 square feet or less tail serving, then that component of the mixed-use proje uld be this determination and potential credit for internal t pture each application. The TA suggests that lead agency ma for any other use. One approach is to review the City Genera (LRTP) and identify whether the implemen GHGs. If it does, the City mAcondethe use types to achieve the ree c net change in VMT for thet disclosure of substantial evq traffic and air quality forecast In summary, t s th • Residenti 5 percent I • Office —15 p t belo\n • Retail — No net e i • Other Land Uses — Rdentified for threshold h component of the project ise for the analysis. Should >e ander retail use be local reened o e City will make ;ed on the I d use balance of required to, develop thresholds I&ng-Range Transportation Plan uld result in a reduction of VMT and IFtion-MP[he plan, including all the other land s. Therefore, consistency with the plan and no tional threshold. This approach would require ral Plan or LRTP findings, and other supporting existing regional average VMT per capita (17.9 X 0.85 = 15.2) ting regional average VMT per employee (24.1 X 0.85 = 20.5) al VM T as a result of project implementation change in total VMT as a result of project implementation if consistent with the General Plan Figure 4 demonstrates the potential land development entitlement process to comply with the State CEQA Guidelines related to VMT and transportation impacts. It provides the path from application filing through determination of impacts. It is presented as the standard process; each development application is considered unique and may create alternative or modified steps through the process. Each step that diverges from this standard process should be accompanied with substantial evidence demonstrating compliance with other climate change and GHG emission reduction laws and regulations. 22 13-71 PROJECT SCREENING CRITERIA - Transit Priority Area - High Quality Transit Corridor - Local -serving Retail <50TSF - Low Trip Generator <300ADT IDENTIFICATION OF PROJECT VMT - Efficiency Rate -Total VMT IDENTIFICATION OF VMT THRESHOLD (Existing and Cumulative) MODELING AND ASSESSMENT OF I M PACT MITIGATION MEASURES LSA Proposed Land Development Project Application Received Residential Office Retail """I Presumed Insignificant Analysis Complete Other VMT PER VMT PER TOTAL TOTAL CAPITA EMPLOYEE VMT VMT ' If Consistent with General Plan I:\CNB1702.02\G\VMT Process\VMT Process_v7.cdr (4/10/2020) PROJECT SPECIFIC AREAWIDE REGIONAL FEE CAPCOA Green Bank Requires New Nexus Study CARB VMT Reduction -Transit District Substantial Evidence -JPA - MPO Do Measures Fully Mitigate Impact and Create No Additional Impact? NO YES Additional Analysis Analysis Complete or Significant Unmitigatable Impact and Statement of Overriding Considerations Than icant act. ,omplete FIGURE 4 CEQA Transportation Thresholds of Significance Guide Transportation Impacts Flow Chart for Land Development Projects 13-72 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 24 13-73 4.1 Agency Communication At the outset of the project development process, the applicant should submit a full and complete project description including the intensity/density of the project, proposed parking supply, number of affordable housing units (if residential) and any other project features that may affect trip generation, VMT generation, project access, and alternate modes of travel. The City would complete the review within 2 weeks and would consider whether the project may have less than significant transportation impacts (i.e., screened out) or whether a VMT analysis would be required. The City will continue to require the Traffic Phasing Ordinance level of analysis as applicable. 4.2 Project Screening Once a development application is filed and the meeting is held, the initial step. If the project meets any one of the screening to create a less than significant impact. No further analysis is enumerate the screening criterion and how the project 20s of screening does not apply, a VMT analysis may be r can be completed by City staff or the City Traffic Ei simple algebraic demonstration or a more sophisti addressed later. _ 4.3 Project Vehicle Miles Traveled An The first step is to identify the project land project is residential, use the office (or a similar trip gene generated by the prcject. credit for internal trip captur be reported for mix r rate. 4.3.1 Sma'11hoiect Vehicl For smaller projeNtri identified manua by agency-approlengths can be fo N BTAM. ct screening is conducted as Le pe project may be presumed e CEQA document should 2dlW threshold. If project iinatMWproject screening of this a7glysis may be a ns exercise. This distinction is e,WrCMWropriate efficiency rate to use. If the OM population) rate. If the project is commercial Koyee rate. For retail projects, use the total VMT korteach land use after generating trips, taking As an alternative, the predominant use may ses, use the service population as the efficiency Traveled Analysis F one predominant use, the determination of project VMT may be t of the daily trip generation (land use density/intensity multiplied ration rate) and the trip length in miles for that specific land use. Trip related air quality tools, such as CalEEMod, or may be derived from 4.3.2 Large Project Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis For large or multiuse projects, use of the NBTAM traffic forecasting tool should be required. For purposes of City review, a project generating 1,000 ADT or more should use the NBTAM traffic forecasting tool. At this level of trip generating, the probability of trip fulfilment expands to an area greater than the immediate project location and may include a greater regional attraction. The NBTAM traffic forecasting tool can more accurately define the select links used and the total VMT generated by the project. 25 13-74 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Next, the project generated rate per capita of residential projects or per employment for office projects (or total VMT) is compared to the appropriate significance threshold. This is either 85 percent of the existing regional average per capita or employment for specific uses, or no net increase in total VMT for retail or other uses that are consistent with the General Plan. For those projects that require a General Plan Amendment, 85 percent of existing regional average is appropriate as the project has yet to be evaluated as part of the City's ultimate land development vision. If the project VMT (expressed as an efficiency rate [per capita or per employment] or total number) is less than the significance threshold, the project is presumed to create a less than significant impact. No further analysis is required. If the project is greater th:tignificance threshold, mitigation measures are required. 4.3.3 Traffic Phasing Ordinance Analysis The City adopted a Traffic Phasing Ordinance to ensu transportation planning. In particular, the Traffic PhI roadway system should not be extended beyond IevE in order to accommodate a proposed project. This gc planned capacity aligns with elements of 1 Impacts in CEQA. As such, all land use pro required to prepare an analysis of transpc Newport Beach Municipal Code. 4.4 Mitigation Measure The applicant is required, p'q created by the project. These (Appendices A an must approve percent red r If the mitigation 11 impact mitigated to oordination ZNM iinaue states tFM :)sAW the circula use planning and Oe capacity of the in element roadway g roadway widening to the system's on Evaluating Transportation ore daily trips will continue to be t with Chapter 15.40 of the 1ft6fLfeJVIe offsets to completely mitigate the impact r itigation strategies provided by the City d on the applicant and their CEQA team experience. The City hLtigation ascribed to the project and the related VMT gate the project impact, the project is presumed to have an ificant level. No further analysis is required. If the project's VMT impact cannot be fully�ed, the City may (1) request the project be redesigned, relocated or realigned to reduce the V T impact, or (2) prepare a Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC) for the transportation impacts associated with the project. All feasible mitigation measures must be assigned to and carried out by the project even if a SOC is prepared. 26 13-75 5.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS The 2020 CEQA Guidelines include Section 15064.3.b.(2) to address transportation projects. It reads: For roadway capacity projects, agencies have the discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. The City may continue to use delay and LOS for transportation projects as long as impacts related to "other applicable requirements" are disclosed. This has generally been interpreted as VMT impacts and other State climate change objectives. These other applicable req&ements may be found in other parts of an environmental document (i.e., air quality, GHG), y be provided in greater detail in the transportation section. For projects on the State highway system, Caltrans will u use VMT as the CEQA metric, and Caltrans will evaluat (Caltrans Draft VMT-Focused Transportation Impact Review will review environmental documents for cap analysis of VMT change. The assessment of a transportation project the difference in VMT with the project. Any would result in a significant impact. The primary difference in th models have limited abiliA databases are fixed to a hor elasticities. The most rec ZV meaning tha r The TA presents o To estimat ponsoring agencies to 61to the project" 1W Intergovernmental s for the agency's e VMT without the project and ble to the transportation project R is related to induced growth. Current traffic kwth, as their land use or socioeconomic i limited set of reports that would indicate ,Turner 2011, p. 24), estimates an elasticity of 1.0, ne miles results in a 1 percent increase in VMT. from roadway expansion projects: 1. Determine the total lane -miles over an area that fully captures travel behavior changes resulting from the project (generally the region, but for projects affecting interregional travel look at all affected regions). 2. Determine the percentage change in total lane miles that will result from the project. 3. Determine the total existing VMT over that some area. 4. Multiply the percentage increase in lane miles by the existing VMT, and then multiply that by the elasticity from the induced travel literature: 27 13-76 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH [% increase in lane miles] x [existing VMT] x [elasticity] _ [VMT resulting from the project] It should be pointed out that OPR assigns this induced growth to induced land use. That is, land use not included in any approved general or area plan and not accounted for in any traffic forecasting tool. Caltrans has identified a computerized tool that estimates VMT generation from transportation projects. It was developed at University of California, Davis and is based on elasticities and the relationship of lane mile additions and growth in VMT. It uses Federal Highway Administration definitions of facility type and ascribes VMT increases to each facility. Output includes increases on million vehicle miles per year. Caltrans is investigating its use for all its VMT analyses of capital projects. It may be available for use by local agencies and should be ' stigated for its value in Newport Beach. The TA provides other options to identify induced growth - 1. Employ an expert panel. An expert panel development that would likely result frog then be analyzed by the travel demand n Induced vehicle travel assessed via this a elasticities found in the 2. Adjust model results to align model analysis is 3. The TA provides a fina ed VMT. These include: use could effects on vehicle travel. 'be verified using arch. If the travel demand land use changes chicle travel should be adjusted upward e assessed VMT after adjustment ing it iteratively with a travel demand model. A estimate the land use effects of a roadway `ic patterns that result from the land use change -avel demand model. The land use model and can be iterated to produce an accurate result. Whenever employing a travel demand model to assess induced vehicle travel, any limitation or known lack of sensitivity in the analysis that might cause substantial errors in the VMT estimate (for example, model insensitivity to one of the components of induced VMT described above) should be disclosed and characterized, and a description should be provided on how it could influence the analysis results. A discussion of the potential error or bias should be carried into analyses that rely on the VMT analysis, such as greenhouse gas emissions, air quality, energy, and noise. 28 13-77 6.0 SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS FOR LAND PLANS The OPR guidance has provided guidance on the treatment of CEQA traffic analyses for land use plans in the TA. The TA reiterates previous direction regarding individual land use assessments: Analyze the VMT outcomes over the full area over which the plan may substantively affect travel patterns (the definition of region). VMT should be counted in full rather than split between origins and destinations (the full impact of the project VMT). The TA provides a single sentence as consideration for land use pl plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on trans residential, office or retail land uses would in aggregate exce recommended above." This recommendation refers to 85,Akrcerr average, and no net gain for residential, office, and This recommendation is confusing and contradictoryil recommending a focus on specific trip purposes (i.e., ho work -based trips for office projects). Depe thetypes are recognized as contributors to larn- interactions with other non -work -based dIton n . a plan -level assessment, a great deal of VMT VMT. To assess a land plan, use should be identified for all traffic model runs sh k Project. The SB 375 p s and th baseline GHG e ons re Regional Trans por PI the integration of Ian "A general plan, area on if proposed new Lctive thresholds IWsting city or regional FTA recommendations. OPR is I trips for residential projects and platform, at least four other trip kkes. Home-based origins will have IThome-based trips are the focus of nted for in the estimation of total is recommended. The total VMT for the plan VMT contributors within the plan area. Similar ing base year and the horizon year with No nal Targets Advisory Committee GHG goal setting has established a that local Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and Agencies (RTPAs) can achieve. These achievements are provided in ng and transportation, not solely through the imposition of regulation on passengerWand light-duty trucks. The CARB reviews the GHG reduction strategies and has approved the most recent round of GHG emission reductions for MPOs and RTPAs around the State. Other legislative mandates and State policies speak to GHG reduction targets. A sample of these include: • Assembly Bill 32 (2006) requires statewide GHG emissions reductions to 1990 levels by 2020 and continued reductions beyond 2020. • SB 32 (2016) requires at least a 40 percent reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2030. 29 13-78 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • Executive Order (EO) B-30-15 (2015) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. • EO S-3-05 (2005) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. • EO B-16-12 (2012) specifies a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 specifically for transportation. PRC Section 15064.3(b)(4) states (in part) the following: A lead agency has discretion to choose the most apr evaluate a project's vehicle miles traveled, including in absolute terms, per capita, per household, or in of Therefore, the recommended methodology for condu compare the existing VMT per service population fo year VMT per service population. The recommended t population in the horizon year with the proposed land p 30 thodology to express the change land plans is to �xoected horizon achieve a lower VMT per service n occurs for the existing condition. 13-79 7.0 MITIGATION STRATEGIES When the City identifies a significant CEQA impact according to the thresholds described above, the City must identify feasible mitigation measures in order to avoid or substantially reduce that impact. Although previous vehicle level of service impacts could be mitigated with location -specific vehicle level of service improvements, VMT impacts will require mitigation of regional impacts through more behavioral changes. Enforcement of mitigation measures will be still be subject to the mitigation monitoring requirements of CEQA, as well as the regular police powers of the City. These measures can also be incorporated as a part of plans, policies, regulations, or project designs. 7.1 Definition of Mitigation Section 15370 of the 2020 State CEQA Guidelines defines m "Mitigation" includes: Q b. Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or implementation. _ C. Q e. Rectifying the impact by Section 15097 0lM monitoring or repoN imposed to mitigate follows: certain action o1w of an (itude of the action and its J6Q_r restoring the impacted time by preservation and maintenance reacing or providing substitute resources or permanent protection of such resources in the delines states that "the public agency shall adopt a program for ons which it has required in the project and the measures it has VMT mitigations are not physical improvements; rather, they are complex in nature and will significantly depend on changes in human behavior. Therefore, it will be important that lead agencies develop a proper monitoring program to ensure the implementation of these mitigation measures, throughout the life of a project, in compliance with CEQA. Lead agencies must also coordinate with other responsible agencies as part of this monitoring program to determine the feasibility of the mitigations and whether they would last in perpetuity. Historically, mitigation measures for LOS based transportation impacts have addressed either trip generation reductions or traffic -flow -capacity enhancements. LOS mitigation measures include adding capacity to intersections, roadways, ramps, and freeways. However, transportation demand 31 13-80 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH management (TDM) actions, active transportation amenities, and other measures to reduce the number of trips creating an impact are also possible mitigation strategies. LOS based mitigations are mostly physical improvements whose benefits are observable, measurable, and virtually perpetual. The addition of a turn lane at an intersection will behave similarly regardless of location and will continue to perform as intended until the lane is removed or modified. A lane mile of roadway will carry a similar volume of traffic if designed consistently across most jurisdictions in California, and it will continue to do so as long as the lane exists. The definition of VMT mitigation measures is somewhat different. Most VMT mitigations may seem feasible from a theoretical perspective, but practical implementatio hese strategies as formal CEQA mitigation measures in perpetuity is yet to be tested. Sever these mitigations are contextual and behavioral in nature. Their success will depend ze and location of the project as well as expected changes in human behavior. share program does not necessarily guarantee a behavi( the level of improvement may be uncertain and subjeJ LOS mitigations (such as addition of turn lanes) focus (strategy "c" of State CEQA Guidelines Section 15370) mitigations (such as commute trip-reductilft"Larr overtime through preservation and moni CEQA Guidelines Section 15370) use/location-based policies) will generated by the projects (strA Furthermore, it may be thalq Most VMT impacts are in the associated with a I VMT deficit thaaWividu-71110 transit systeqffurchase of rr system) may o hE insignificance. AI project does not ne GHG reduction in the effective reduction in providing a bike Rhange with project's population; the whim of theNbulation affected. 'Etifying a physical CEQA impact ntrary, the majority of VMT ;roject t ducing or eliminating an impact (strategy "d" of State ions (such as those focused on land I'actsb4Feducing the number of trips Guidelines Section 15370). Kie pacvannot be mitigated at the project -specific level. t of analysis. The incremental change in VMT ar setting in which it may be located would suggest a greater offset. Only a regional solution (e.g., completion of a uses, or gap closure of an entire bicycle master plan Jaxy I change necessary to reduce the VMT impact to a level of s for GHG emissions, may not require locational specificity. A to diminish the VMT at the project site to gain benefit in VMT and offsets in an area where the benefit would be greater will have a more and GHG and contribute to the State's ultimate climate goals. This is the basis for the cap -and -trade strategies. These issues of regional scale, partial participation, and geographic ambiguity confound the certainty of agency identification of VMT mitigation measures. Section 15126.4 of the State CEQA Guidelines states, "Where several measures are available to mitigate an impact, each should be discussed and the basis for selecting a particular measure should be identified. Formulation of mitigation measures shall not be deferred until some future time [emphasis added]." Certainty does not yet exist that partial participation in VMT mitigation measures is permissible. Regional VMT mitigation is considered the most effective method for large-scale VMT reduction, yet the cost and implementation barriers are greater in most cases than one project can undertake. The only 32 13-81 exception may be where VMT mitigation strategies are provided at a regional level in the form of mitigation banks, fees, and exchanges and the projects are subject to contribute to these fee programs consistent with applicable provision to ensure compliance and consistency with CEQA and other legal requirements. Section 21099 (b) (4) of the PRC states, "This subdivision [requiring a new transportation metric under CEQA] does not preclude the application of local general plan policies, zoning codes, conditions of approval, thresholds, or any other planning requirements pursuant to the police power or any other authority." Hence, despite the fact that automobile delay will no longer be considered a significant impact under CEQA, the lead agency can still require projects to meet the LOS standards designated in its zoning code or general plan. Therefore, in that cas project might still be required to propose LOS improvements for congestion relief in an to VMT strategies as CEQA mitigation measures. 7.2 7.2.1 Mitigation Measures and Project Alternatives Land Development Projects and Commun Mitigations and project alternatives for VMT impacts included in the TA. VMT mitigations can be extremely categories such as land use/location, roadtra strategies, and parking pricing/policy. Howtse!Aes measurement of the relief provided by the program, a bike share program, to VMT reduction strategies A Control Officers AssociatioaW (CAPCOA Green Book) and i1 VMT reduction percentages. Appendix A pry a stated in thedWCOA C the OPR TA fo`rqlbd de, other sources sucqllkt transportation analyM memorandum Analysis uggested by the OPR and are can be classified under several gents, commute trip reduction *mitigations is the quantitative VMT reduction does a TDM O fe of sTewalk provide? Improvements related sources such as the California Air Pollution Eying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures Aerally presented in wide ranges of potential of tferent VMT mitigation measures and project alternatives (onl ose strategies directly attributed to transportation) and projects. The table also refers to mitigation measures listed in asurement Calculator for the City of Los Angeles, the s for the City of San Jose and the San Diego Region, and the Mitigation Measures Pursuant to SB 743, prepared for the Los Angeles County MetropolTan Transportation Authority. Appendix B provides a list of mitigations for land development projects based on the research work performed by Deborah Salon, Marlon G. Boarnet, Susan Handy, Steven Spears, and Gil Tal with the support of CARB. Unless the project applicant provides substantial evidence identifying a project - specific value, the City should apply the midpoint of provided ranges for VMT reduction. Where a mitigation strategy does not have an identified VMT reduction range, the project applicant would be required to provide a reduction estimate supported by evidence. As for land use plans, the potential mitigation measures for community/general plans would be similar to those for land development projects, with certain modifications. The OPR TA does not 33 13-82 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH specifically state any VMT mitigations for land use plans. However, the transportation impact study guidelines for the San Diego Region list potential mitigation measures. These measures have been summarized in Appendix C along with corresponding VMT reduction percentages obtained from CAPCOA. It must be noted that Appendices A—C provide only summaries of the mitigations stated in the sources mentioned above. The reader should refer to the original source for further details and for subsequent updates to the mitigation measures. Also, Appendices A—C do not provide an exhaustive list of mitigation measures to offset the CEQA impacts. Other measures can also be accepted by agencies based on provision of substantial evidence. _ As additional mitigation measures are developed to offset VMT i is in the future for the State CEQA Guidelines process, linkages between the strategy and t ental effect and quantified offset must be made. This can be based on other sources' ob vatio d measurements or City experience in these practices. The key to mitigation is to its efficac eal and substantial evidence. 7.2.2 Transportation Projects , Although OPR provides detailed guidance transportation projects, it leaves the subjl suggested as mitigation measures: • Tolling new lanes to encou • Converting existing ge • Implementing or funding • Impleme<reon on existi No quantifieperces substantial et wool growth impacts associated with vague. Only four strategies are mprovements or HOT lanes d management on Systems strategies to improve passenger throughput ;e is allocated to these strategies, and LSA could find no rovide guidance to levels of significance after implementation of these strategies. Reviefour recommended strategies suggests that OPR is directing strategies away from gen al -purpose mixed -flow lanes on expressways, freeways, and arterial highways. Inasmuch as these are the project descriptions and Purpose and Need, the project intent and the project mitigation may be at odds. The lead agency would be subject to an SOC for the capital project VMT impact. 7.3 Funding Mechanisms The change in the metric for transportation impacts from LOS to VMT will lead to a shift in impacts and mitigation measures from being local and project -specific to being more regional in nature. OPR acknowledges the regional nature of VMT impacts and states that regional VMT reduction programs and fee programs (in -lieu fees and development impact fees) may be appropriate forms of mitigation. Fee programs are particularly useful to address cumulative impacts. It is very important 34 13-83 for the agencies to coordinate with the RTPA or the MPO to develop such mitigation programs that would fund transit, develop active transportation plans, etc. These programs are regional in nature and best suited for administration by the regional agency. Regional agencies may also wish to coordinate with appropriate stakeholders, including participating local jurisdictions, developers, and other interests while conducting nexus studies and checking for rough proportionality and compliance with CEQA. Most of the VMT mitigations included in Appendix A are applicable in urban areas. They are less effective in suburban and rural contexts, where TDM strategies may become diluted or are not applicable. Thus, site-specific strategies are more suitable in urban areas, whereas program -level strategies are more suitable for projects in suburban/rural areas. In atter approach, cumulative contributions for development mitigations can pay for VMT redu strategies that would not be feasible for the individual projects to implement themselves. fee programs, program - based mitigation approaches may include mitigation excha and tion banks. The mitigation exchange concept requires a developer to implement a determined p t that would reduce VMT in order to propose a new one. On the other haoMe concept of mita n banks seeks to establish monetary values for VMT reductions so th�In I ias MT reduction credits. As previously stated, VMT impacts are mo for mitigations outside the control of the le controlling the mitigations, the impacts migI identification impacts migl collaborative exchanges a! can contribu the end of tr I in natu?IWnce, there might be requirements withmwonsent from the agency bk&t and unavoidable. Additionally, can contribute their fair share to mitigate commends local agencies working k lish fee programs, mitigation banks, and ional mitigation pathway where the projects ks, exchanges, and impact fees are illustrated at 35 13-84 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Procedural Flow Chart — VMT Bank ODecision Q Analytical process or procedural outcome Program Scale 5 PSE ��CA REGIONAL PUBLIC Iq Maintaining the Bank in-house could: GDee Increase the agency control dministra Potentially generate revenue l ncy staff Legal Formation of Bank Q Develop Review Team Determine & Select Mitigation Options Administer Bank and Complete Mitigation Agreements with Lead Agencies 36 13-85 Procedural Flow Chart — VMT Exchange ODecision Q Analytical process or procedural outcome PUBLIC Maintaining the Exchange intemally could: Increase the agency's control over the program Potentially generate revenue Program Scale ZL 4 fZ ExF party to Exchange can: an agency's dministra agency hurtle encv staff op Approved Process for Sponsor and Agency 0 Develop Review Team Q Verify Effectiveness of Mitigation Options t---1 Administer Exchange and Complete Mitigation Agreements with Lead Agencies 37 13-86 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH Procedural Flow Chart — VMT Impact Fee ODecision O Analytical process or procedural outcome O Program Scale RES�flE�yT1Pl- LpCgl 1 Determine Nexus (VMT) Approaches information such as the Engineering News - Record Construction Cost index. The agency should also publish annual reports that include the balance of the fund and how it has been used. O Monitor Fee Use f5 -Year Check) Fees collected by the fee program can only be used for projects Included in the CIP. Additionally, fees that are not spent or committed five years after being received must be refunded. Agencies must monitor collected fees to ensure they are being spent appropriately and in a timely manner. Updated Modeling & Analysis as Needed C:b An agency administering a fee program must update both the program's land use assumptions and CIP at least every five years. 38 13-87 APPENDIX A CARB AND LOCAL JURISDICTION VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 13-88 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-89 LSA Mitigation Measure VIVIT Reduction' CAPCOA'# ..4 Metro Jose' Angeles6 Diego Region' Notes Notes: CAPCOA TST-2: Implement Transit Access Improvements (applicable in urban and suburban context, and appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); CAPCOA LUT -5: Increase Transit Accessibility [May be grouped with CAPCOA measures LUT -3 (mixed use development), SDT-2 (traffic calmed streets with good CAPCOA TST-2: Not quantified alone, grouped strategy connectivity), and PPT -1 through PPT -7 (parking management strategies); measures are with TST-3'Expand transit network' and TST-4'lncrease applicable in urban and suburban contexts; appropriate in rural context if development site is 1 Improve or increase access to transit transit service frequency/speed'; CAPCOA LUT -5: 0.50%- Y Y Y Y Y Y adjacent to a commuter rail station with convenient rail service to a major employment 24.60% center; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Increase transit accessibility to improve last -mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations and low -carbon travel modes accessible; both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Existing transit mode share (as a percent of total daily trips) (%), Lines within project site improved (<50%, >=50%)] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA LUT -3 (Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments Similar to CAPCOA LUT -3 (Increase Diversity of Urban and (Mixed Use) - Applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context (unless the Suburban Developments (Mixed Use)): 9.00% - 30.00% project is a master -planned community; appropriate for mixed-use projects) and CAPCOA LUT - 2 Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycare VMT reduction and CAPCOA LUT -4 (Increase Destination Y Y Y N Y 4 (Applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for Accessibility): 6.70%- 20.00% VMT reduction 40residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects); City of San Jose [Access to Neighborhood Schools: Applicable for residential uses only]; City of San Jose [Very similar to measure 'Increase diversity of uses'- Appliable for residential and employment uses] Notes: Similar measure is CAPCOA LUT -6 [Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing] - [Applicable in urban and suburban contexts; negligible impact in a rural context 3 Incorporate affordable housing into the project 0.04%- 1.20% Y Y Y N Y unless transit availability and proximity to jobs/services are existing characteristics; appropriate for residential and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Similar to measure 'Integrate affordable and market rate housing] - Measure is applicable for residential uses only Notes: CAPCOA SDT-3 [Neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV) would result in a mode shift and therefore reduce the traditional vehicle VMT and GHG emissions. Range depends on the 4 Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle network 0.50%- 12.70% Y Y N N Y available NEV network and support facilities, NEV ownership leveles, and the degree of shift from traditional; measure is applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context, for small Ao� citywide or large multi -use developments, and appropriate for mixed-use projects] 1) 0.25% - 0.5% (0.25% reduction is ted for project oriented towards a planned co u Notes: CAPCOA LUT -7 [Orient project toward non -auto corridor]; Grouped strategy with LUT -3 reduction is attributed for a ro'ect orien ards an (Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) ; there is no sufficient existing corridor) (as nto Me an evidence that the measures results in non-negotiable trip reduction unless combined with 5 Orient project towards transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities Air Quality l ity M ) Mendeana District D) Y Y Y N N Y other measures, including neighborhood design, density and diversity of development, transit Recom ante for Land Us accessibility and pedestrian and bicyle network improvements; the measute is applicable for Reductions),reduction in VMT % increase in urban or suburban context (may be applicable in a master -planned rural community) and is transit frequenc r 10% increase i nsit appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed use projects ridership (as per the for Clean Air cy (CCAP) Transportation Emissio book) Notes: CAPCOA SDT-1 [applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects; reduction benefit only occurs if the project has both pedestrian network improvements on site and connections to the larger 6 Provide pedestrian network improvements 0.00%- 2.00% Y Y Y Y Y Y off-site network]. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Provide pedestrian network improvements for active transportation: applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Included (within project and connecting off-site/within project only)] P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-90 LSA P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-91 1% increase in share of workers commuting by bicycle (for each additional mile of bike lanes per square mile) (Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Notes: CAPCOA SDT-5 [Grouped strategy, benfits of Bike Lane Street Design are small and Major U.S. Cities: If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use should be grouped with the LUT -9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to strengthen Them —Another Look by Dill and Carr (2003)); 258% street network characteristics and enhance multi -modal environments], the measure is 830% increase in bicycle community (Moving Cooler. An applicable in urban and suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, 7 Incorporate bike lane street design (on-site) Analysis of Transportation Strategies Y Y Y Y Y Y industrial, and mixed-use projects. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Cambridge 'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Expand the reach Systematics); 0.075% increase in bicycle commuting with of bike access with investment in infrastructure: applicable for both residential and each mile of bikeway per 100,000 residents (If You Build employment uses]; City of LA [Provide bicycle facility along site (Yes/No)] Them, Commuters Will Use Them; Cross -Sectional Analysis of Commuters and Bicycle Facilities by Nelson and Allen (1997)) Notes: CAPCOA TST-3; Measure applicable in urban and suburban context, maybe applicable in rural context but no literature documentation available, appropriate for specific or general plans. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure' Improve pedestrian or 8 Expand transit network 0.10%— 8.20% YY Y Y Y bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Increase transit accessibility to improve last -mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations and low -carbon travel modes accessible; both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Existing transit mode share (as a percent of total daily trips) (%), Lines within project site improved (<50%, >=50%)] Notes: CAPCOA TST-4, applicable in urban and suburban context, maybe applicable in rural context but no literature documentation available, appropriate for specific or general plans. 9 Increase transit service frequency/speed 0.02%— 2.50% Y Y Y Y Y This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Similar to measure 'Subsidize public transit service upgrades']; City of LA [Reduction in headways (increase in frequency) (%)] Notes: CAPCOATST-1 (Applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; 10 Provide a Bus Rapid Transit System 0.02%— 3.20% Y Y N N Y appropriate for specific or general plans). This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.' Notes: CAPCOA RPT -3 (Applicable in urban, suburban and rural context; appropriate for 11 Not Quantified: Grouped strategy (with RP TST-1 Required project contributions to transportation infrastructure improvement projects Y Y Y Y Y residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); measure similar to some of the through 7) measures discussed above. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.' Notes: CAPCOA LUT -4 [Destination accessibility measured in terms of the number ofjobs or other attractions reachable within a given travel time, which tends to be the highest at central locations and lowest at peripheral ones; the location of the project also increases the potential for pedestrians to walk and bike to these destinations and therefore reduces VMT; applicable for urban and suburban contexts, negligible impact in a rural context; appropriate for 12 0.0 Y Y Y Increase destination accessibility 6.70%— 20.00 Y Y Y residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]. This can be considered under Technical Advisory Measure'Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service'; City of San Jose [Increase transit availability to improve last -mile transit connections; Improve network connectivity/design to make destinations and low -carbon travel modes accessible; both applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Lines within project site improved (<50%, >=50%)] Notes: CAPCOA SDT-2 [applicable in urban, suburban, and rural contexts; appropriate for 13 Provide traffic calming measures 0.25% — 1.00% Y Y Y Y Y Y residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Streets with traffic calming improvements (%), intersections with traffic calming improvements (%)] Notes: CAPCOA SDT-6 [Bike Parking in Non -Residential projects has minimal impacts as a 0.625% (as per the Center for Clean Air Policy (CCAP) standalone strategy and should be grouped with the LUT -9 (Improve Design of Development) Transportation Emission Guidebook) and 258% - 830% strategy to encourage bicycling by providing strengthened street network characteristics and 14 Provide bike parking in non-residential projects increase in bicycle community (Moving Cooler: An Y Y Y Y Y Y bicycle facilities]; the measure is applicable in urban, suburban, and rural contexts; Analysis of Transportation Strategies for Reducing appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects; City of San Jose [Provide bike Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Cambridge Systematics) parking and end -of -trip facilities such as bike parking, bicycle lockers, showers, and personal lockers (Applicable for both residential and employment uses)]; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)] P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-91 LSA P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-92 Notes: CAPCOA SDT-7 [Grouped Strategy; the benefits of Bike Parking with Multi -Unit Residential Projects have no quantified impacts and should be grouped with the LUT -9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to encourage bicycling by providing strengthened 15 Provide bike parking with multi -unit residential projects Not Quantified Y Y Y Y Y y street network characteristics and bicycle facilities. The measure is applicable in urban, suburban, or rural contexts. It is appropriate for residential projects.]; City of San Jose [Provide bike parking and end -of -trip facilities such as bike parking, bicycle lockers, showers, and personal lockers (Applicable for both residential and employment uses)]; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)] Notes: CAPCOA PDT -1 (applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects); reduction can be counted only if spillover parking is controlled (via residential permits and on -street market parking); follow multi -faceted strategy including 1) elimination/reduction of minimum parking 16 Limit or eliminate parking supply 5.00% - 12.50% Y Y Y Y Y Y requirements, 2) creation of maximum parking requirements, and 3) provision of shared parking; City of San Jose [Decrease project parking supply at the project site to rates lower than the standard parking minimums where allowable in the San Jose Municipal Code (applicable for employment uses)]; City of LA [City code parking provision (spaces), actual parking provision (spaces)] Notes: CAPCOA PDT -2 (applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial and mixed-use projects; complimentary 17 Unbundle parking costs from property costs 2.60% - 13.00% Y Y Y Y Y strategies include workplace parking pricing); City of San Jose [Unbundle On -Site Parking Costs: Application for Residential Uses Only]; City of LA [Monthly cost for parking ($)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -15 [Implement employee parking "cash -out'; the term "cashout" is used to describe the employer providing employees with a choice of forgoing their current subsidized/free parking for a cash payment equivalent to the cost of the parking space to the employer. The measure is applicable in urban and suburban context; it is not applicable in rural context; it is appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects. Restrictions 18 Provide parking cash -out programs 0.60%— 7.70% commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y are applied only if complementary strategies are in place: a) Residential parking permits and market rate public on -street parking to prevent spill over parking; b) Unbundled parking - is not required but provides a market signal to employers to forgo paying for parking spaces and "cash -out' the employee instead. In addition, unbundling parking provides a price with which employers can utilize as a means of establishing "cash -out' prices; City of San Jose [Parking cash -out: Employment uses only]; City of LA [Parking cash -out: Employees eligible (%)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -1: Commute Trip Reduction Program — Voluntary, is a multi -strategy program that encompasses a ombination of individual measures described CAPCOA measures TRT -3 through TRT -9. It is presented as a means of preventing double -counting of reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a maximum level of reductions that should be permitted for a combined set of strategies within a voluntary program. The main difference between a voluntary and a required program is: A) 19 Implementor provide access to a commute reduction program -Voluntary 1.00% - 6.20% co VMT Y Y Y Y Y Y Monitoring and reporting is not required B) No established performance standards (i.e. no trip reduction requirements). The measure is applicable in urban and suburban contexts, negligible in a rural context, unless large employers exist and suite of strategies implemented are relevant in rural settings. The measure is appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects; City of San Jose [Applicable for employment uses only]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -2 (Commute Trip Reduction Program is a multi -strategy program that encompasses a combination of individual measures from TRT -3 through TRT -9. It is presented as a means of preventing double -counting of reductions for individual measures that are included in this strategy. It does so by setting a maximum level of reduction that should be Implement or provide access to Commute Trip Reduction Program —Required permitted for a combined set of strategies within a program that is contractually required of 20 implementation/monitoring 4.2% — 21.0% commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y Y the development sponsors and managers and accompanied by a regular performance monitoring and reporting program. Check examples of Tuscon, Arizona and South San Fransisco, CA from CAPCOA. The measure is applicable in urban and suburban contexts; it is negligible in rural context, unless large employes exist, and suite of strategies implemented are relevant in rural settings; jurisdiction level only); City of San Jose [Employment uses only]; City of LA [Employees participating (%)] P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-92 LSA P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-93 Notes: CAPCOA TRT -3 [Provide Ride -Sharing Programs: applicable in urban and suburban context; Negligible impact in many rural contexts, but can be effective when a large employer 21 Provide ride -sharing program 1.00%-15.00% commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y Y in a rural area draws from a workforce in an urban or suburban area, such as when a major employer moves from an urban location to a rural location; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Ride share for employment uses only]; City of LA [Measured in terms of employees eligible (%)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -9 [urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, and 22 Implement car -sharing program 0.40%— 0.70% Y Y Y Y Y Y appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Car share project setting (urban, suburban, all other)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -12 [This measure has minimal impacts when implemented alone. The strategy's effectiveness is heavily dependent on the location and context. Bike -sharing Taking evidence from the literature, a 135-300% increase programs have worked well in densely populated areas (examples in Barcelona, London, Lyon, in bicycling which roughly shifting from vehicle and Paris) with existing infrastructure for bicycling. Bike sharing programs should be combined 23 Implement bike -sharing program p g p g pare travel) results in a negligible impact (around 0.03% VMT is Y Y N Y Y Y with Bike Lane Street Design SDT-5 and Improve Design of Development (LUT -9). The g ( ) p g p ( ) reduction) measure is applicable in urban and suburban -center context only; it is negligible in a rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects; City of San Jose [Bike share for employment and residential uses]; City of LA [bike share - within 600 feet of existing bike share station - OR -implementing new bike share station (Y/N)] Similar to CAPCOA TRT -4 [Implement Subsidized or Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT -4 [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of 24 Provide transit passes Discounted Transit Program]; for TRT -4, commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y San Jose [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of LA [Employees and reduction is 0.30%- 20.00% residents eligible (%), amount of transit subsidy per daily passenger (daily equivalent) ($)] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT -11 (Provide employer-sponsored vanpool/shuttle) - the measure is applicable for urban, suburban, and rural context, and is appropriate for office, 0.30% - 13.40% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA industrial, and mixed-use projects; Similar measure is CAPCOA TRT -10 (Implement a School Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for TRT -11: Provide Employer -Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle); Pool Program: Applicable for urban, suburban, and rural context and appropriate for 25 example providing ride -matching or shuttle services 7.20%- 15.80% school VMT reduction (for CAPCOA TRT- Y Y Y Y Y residential and mixed-use projects); City of San Jose [School carpool program - residential uses 10: Implement a School Pool Program) only)]; City of LA [School carpool program - level of implementation (low, medium, high); Employer sponsored vanpool or shuttle (Degree of implementation (low, medium, high), employees eligible (%), employer size (small, medium, large)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -10 [This project will create a ridesharing program for school children. Most school districts provide bussing services to public schools only. SchoolPool helps match parents to transport students to private schools, or to schools where students cannot walk or bike but do not meet the requirements for bussing. The measure is applicable in urban, 26 Implement a school pool program 7.20% - 15.80% school VMT reduction Y Y N Y Y Y suburban, and rural context and is appropriate for residential and mixed-use projects.]; City of San Jose [School carpool program - residential uses only)]. This measure can be considered under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ridematching services.'; City of LA [School carpool program - level of implementation (low, medium, high) Notes: CAPCOA TST-6 (Provide Local Shuttles - grouped strategy with TST-5 'Provide Bike Parking Near Transit' and TST-4'Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed') - Applicable in urban/suburban context; appropriate for large residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects; solves the "first mile/last mile" problem; CAPCOA TRT -11 (Provide CAPCOA TST-6 (Provide Loca : Not Quantified; employer-sponsored vanpool/shuttle) - the measure is applicable for urban, suburban, and 27 Operate free direct shuttle service 0.30%- 13.40% commute VMT r ction (for CAPCOA Y Y N Y Y Y rural context, and is appropriate for office, industrial, and mixed-use projects. This measure TRT -11: Provide Employer -Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle) can be considered under the Technical Advisory Measure 'Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ridematching services.'; City of San Jose [Employment uses only]; City of LA [Employer sponsored vanpool or shuttle (Degree of implementation (low, medium, high), employees eligible (%), employer size (small, medium, large)] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -6 [Applicable in urban, rural, and suburban contexts; appropriate for 28 Provide teleworking options 0.07% - 5.50% commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y Y retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Alternative work schedules and telecommute (employment land uses only)]; City of LA [Alternative work schedules and telecommute (employees participating (%), type of program)] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TST-2 through TST-4; City of San Jose [Subsidize transit service through contributions to the transit provider to improve transit service to the project (e.g. 29 Subsidize public transit service upgrades Not Quantified Y Y N Y N Y frequency and number of routes); applicable for both residential and employment uses]. The measure is included under the Techical Advisory Measure'Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single -occupancy vehicle.' P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-93 LSA P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-94 Notes: CAPCOA TRT -4 [Implement subsidized or discounted transit program (the measure is applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in a rural context, appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects); The project will provide subsidized/discounted daily or monthly public transit passes. The project may also provide free transfers between all shuttles and transit to participants. These passes can be partially or 30 Implement subsidized or discounted transit program 0.30% — 20.00% commute VMT Y Y Y Y Y Y wholly subsidized by the employer, school, or development. Many entities use revenue from parking to offset the cost of such a project. The measure is included under the Techical Advisory Measure'Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single -occupancy vehicle.'; City of San Jose [Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program]; City of LA [Transit subsidies measured by employees and residents eligible (%), and amount of transit subsidy per passenger (daily equivalent) ($)] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT -11 (Provide Employer -Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle: applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context; appropriate for office, industrial, and mixed-use projects). 31 Subsidize vanpool 0.30%- 13.40% commute VMT Y Y N Y N Y The measure is included under the Techical Advisory Measure'Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single -occupancy vehicle.'; City of San Jose AIL [Applicable for employment uses only] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -5 [Provide End of Trip Facilities]: End -of -trip facilities have minimal impacts when implemented alone. This strategy's effectiveness in reducing vehicle miles 22% increase in bicycle mode share (UK National Travel traveled (VMT) depends heavily on the suite of other transit, pedestrian/bicycle, and demand Survey)/2%-5% reduction in commute vehicle trips management measures offered. End -of trip facilities should be grouped with Commute Trip 32 Providing on-site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools, (Transportation Demand Management Y Y Y Y Y Reduction (CTR) Programs (TRT -1: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms Encyclopedia )/0.625% reduction in VMT (Centerfor through TRT -2: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program — Required Clean Air Policy (CCAP) Emission Guidebook) Implementation/Monitoring) and TRT -3 (Provide Ride -Sharing Programs); City of San Jose [Similar measures include 'Provide bike parking/end of trip bike facilities', 'Implement car sharing programs']; City of LA [Include bike parking/lockers, showers, & repair station (Y/N)] 33 Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites Not Quantified YY N N Y Included as part of CAPCOA TRT -1 (Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Voluntary) 34 Provide a guarenteed ride home service to users of non -auto modes Not Quantified Y Y N N Y 35 Locate project in an area of the region that already exhibits low VMT 10.00%- 65.00% Y Y N N Y Notes: CAPCOA LUT -2 (Applicable in urban and suburban contexts; negligible in rural contexts; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects) Notes: CAPCOA LUT -5 [May be grouped with CAPCOA measures LUT -3 (mixed use development), SDT-2 (traffic calmed streets with good connectivity), and PPT -1 through PPT -7 (parking management strategies); measures are applicable in urban and suburban contexts; 36 Locate project near transit 0.50%- 24.60% Y Y N N Y appropriate in rural context if development site is adjacent to a commuter rail station with convenient rail service to a major employment center; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects] Notes: CAPCOA LUT -1 (Applicable in urban and suburban contexts only; negligible in rural 37 Increase project/development density 1.50%-30.00% Y Y Y Y N Y context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects); City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses] Notes: CAPCOA LUT -3: Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban Developments (Mixed Use) 38 Increase the mix of uses within the project or within the project's surroundings 9.00%- 30.00°o Y Y Y Y N Y [Applicable in urban and suburban context, negligible in rural context, and appropriate for mixed-use projects]; City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses] Similar measure is CAPC [I a Design of Notes: Similar measure to CAPCOA LUT -9 (Improve Design of Development); City of San Jose 39 Improve network connectivity and/or increase intersection densityon the project site p y / P ) y Y Y Y N Y Build new street connections and/or connect cul-de-sacs to provide pedestrian and bicycle [ / p p y Deploy management strategies (e.g., pricing, vehicle occupancy requirements) on roadways or Development]: 3.0% - 21.3% In VMT access: applicable for both residential and employment uses] Notes: Similar CAPCOA measure is RPT -1 (Road Pricing/Management: Implement Area or 40 roadway lanes. CAPCOA RPT -1: 7.90%- 22.00% Y Y Y N N N Cordon Pricing) Notes: CAPCOA TRT -14 [Urban and suburban context; Negligible impact in a rural context; Appropriate for retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects; Reductions applied only if complementary strategies are in place: o Residential parking permits and market rate public on -street parking - to prevent spill-over 41 Price workplace parking 0.10%- 19.70% commute VMT Y N N Y Y N parking o Unbundled parking - is not required but provides a market signal to employers to transfer over the, now explicit, cost of parking to the employees. In addition, unbundling parking provides a price with which employers can utilize as a means of establishing workplace parking prices; City of San Jose [Price On -Site Workplace Parking (for employment uses only)]; City of LA [Daily parking charge ($), Employees subject to priced parking (%)] P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-94 LSA P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-95 Notes: CAPCOA PDT -4 (applicable for urban context and appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); the project will require the purchase of residential parking permits (RPPs) for long-term use of on -street parking in residential areas; permits 42 Require residential area (on -street) parking permits 0.09% - 0.36% Y N N N Y N reduce the impact of spillover parking in residential areas adjacent to commercial areas, transit stations, or other locations where parking may be limited and/or priced; Grouped strategy (with measures PDT-1'Limit parking supply', PDT-2'Unbundle parking costs from property cost' and PDT-3'lmplement market price public parking (on -street)'); City of LA [Cost of annual permit ($)] Notes: CAPCOA LUT -8 (Grouped strategy with 'Increase Destination Accessibility'; the measure is most effective when applied in combination of multiple design elements that encourage this 43 Locate project near bike path/bike lane 0.625% Y N Y N N N use; strategy should be grouped with 'Increase Destination Accessibility' strategy to increase the opportunities for multi -modal travel; measure is applicable in urban or suburban context, may be applicable in a rural master planned community; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects Nates: CAPCOA TRT -7 (applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; 44 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing 0.80%- 4.00% commute VMT Y N Y Y N N appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects); City of San Jose [Employment uses only] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT -1 (Implement Commute Reduction Program - Voluntary); City of 45 Education and encouragement - Voluntary travel behavior change program 1.00%- 6.20% commute VMT Y N Y Y N San Jose [For both residential and employment uses]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)] Notes: Similar to CAPCOA TRT -7 [Implement Commute Reduction Marketing]; City of San Jose [Similar measure might be'Implement commute trip reduction marketing/educational 46 Education and encouragement - Promotions and marketing 0.80%- 4.00% commute VMT Y NN Y N campaign' (applicable for employment uses)]; City of LA [Employees and residents participating (%)] Notes: CAPCOA TST-6 (Provide Local Shuttles - grouped strategy with TST-5 'Provide Bike Parking Near Transit' and TST-4'Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed') - Applicable in urban/suburban context; appropriate for large residential, retail, office, mixed use, and 47 Implement neighborhood shuttle Not Quantified Y N N Y Y N industrial projects; solves the "first mile/last mile" problem; City of San Jose [Similar measure: 'Operate a free direct shuttle service' (applicable for employment uses only)]; City of LA [Degree of Implementation (low/medium/high), employees and residents eligible (%)] 48 Trip cap Not Quantified Ift NJW N1lW N Y N N Notes: City of San Jose [Applicable for both residential and employment uses] CAPCOA PDT -3 (applicable in urban and suburban context; negligible in rural context; appropriate for retail, office, and mixed-use projects; applicable in a specific or general plan 49 Implement market price public parking (On -street) 2.80%— 5.50% N Y N N N context only, reduction can be counted only if spillover parking is controlled (via residential permits); studies conducted in downtown areas, and thus should be applied carefully if project is not in a central business/activity center 50 Implement area or cordon pricing 7.90%- 22.00% Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA RPT -1; Applicable in Central Business District or urban center only Notes: CAPCOA SDT-4 [The project, if located in a CBD or major activity center, will convert a percentage of its roadway miles to transit malls, linear parks, or other nonmotorized zones. These features encourage non -motorized travel and thus a reduction in VMT. This measure is 51 Create urban non -motorized zones 0.01%-0.20% annual duction Y N Y N N N most effective when applied with multiple design elements that encourage this use. The benefits of Urban Non -Motorized Zones alone have not been shown to be significant. (considered grouped strategy with SDT-1 (provide pedestrian network improvements); this is applicable in urban context only and appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects] Two sources: 0.1% - 0.5% VMT reduction (as per 2005 Notes: CAPCOA RPT -4 (Applicable in suburban and rural context; appropriate for residential, 52 Install park-and-ride lots Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) study) and Y N N N N N retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); Grouped strategy with RPT -1, TRT -11, TRT -3, 0.50% VMT reduction per day (as per Washington State and TRT -1 through 6 Department of Transportation (WSDOT)) 53 Electrify loading docks and/or require idling -reduction systems 26%- 71% reduction in Truck refrigeration units (TRU) Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT -1 (Measure applicability: Truck refrigeration units (TRU)) idling GHG emissions 54 Utilize alternative fueled vehicles Reduction in GHG emissions varies depending on vehicle Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT -2 (Measure applicability: vehicles) type, year, and associated fuel economy 55 Utilize electric or hybrid vehicles 0.40%- 20.30% reduction in GHG emissions Y N N N N N Notes: CAPCOA VT -3 (Measure applicability: vehicles) Notes: CAPCOA TST-5 (should be implemented with other two measures as mentioned to encourage multi -modal use in the area and provide ease of access to nearby transit for 56 Provide bike parking near transit Not Quantified Y N N N N N bicyclists (measure applicable in urban and suburban context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects); Grouped strategy (with measures TST-3 'Expand transit network' and TST-4'Increase transit service frequency/speed') P:\CL81904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-95 LSA Notes: VMT =Vehicle Miles Traveled; CAPCOA =California Air Pollution Control Officers Association; OPR =Office of Planning and Research; TA =Technical CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU = Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD = Parking Policy/Pricing, TR = Cc ' VMT reduction numbers obtained from Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Offil ' Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association in August 2010. ' Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA published by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research State of California in 4 Analysis of VMT Mitigation Measures Pursuant to SB 743 prepared by Iteris, Inc. in February 2018. 5 City of San Jose Transportation Analysis Handbook (dated April 2018). s City of Los Angeles VMT Calculator Version 1.2 Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Links: VF =High Occupancy Toll; ITS= Intelligent Transportation System hstem Improvements, RP = Road Pricing/Management; V = Vehicles) Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019. 1) VMT Calculator (City of LA): https:Hladot.lacity.org/what-we-do/planning-development-review/transportation-planning-policy/modernizing-transportation-analysis Notes: 1) For City of Los Angeles, TDM strategies for VMT reduction are broadly classified into the following categories: 1) Parking, 2) Transit, 3) Education & Management, 4) Commute Trip Reductions, 5) Shared Mobility, 6) Bicycle Infrastructure, and 7) Neighborhood Enhancement 2) For City of San Jose, TDM strategies for VMT reduction are broadly classified into the following tiers: 1) Project Characteristics, 2) Multimodal Network Improvements, 3) Parking, and 4) Programmatic Transporation Demand Management P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-96 Notes: CAPCOA LUT -9 (Include design elements to enhance walkability and connectivity; improved street network characteristics within a neighborhood such as street accessibility; design also measured in terms of sidewalk coverage, building setbacks, street widths, 57 Improve design of development 3.00%- 21.30% Y N N N N N pedestrians crossings, presence of street trees, and a host of other physical variables that differentiate pedestrian -oriented environments from auto -oriented environments); measure is applicable in the urban and suburban contexts, negligible impact in rural context; appropriate for residential, retail, office, industrial, and mixed-use projects Notes: CAPCOA SDT-8 [This is a grouped strategy and the benefits of electric vehicle parking may be quantified when grouped with the use of electric vehicles and or SDT-3 (Implement a 58 Provide electric vehicle parking Not Quantified Y N N N N N Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network). This measure is applicable in urban or suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects.] Notes: CAPCOA SDT-9 [Larger projects may be required to provide for, contribute to, or dedicate land for the provision of off-site bicycle trails linking the project to designated bicycle commuting routes in accordance with an adopted citywide or countywide bikeway plan. The 59 Dedicated land for bike trails Not Quantified Y N N N N benefits of Land Dedication for Bike Trails have not been quantified and should be grouped with the LUT -9 (Improve Design of Development) strategy to strengthen street network characteristics and improve connectivity to off-site bicycle networks. The measure is applicable in urban, suburban, or rural contexts and is appropriate for large residential, retail, Y N N N N office, mixed use, and industrial projects.] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -13 [Applicable in urban, suburban, and rural context; appropriate for 60 Implement school bus program 38.00%- 63.00% school VMT reduction residential and mixed-use projects] Notes: CAPCOA TRT -8 [The project will provide preferential parking in convenient locations (such as near public transportation or building front doors) in terms of free or reduced parking fees, priority parking, or reserved parking for commuters who carpool, vanpool, ride -share or use alternatively fueled vehicles. The project will provide wide parking spaces to accommodate 61 Implement preferential parking permit program Not Quantified N N N N N vanpool vehicles. The impact of preferential parking permit programs has not been quantified by the literature and is likely to have negligible impacts when implemented alone. This strategy should be grouped with Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Programs (TRT -1 and TRT -2) and TRT -3 (Provide Ride -Sharing Programs) as a complementary strategy for encouraging non - single occupant vehicle travel. This measure is applicable in urban and suburban contexts and is appropriate for residential, retail, office, mixed use, and industrial projects.] Notes: VMT =Vehicle Miles Traveled; CAPCOA =California Air Pollution Control Officers Association; OPR =Office of Planning and Research; TA =Technical CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU = Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD = Parking Policy/Pricing, TR = Cc ' VMT reduction numbers obtained from Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Offil ' Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures published by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association in August 2010. ' Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA published by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research State of California in 4 Analysis of VMT Mitigation Measures Pursuant to SB 743 prepared by Iteris, Inc. in February 2018. 5 City of San Jose Transportation Analysis Handbook (dated April 2018). s City of Los Angeles VMT Calculator Version 1.2 Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Links: VF =High Occupancy Toll; ITS= Intelligent Transportation System hstem Improvements, RP = Road Pricing/Management; V = Vehicles) Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019. 1) VMT Calculator (City of LA): https:Hladot.lacity.org/what-we-do/planning-development-review/transportation-planning-policy/modernizing-transportation-analysis Notes: 1) For City of Los Angeles, TDM strategies for VMT reduction are broadly classified into the following categories: 1) Parking, 2) Transit, 3) Education & Management, 4) Commute Trip Reductions, 5) Shared Mobility, 6) Bicycle Infrastructure, and 7) Neighborhood Enhancement 2) For City of San Jose, TDM strategies for VMT reduction are broadly classified into the following tiers: 1) Project Characteristics, 2) Multimodal Network Improvements, 3) Parking, and 4) Programmatic Transporation Demand Management P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Dev Proj (4/3/2020) 13-96 This page intentionally left blank 13-97 APPENDIX B VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS FROM ACADEMIC RESEARCH 13-98 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-99 LSA Notal: VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled t All mitigation measures have been obtained from How do Local Actio ns Affect CMT? A Critical Review ofth M t All VMT reduction numbers have been obtained from How do Local, 111lfs, S., and Tal, G.). ars, S., and Tal, G.I. P:\CL131904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Boarnet and Handy (4/3/2020) 13-100 # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction' Notes Variable: Various factors associated with proximity to transit stop (please refer to How do 1 Improve or increase access to transit 1.3%-5.8% Local Actions Affect CMT?A Critical Review of the Emperical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.) 2 Land Use Mix Elasticity: 0.02 -0.10 Variable: Entropy -variety and balance of land -use types within a neighborhood Variable: Various factors associated with job accessibility and distance to CBD (please refer to 3 Regional Accessibility Elasticity: 0.05 - 0.25 How do Local Actions Affect CMT?A Critical Review of the Emperical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.) Variable: Various factors associated with job accessibility (please refer to How do Local 4 Job -Housing Balance Elasticity: 0.06 - 0.31 for commute VMT Actions Affect CMT?A Critical Review ofthe Emperical Evidence(Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Han(AIII&Spears, S., and Tal, G.) Elasticity: 0.00 - 0.02 for sidewalk length, 0.19 for 5 Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements Pedestrian Environment Factor Jiar 6 Provide Bicycling Network Improvements No effect on VMT 7 Implement Transit Improvements No effect on VMT 8 Voluntary Travel Behavior Change (VTBC) Program 5%-12% 9 Implement Employer -Based Trip Reduction (EBTR) Program 1.33%-6%of commute VMT Home-based telecommuting: 48.1% for hoW&d VM7, 66.5% - 76.6% for all personal VMT, and or 10 Provide telecommuting options commute VMT only; Center -based t uting: 53.7%-64.8%for all personalV .0%-77.2% for commute VMT only 11 Increase Project/Development Density Elasticity: -0.07-0.19 Variable: residential density Variable: Various factors associated with intersection or street density (please refer to How 12 Improve network connectivity and/or increase intersection density on the project site Elasticity: -0.46 - 0.59 do Local Actions Affect CMT?A Critical Review of the Emperical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., Spears, S., and Tal, G.) Variable: Different road prices in various parts of the US (please refer to How do Local Actions 13 Implement Road Pricing 30%-14.6% Affect CMT? A Critical Review of the Emperical Evidence (Salon, D., Boarnet, M.G., Handy, S., ears, S., and Tal, G.) 12% of commu T(paron -2.9%for $3 per day work arking price; 14 Implement Parking Cash -out Programs or Workplace Parking Pricing increase equivalen %hour of ravel time cost Notal: VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled t All mitigation measures have been obtained from How do Local Actio ns Affect CMT? A Critical Review ofth M t All VMT reduction numbers have been obtained from How do Local, 111lfs, S., and Tal, G.). ars, S., and Tal, G.I. P:\CL131904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Boarnet and Handy (4/3/2020) 13-100 This page intentionally left blank 13-101 APPENDIX C VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION MEASURES FOR COMMUNITY PLANS AND GENERAL PLANS 13-102 SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION for the CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH This page intentionally left blank 13-103 LSA Notes: VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled; CAPCOA = California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU =Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD =Parking Policy/Pricing, TR =Commute Trip Reduction Programs, TS =Transit System Improvements, RP =Road Pricing/Management; V= Vehicles) ' All mitigation measures have been obtained from the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019. P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Use Plans (3/29/2020) 13-104 # Mitigation Measure VMT Reduction Modify land use plan to increase development in areas with low VMT/capita characteristics and/or decrease 1 development in areas with high VMT/capita characteristics Not quantified in CAPCOA 0.00%- 2.00% (for pedestrian network 2 Provide enhanced bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities improvements); Multiple measures for bike facilities, refer to Table A for VMT reduction percentages 3 Add roadways to the street network if those roadways would provide shorter travel paths for existing and/or future trips Not quantified in CAPCOA CAPCOA TST-2 (Implement transit access improvements): Not quantified alone, grouped strategy with TST-3 (Expand transit network) and TST-4 4 Improve or increase access to transit (Increase transit service frequency/speed); CAPCOA LUT -5 (Increase transit accessibility): 0.50%- 24.60% Similar to CAPCOA LUT -3 (Increase Diversity of Urban and Suburban (Mixed Use)): 9.00%- 5 Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycareDevelopments 30.00% VMT reduction and CAPCOA LUT 4 (Increase Destination Accessibility): 40.25%— 6.70%- 20.00% VMT reduction 61 Incorporate a neighborhood electric vehicle network A 0.50%-12.70% 7 Provide traffic calming 1.00% 8 Limit or eliminate parking supply Unbundle parking costs 0%- 12.50% - 13.00% 0.10W19.70% commute VMT (for 9 pricing workplace parking); 7.90%- 10 Provide parking or roadway pricing or cash -out programs 22.00% (for CAPCOA RPT -1 (Road Pricing/Management: Implement Area or Cordon Pricing)); 0.60%— 7.70% commute VMT (for cash -out programs) 4.2%— 21.0% commute VMT %— 3.2% 11 Implement or provide access to a commute reduction program VMT reduction (for commute reduction programs with required implementation/monitoring) 0.40%- 0.70% VMT reduction (for car sharing); 1.00%- 15.00% commute VMT reduction (for ride -sharing); a 135%- 12 Provide car -sharing, bike sharing, and ride -share ams 300% increase in biking (of which roughly 7% are shifting from vehicle travel) results in a negligible impact (around 0.03% VMT reduction) Similar to CAPCOA TRT -4 [Implement 13 Provide partially or f sidized transit passesSubsidized or Discounted Transit IL Program]; for TRT -4, commute VMT reduction is 0.30%- 20.00% 0.30%- 13.40% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA TRT -11: (Provide 14 Shift single occupancy vehicle tripsolin pooling by providing ride -matching services or shuttle services Employer -Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle)); Grouped strategy (for CAPCOA TST-6 (Provide Local Shuttles)) 15 Provide telework options 0.07%- 5.50% commute VMT 0.30%- 13.40% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA TRT -11: (Provide Employer -Sponsored Vanpool/Shuttle)); 16 Provide incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than a single -occupancy vehicle Grouped strategy (for CAPCOA TST-6 (Provide Local Shuttles)); 0.30% - 20.00% commute VMT reduction (for CAPCOA TRT -4 (Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program)) Provide employee transportation coordinators at employment sites Not quantified in CAPCOA H18 Provide a guarenteed ride home sevice to users of non -auto modes Not quantified in CAPCOA Notes: VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled; CAPCOA = California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CAPCOA Transportation Mitigation Categories (LU =Land Use/Location, SD = Neighborhood/Site Enhancements, PD =Parking Policy/Pricing, TR =Commute Trip Reduction Programs, TS =Transit System Improvements, RP =Road Pricing/Management; V= Vehicles) ' All mitigation measures have been obtained from the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region developed by San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the San Diego Traffic Engineers Council (SANTEC) in January 2019. P:\CLB1904.09\Document\Copy of VMT Mitigations.xlsx\Land Use Plans (3/29/2020) 13-104 IV wv\ v.lsa.net ATTACHMENT D IMPLEMENTATION PROCEDURES FOR THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT A. Intent. K-3 The intent of this policy statement is to protect the environment of the City of Newport Beach, to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and to implement the basic principles, objectives, and criteria contained in the Guidelines adopted by the Secretary for Resources pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, as amended. These implementation procedures are intended to satisfy the requirements of Section 15022 of the CEQA Guidelines, or any successor guideline, and are designed to be used in conjunction with the CEQA statutes and Guidelines. In the event that any provision of this policy is found to be inconsistent with CEQA, the Guidelines or case law, this policy shall be revised to comply with applicable law. B. Definitions. As used in this policy statement, the following definitions shall apply: 1. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) means Public Resources Code, Sections 21000 et seq., or any successor statutes. 2. CEQA Guidelines means the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act", prepared by the Secretary for Resources. 3. Community Development Director means the Community Development Director for the City of Newport Beach or his/her designee. 4. Decision Making -Body means the officer or body that has the authority to review and approve a project or application under Titles 20 and/or 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code, including, but not limited to, the Community Development Director, Zoning Administrator, Hearing Officer, Planning Commission, and City Council. 5. All definitions contained in CEQA and the Guidelines shall also apply to this policy statement. 1 13-106 K-3 C. General Policies. The following general policies shall apply: 1. The City, in implementing the requirements of CEQA, shall, wherever possible, integrate these procedures into the existing planning and review procedures of the City. 2. In reviewing and assessing the significance of environmental impacts, the City shall be guided by the applicable General Plan and Local Coastal Program policies and standards. D. Environmental Determinations. 1. Activities Not Subject to CEQA. This policy statement shall apply only to activities that are subject to CEQA. Activities that are not "Projects" as defined in Guidelines Section 15378, or any successor guideline, and activities that are "Ministerial" as defined in Guidelines Section 15369, or any successor guideline, are not subject to CEQA or this policy statement. Examples of City activities that are not normally subject to CEQA include but are not limited to, the following: Business licenses Parking permits Sign permits Demolition permits Grading permits Building permits Final subdivision maps Certificates of use and occupancy Coastal Commission Approvals in Concept for Coastal Commission Exceptions. There may be instances where unusual circumstances cause one of these activities to be considered a discretionary action subject to CEQA. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following: 2 13-107 K-3 a. Any building permit or grading permit application or other action which is normally considered ministerial but due to special circumstances is determined to have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. Examples may include the following: Work in an area of unusual erosion potential or ground instability Work affecting scenic or sensitive biological resources An activity that may generate substantial public health impacts, such as noise, odors, or toxic materials b. Any building or grading permit in a sensitive area for which no prior CEQA review has occurred and no discretionary permit (e.g., use permit, site plan review) is required. Determination. The Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision - Making Body. The Decision -Making Body charged with reviewing a project or application under Titles 20 and/or 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall have the final authority to determine whether an activity is subject to CEQA. Action by the Decision -Making Body. No findings or discussion of CEQA compliance shall be required for activities that the Decision -Making Body has determined not to be subject to CEQA. 2. Projects that are Exempt from CEQA. CEQA and the Guidelines provide that the following types of projects are exempt from the requirement to prepare an Initial Study unless there are special circumstances that could result in significant environmental effects. a. Statutory Exemptions. Activities that qualify for a statutory exemption as provided under Sections 15260 et seq. of the Guidelines or any successor guidelines, do not require further environmental review. 3 13-108 K-3 b. Categorical Exemptions. The various classes of categorical exemptions are contained in Sections 15300 et seq. of the Guidelines, or any successor guidelines. The discussion of exceptions contained in Section 15300.2, or any successor guideline, shall apply particularly to projects and activities that would affect the shoreline, bluffs, wetlands, public views and other sensitive environmental resources. The Decision -Making Body shall have the authority to interpret the applicability of Categorical Exemptions to particular projects, including City -sponsored activities (e.g., Zoning Code amendments, assessment districts, construction and maintenance of utilities) and privately - initiated applications. C. "General Rule" Exemptions. During the preliminary review of an application, each discretionary project that is not covered under a statutory or categorical exemption shall be evaluated to determine whether it qualifies for an exemption under the general rule contained in Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline, which states, "Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA." The Guidelines further encourage agencies to adopt a list of project types that would qualify for the general rule exemption. Project types which qualify for this exemption include, but are not limited to: i. Minor changes to the Municipal Code which donot authorize physical development. ii. Minor changes to public infrastructure such as installing trees, replacing or upgrading streetlights, traffic signals, etc.; and other public improvements of a minor nature. iii. Administrative City actions such as budget amendments, professional services agreements, etc. which do not involve projects which affect the physical environment. Determination. When the Community Development Department is not the Decision - Making Body, the The Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision -Making Body. The Decision -Making Body charged with reviewing a project or application under Titles 20 and 21 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code shall have the authority to determine the applicability of exemptions for all public and privately -initiated projects. 4 13-109 K-3 Notice of Exemption. After approval of a project that was found to be exempt, the Community Development Director may prepare and file a Notice of Exemption as provided under Section 15062 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 3. Initial Studies. If a project is subject to CEQA and is not exempt under one of the provisions listed under Section D.2, the Community Development Director shall conduct an Initial Study according to the requirements contained in Section 15063 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Where it is determined that consultant assistance is required to complete the Initial Study, the procedural requirements contained in Section E shall apply. Applicant's Responsibilities. The applicant shall submit all information determined by the Community Development Director to be necessary for the preparation of the Initial Study. In addition, when consultant assistance or outside legal counsel is required the applicant shall be responsible for all costs as provided under Sections E and F. Determining Significant Effects. In determining whether a project may have a significant effect the City will generally follow the guidance contained in Section 15064 and Appendix G of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline or appendix. In addition, the following shall be considered in determining whether a project may have asignificant impact, in view of the particular character and beauty of Newport Beach: a. A substantial change in the character of an area by a difference in use, size or configuration is created. b. Substantial grading, excavating or other alteration to the natural topography. C. Substantial alteration of the shoreline or waters of the bay or ocean either directly or indirectly. Determination. The Community Development Director shall make a recommendation regarding the applicability of CEQA to the Decision -Making Body. On the basis of the information and analysis contained in the Initial Study, the Decision -Making Body shall determine whether a Negative Declaration or EIR should be prepared, as provided by Section 15063(b) of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 5 13-110 K-3 4. Negative Declarations. As provided in Section 15070 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline, the Community Development Director shall prepare a proposed Negative Declaration for a project subject to CEQA when either: a. The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have asignificant effect on the environment; or b. The Initial Study identifies potentially significant effects, but: i. Revisions in the project made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed Negative Declaration is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and ii. There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. Notice and Posting of a Proposed Negative Declaration. The Community Development Director shall provide notice of a Negative Declaration as required by Section 15072 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Action by the Decision -Making Body. Prior to approval of any project for which a Negative Declaration was prepared, the Decision -Making Body shall adopt the Negative Declaration prepared by the Community Development Director. Additionally, prior to approval of any project for which a Negative Declaration was prepared, appropriate findings shall be prepared by the Community Development Director for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. The Decision -Making Body shall approve or modify, or disprove the findings prepared by the Community Development Director. The Decision -Making Body may also take no action or not adopt the Negative Declaration. Notice of Determination. Within 5 working days following the Decision- Making Body's approval of a project for which a Negative Declarationwas prepared, the Community Development Director shall prepare and file a Notice of Determination as provided under Section 15075 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. K-3 5. Environmental Impact Reports. If the Initial Study shows that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project, either individually or cumulatively, may cause a significant effect on the environment, regardless of whether the overall effect of the project is adverse or beneficial, the Community Director shall either have prepared a Draft EIR or use a previously certified EIR which adequately analyzes the project. Applicant's Responsibilities. The applicant shall submit all information determined by the Community Development Director to be necessary for the preparation of the EIR. In addition, when consultant assistance is required, the applicant shall be responsible for all costs as provided under Sections E and F, below. Consultant Assistance/Legal Counsel. If consultant assistance or legal counsel is required in the preparation of a Draft EIR, the procedures contained in Section E, below, shall be followed. Notice of Preparation. The Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Notice of Preparation as provided by Section 15082 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Screencheck Draft EIR. If a consultant is retained to assist the City in preparing a Draft EIR, the Community Development Director may require the consultant to submit one or more screencheck drafts for review prior to finalizing the Draft EIR for publication. Notice of Completion of a Draft EIR. The Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Notice of Completion as provided by Section 15085 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. Final EIR. After completion of the Draft EIR public review period the Community Development Director shall prepare a Final EIR as provided by Section 15089 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. 7 13-112 K-3 Action by the Decision -Making Body. Prior to approval of any project for which an EIR was prepared, the Final EIR shall be certified as provided by Guidelines Section 15090 and appropriate findings as required by Sections 15091, 15092 and 15093, or any successor guidelines, shall be prepared by the Community Development Director for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. The Decision -Making Body shall modify, certify, or disprove any EIR prepared by the Community Development Director. Additionally, prior to approval of any project for which an EIR was prepared, the Decision -Making Body shall approve or modify the findings prepared by the Community Development Director. The Decision -Making Body may certify an EIR and deny the underlying the project. Notice of Determination. Within five working days following the Decision- Making Body's approval of a project for which an EIR was prepared, the Community Development Director shall prepare and file a Notice of Determination as provided under Section 15075 of the Guidelines, or any successor guideline. E. Consultant/Outside Lei2al Counsel Assistance. When the Community Development Director determines that consultant assistance or outside legal counsel is required for the preparation of an Initial Study, Negative Declaration or EIR, the following procedures shall be followed: 1. Consultant List. The Community Development Director shall maintain a list of consultants having a sufficient variety of expertise to assist in the preparation of Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, or EIRs when required. 2. Consultant/Outside Legal Counsel Selection. When outside assistance is required, a consultant shall be selected by the Community Development Director from the City's consultant list based on the nature of the project and the expertise of the consultant. If it is determined by the Community Development Director or requested by the applicant that proposals should be solicited from more than one consultant, the Community Development Director shall prepare and distribute a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) or Request for Proposals (RFP). Following receipt of proposals or statements of qualifications, the Community Development Director shall evaluate the submittals and select the best -qualified consultant to assist in the preparation of the EIR. The applicant may submit recommendations regarding the selection of a consultant, but the final decision regarding consultant selection shall be made by the Community Development Director. When outside legal counsel is required, the City Attorney may select legal counsel based on the nature of the project and the expertise of the attorney_ 8 13-113 K-3 3. Scope of Work and Budget. After a consultant or outside legal counsel has been selected, a detailed scope of work and budget shall be prepared by the consultant and the Community Development Director and/or the City Attorney, as applicable. 4. Contract Approval and Administration. The proposed scope of work and budget shall be submitted to the applicant for approval. If the proposal is acceptable, the applicant shall submit a deposit to cover the consultant or legal costs plus reasonable City administrative expenses. The consultant or legal counsel shall not be authorized to commence work until such deposit is received from the applicant. The amount of the deposit will normally be the total project budget; however, for large projects the deposit may be made in two or more payments subject to approval by the Community Development Director. After receipt of the applicant's deposit the Community Development Director or City Attornu shall prepare and execute a contract for consultant services in a form meeting the approval of the City Attorney, and shall administer the contract through project completion. At the conclusion of the project, any unused deposit shall be returned to the applicant. F. Fees. The preparation of an Initial Study, Negative Declaration, or EIR shall be subject to the following fees: 1. For Initial Studies and Negative Declarations prepared by the Community Development Director without consultant assistance, a reasonable fee shall be collected as established by resolution of the City Council as part of the Community Development Department's Schedule of Rents, Fines and Fees Fee Sehedule. 2. For Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, and EIRs prepared with consultant or outside legal counsel assistance, there will be a City fee as required by the Schedule of Rents, Fines and Feesffmnieipal 3. No future applications shall be accepted from any applicant, and no permits or entitlements shall be approved or issued until all prior indebtedness to the City incurred under this section by such applicants has been paid in full. 9 13-114 K-3 4. The amount of any applicable flw—fee shall become an obligation of the applicant to the City whether or not the permit or entitlement is issued, or whether or not the applicant exercises the right to obtain the permit or entitlement. Such fees accrue and become payable when the City gives notice to the applicant of the amount of such fees. This liability shall be enforceable in any court of competent jurisdiction. In the event suit is filed by the City, in addition to the amount of the fee, applicant shall indemnify the City as required by Section 1.07.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code and pay the City's reasonable attorney's fees. F. Authority of the Communily Development Director. The Community Development Director shall have authority for the interpretation of CEQA, the Guidelines, and this policy statement as they may affect any particular activity or project, including private development projects and City public works projects. In addition, the Community Development Director shall have authority for the following actions: 1. Makinge—a recommendations as to whether activities are subject to CEQA. 2. Making recommendations regarding the applicability of Categorical, Statutory and "General Rule" Exemptions for consideration by the Decision - Making Body. 3. Preparing Initial Studies for projects that are not exempt from CEQA. 4. Preparing, posting, and distributing Notices of Preparation, Exemption, Completion, and Determination; Negative Declarations;, and Environmental Impact Reports for City -sponsored projects and projects for which the City has approval authority as Lead Agency. 5. Preparing responses to comments on Negative Declarations and EIRs, and preparing draft findings, resolutions, and mitigation monitoring programs for consideration by the Decision -Making Body. 10 13-115 K-3 6. Making recommendations to the Decision -Making Body regarding the requirements of CEQA or the adequacy of environmental documents. 7. Developing administrative procedures for implementation of CEQA and these policies. 8. Reviewing and commenting on Negative Declarations, Notices of Preparation, Draft EIRs, or other environmental documents prepared by other lead agencies. 11 13-116