sb 743
play

SB 743 An Evolutionary Change to Transportation Impact Analysis - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Aug 24, 2023 •368 likes •854 views

SB 743 An Evolutionary Change to Transportation Impact Analysis Bob Grandy, Ronald Milam and Ian Barnes March 16, 2017 INNOVA VATION B BY SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE nd Draft o Ja Jan. 2 n. 2016 2 nd of Guid ideli lines

  1. SB 743 An Evolutionary Change to Transportation Impact Analysis Bob Grandy, Ronald Milam and Ian Barnes March 16, 2017 INNOVA VATION B BY

  2. SB 743 IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE nd Draft o • Ja Jan. 2 n. 2016 – 2 nd of Guid ideli lines • Fina inal D l Draft t to Natural R l Reso source Age gency e y early y 2017 17 • Imple lementatio ion in n in la late-2017 17 • Tw Two-year g gra race p peri eriod od? • Potentia ial a l acceleratio ion in in sc schedule due t to Calt ltrans gu s guid idanc nce INNOVA VATION B BY

  3. Change NEW LAWS SB SB 74 743 AB 417 AB 2245 SB 226 AB 1358 SB 375 SB 9 SB 97 AB 32 INNOVA VATION B BY

  4. Change SB 743 LEGISLATIVE INTENT (1) Ensure that the environmental impacts of traffic, such as noise, air pollution, and safety concerns, continue to be properly addressed and mitigated through the California Environmental Quality Act. (2) More appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. INNOVA VATION B BY

  5. Change TRANSPORTATION PLANNING What at S SB 7 743 43 Do Does N Not Do… Do… No c change to g genera ral l pl plan ans, t traf affic im impac act f fee progra rams, S , State Const stit itutio ion, s subdiv divis isio ion map act, e map ac etc. INNOVA VATION B BY

  6. Change IMPACT ANALYSIS & MITIGATION Mobil ilit ity What at S SB 7 743 43 Does Do… Do Do… - Elimi iminat ates L s LOS/D S/Delay - Adds V dds VMT - Saf Safety? Acces cessib ibil ilit ity - Methods a ds and Thresh sholds ds Guidance ce INNOVA VATION B BY

  7. Change IMPACT ANALYSIS & MITIGATION Isn’t VMT quantification already included under CEQA? • Yes, but it is not specifically reported in the transportation section • It is used to quantify other metrics used for energy, greenhouse gas, and air pollution analyses • Reducing VMT for transportation purposes requires the project to change in some way that reduces the amount of vehicle trips or their length INNOVA VATION B BY

  8. Change IMPACT ANALYSIS & MITIGATION SB 743 looks at VMT differently • For Residential: automobile VMT for home-based trips (passenger cars and light trucks only) • For Office: automobile VMT generated by workers • For Retail: exempt if less than 50 Ksf, can provide total VMT generated or cumulative project effect INNOVA VATION B BY

  9. Methods VMT FORECASTING VMT = Volume x Distance or Trips x Trip Length INNOVA VATION B BY

  10. Data AVAILABLE SOURCES Statewide MTC Model Census Data HPMS Data Model • Not Locally • Locally • Does not • Boundary Calibrated Calibrated provide method only specific VMT • 78 Sonoma • Roadway, • OPR information County Zones Transit, and guidelines Land Use • Journey-to- recommend • Omits local More Refined Work data per capita trips only provides methods for • 86 Sonoma information residential County Zones for work trips and office • More (about 20% of • Can be based accurate daily trips) on old data measure of VMT INNOVA VATION B BY

  11. Data AVAILABLE SOURCES SCTA Model • Locally Calibrated • Roadway, Transit, and Land Use More Refined than MTC • 900+ Sonoma County Zones • Truncates trip length/VMT at County boundaries INNOVA VATION B BY

  12. Methods VMT FORECASTING VMT = Volume x Distance or Trips x Trip Length • OPR guidelines provide 3 basic methodologies for VMT quantification: • Activity-Based Modeling • Trip-Based Modeling • Spreadsheet Method/Sketch Models INNOVA VATION B BY

  13. Methods VMT FORECASTING VMT = Volume x Distance or Trips x Trip Length • There are sub-methodologies within each method: • Boundary Method • Origin-Destination Method INNOVA VATION B BY

  14. Methods AIR POLLUTION = GHG Boun oundar dary y VMT MT Me Metho hod • Calc lculates V VMT MT that t occurs s in a a de desig signat ated d area ( ar (i. i.e. a a cit ity) • Can b be used f for or re retail projects pr • Cit Citrus Heig ights = s = 1,000, 000,110 d daily V VMT (weekday) y) INNOVA VATION B BY

  15. Methods FULL ACCOUNTING Orig igin in- Des Destin ination ( ion (OD) D) VMT MT Me Metho hod • Calc lculates V VMT MT from m indiv ividu idual t trips ips to/ o/fr from a an are rea • Cit Citrus Heig ights = s = 1,39 397, 7,340 340 dail daily V VMT (weekday) y) INNOVA VATION B BY

  16. Methods FULL/SHARED ACCOUNTING • Full A Acco ccounting: all V ll VMT MT generated by pr project is is at attributed t d to pr proje ject • Share red-Acco counting: g: VMT is sh is shar ared d between o n origina nating ng an and de d dest stination lan and u d use se INNOVA VATION B BY

  17. Methods WHAT VMT COUNTS? Project Generated VMT vs. the Project’s Effect on VMT INNOVA VATION B BY

  18. Methods FULL ACCOUNTING Mode odel B Bas ased d MTC M Model: V VMT Per C Capita a - Residen ents ts 25.0 O-D V VMT MT 20.0 • Calc lculates V VMT p MT per r 15.0 re resident of of are rea or or 10.0 worker in in ar area • MTC M C Mode del So Sonoma 5.0 County dail Co daily V VMT pe per 0.0 Capi Capita g a generated b d by Resid sidents = s = 17.9 INNOVA VATION B BY

  19. MTC Model: Residence-Based VMT Cloverdale -13% | 2% Jurisdiction VMT Santa Rosa 13.4* Healdsburg 14.0* Bay Area 15.3 Healdsburg Unincorporated -22% | -8% Cloverdale 15.6* 12% | 36% Windsor 16.6* Rohnert Park 17.6 Windsor -7% | 9% Sonoma County 17.9* Petaluma 19.1* Santa Rosa Sonoma 19.3* -25% | -13% Cotati 19.6* Unincorporated 20.1* Sebastopol 20.8 Cotati * CHTS data suggests higher Sebastopol 10% | 28% VMT per capita. MTC model 16% | 36% may be truncating trips. Rohnert Park LEGEND -2% | 15% Sonoma % vs. Sonoma County 8% | 26% % vs. Bay Area Petaluma 6% | 25% INNOVA VATION B BY

  20. MTC Model: Worker-Based VMT Cloverdale -40% | -41% Jurisdiction VMT Cloverdale 13.3 Santa Rosa 17.9 Healdsburg Unincorporated -3% | -5% Windsor 19.8 13% | 12% Cotati 20.5 Rohnert Park 20.9 Windsor -11% | -13% Healdsburg 21.6 Sonoma County 22.4 Santa Rosa Bay Area 22.7 -20% | -21% Petaluma 24.7 Sebastopol 25.2 Unincorporated 25.3 Cotati Sebastopol Sonoma 29.1 -8% | -10% 13% | 11% Rohnert Park LEGEND -6% | -8% Sonoma % vs. Sonoma County 30% | 28% % vs. Bay Area Petaluma 11% | 9% INNOVA VATION B BY

  21. Thresholds VMT  AB 32 AB 32  Gover ernor’s or’s E EOs Project’s  SB 375 T 75 Targets ‘Au Autom omobi obile’ le’  SB 743 O 43 Objectives VM VMT  Calt ltra rans S SMP P Targe rget  Loc ocal C CAP APs  ARB M Mobile bile Source OPR is basing their recommendations Strate tegy on subst stan antial ial e evidence based on adopted State plans, pending State plans, and Executive Orders of the INNOVA VATION B BY current and previous governors.

  22. Thresholds OPR GUIDANCE OPR OPR suggests a threshold of 15 percent b belo low b baselin ine (cond nditions ns when n NOP i is s relea eased ed) In general, the 15 percent reduction threshold is tied to statewide greenhouse gas reduction goals. But, thresholds in the Technical Advisory are non on-bindin ing. INNOVA VATION B BY

  23. Methods VMT FORECASTING So, it is up to the lead agency to decide on what quantification methodology they want to use (with substantial supporting evidence) Thresholds must be based on this method INNOVA VATION B BY

  24. Thresholds OPR GUIDANCE YES ES: No im impac act. No VMT Analysis NO: Further Analysis Needed. INNOVA VATION B BY

  25. Thresholds OTHER MODES AND SAFETY  Tran ansi sit Se Service ce  Bic icycle le F Facil ilit ities  Pedes estria ian F Facili lities ies  Safety Dire irect • Indire ndirect • INNOVA VATION B BY

  26. Mitigation TRIPS OR TRIP LENGTH The project needs to change in some way. INNOVA VATION B BY

  27. Mitigation BUILT ENVIRONMENT Distance Develop opment Demograph phics cs Design gn Destinations Dens De nsity Diversity to T Transit Scal ale 7Ds Ds Tha That i infl fluence T Tri rip Ge Gene neration ( (and nd VM VMT) INNOVA VATION B BY

  28. SB 743 UNCERTAINTY What about disruptive trends? INNOVA VATION B BY

  29. Examples PROJECT TYPES  16-unit it R Residen dentia ial  Auto V VMT T for home me- based t ba trips rips  Ju Just Ov Over 1 r 100 Trip rip Thre Threshold ld  Use average ge t trip rip le lengt ngth x x trip rip ge gen  Not in in TP TPA  “Spreadsheet” Ap Approach INNOVA VATION B BY

  30. Examples PROJECT TYPES  Of Offic ice B Build ildin ing  Au Auto V o VMT for work rk- based t ba trips rips fro rom  Ov Over 1 r 100 T Trip rip employees Threshold Thre ld  Ca Can u use a averages o or  Does oes n not ot m meet eet mode del ru runs ns, , scre reeni ning c crit riteri ria dep epending on on size e and c comp mplexi xity INNOVA VATION B BY

Recommend

More recommend