HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-06-16; City Council; ; Adoption of Vehicle Miles Traveled as a Significance Threshold pursuant to Senate Bill 743 and the California Environmental Quality ActCA Review __RK__
Meeting Date: June 16, 2020
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Jason Geldert, City Engineer
jason.geldert@carlsbadca.gov, 760‐602‐2758
Subject: Adoption of Vehicle Miles Traveled as a Significance Threshold pursuant to
Senate Bill 743 and the California Environmental Quality Act
Recommended Action
Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution approving the thresholds of significance for vehicle
miles traveled and the screening criteria for purposes of analyzing transportation impacts under
Senate Bill 743 and the California Environmental Quality Act.
Executive Summary
California Senate Bill 743 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law in 2013. This
legislation led to a change in the way transportation impacts will be measured under the
California Environmental Quality Act. Starting on July 1, 2020, automobile delay and level of
service may no longer be used as the performance measure to evaluate and determine the
transportation impacts of projects under the act. Instead, an alternative metric that supports
the goals of SB 743 will be required. Although there is no requirement under state law to use
any specific metric, vehicle miles traveled is the metric recommended by the governor’s Office
of Planning and Research.
Consistent with SB 743, city staff have developed local vehicle travel analysis guidelines that
comply with the CEQA requirements and follow the recommendations from the Office of
Planning and Research, with minor adjustments, as explained below. The guidelines contain
background on the use of vehicle miles traveled to evaluate transportation impacts, thresholds
of significance, screening criteria, methodologies for evaluating vehicle miles traveled for
individual projects, and guidance on vehicle miles traveled mitigation.
The proposed guidelines were presented to the Transportation and Mobility Commission on
May 4, 2020. The commission, unanimously supported staff’s proposal. It should be noted that
the vehicle miles traveled metric is only required for CEQA review. Development projects will
still be subject to mobility level of service standards to show their compliance with the city’s
General Plan and Growth Management Plan.
This matter is before the City Council because CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) requires that
thresholds of significance be adopted for general use as part of a lead agency’s environmental
review process by ordinance, resolution, rule or regulation, and developed through a public
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 1 of 221
review process and supported by substantial evidence. The information contained in this staff
report meets this requirement.
Discussion
Policy Background
California SB 743 (Exhibit 2), signed into law in 2013, initiated a significant departure from past
policy and practice regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. That bill was a response to
state emissions targets established in various Senate bills and executive orders, such as SB 32
(Exhibit 3) and Executive Order B‐30‐15 (Exhibit 4). These legislative mandates set aggressive
greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and established unique emissions benchmarks for
various years in the future.
SB 743 directed the state Office of Planning and Research to develop criteria for determining
the significance of transportation impacts of projects to align with statewide emission reduction
goals. Specifically, the criteria, as stated in the bill, promotes the reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks and a diversity of land
uses. Measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion are no longer to be considered in
evaluating and determining whether a project will have a significant impact on the
environment.
The Office of Planning and Research identified the use of vehicle miles traveled as the most
appropriate metric to use in evaluating a project’s transportation impact that aligns with the
goals of SB 743. Vehicle miles traveled refers to the amount and distance of vehicle travel that
is attributable to a specific project or geographical region over a given period. The California
Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted revisions to the CEQA guidelines based on the
office’s recommendations in December 2018 (Exhibit 5). According to the adopted guidelines,
the use of vehicle miles traveled to determine transportation impacts must begin no later than
July 1, 2020.
CEQA – Thresholds of significance and screening criteria
The California Environmental Quality Act requires government agencies to inform decision
makers and the public about the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects and to
reduce those environmental impacts to the extent feasible. The CEQA guidelines are
administrative regulations governing the implementation of CEQA and explain how to
determine whether an activity is subject to environmental review, what steps are involved in
the environmental review process, and the required content of environmental documents. The
CEQA guidelines apply to all public agencies throughout the state.
CEQA thresholds of significance
Thresholds of significance are key elements of any CEQA document, because the level at
which thresholds are established can determine whether the impacts of a project are
deemed significant, and requiring mitigation, or less than significant, and not requiring
mitigation. Thresholds of significance may be defined either as quantitative or
qualitative standards, or sets of criteria, whichever is most applicable to each specific
type of environmental impact. For example, quantitative criteria are often applied to
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 2 of 221
traffic, air quality and noise impacts, while aesthetic impacts are typically evaluated
using qualitative thresholds.
For vehicle miles traveled analyses, thresholds of significance are based on the type of
land use. For residential and office projects, the Office of Planning and Research
recommends that a project’s vehicle miles traveled per capita or per employee be
compared to the corresponding average for a larger geographical area, such as a city or
region. For retail and other projects that evaluate vehicle miles traveled on the roadway
network, the threshold is based on the change in vehicle miles traveled in the affected
area.
CEQA Screening Criteria
Screening criteria help streamline project reviews by providing cities, applicants and
public with a conservative indication of whether the proposed project could result in
potentially significant impacts. If all the screening criteria are met by a proposed project,
then the city or applicant would not need to perform a detailed vehicle miles traveled
assessment. For example, the Office of Planning and Research recommends that a
project may be presumed to not have a significant impact resulting from vehicle miles
traveled if it is near public transit, comprised entirely of affordable housing or can be
considered a small project. The developer of any project that does not meet the
screening criteria must complete a detailed vehicle miles traveled analysis and must
compare its project vehicle miles traveled to the appropriate threshold of significance.
Cities and counties have discretion to formulate their own significance thresholds and screening
criteria. Setting thresholds requires the jurisdictions to make a judgment about how to
distinguish significant impacts from less‐than‐significant impacts based on substantial evidence.
Substantial evidence means that a fair argument, based on enough relevant information and
reasonable inferences, can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions
might also be reached.
Carlsbad Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines
City staff have developed citywide vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines (attachment A to
Exhibit 1) to comply with state environmental recommendations for thresholds of significance,
to encourage consistency in vehicle miles traveled analysis across projects, and to balance the
Office of Planning and Research recommendations the with City of Carlsbad’s values. The
guidelines contain background on the use of vehicle miles traveled to evaluate transportation
impacts, thresholds of significance, screening criteria and methodologies for evaluating
individual projects, and guidance on mitigation.
Important elements of the guidelines are highlighted in the sections below.
Thresholds of significance and screening criteria
The Office of Planning and Research’s technical advisory report on evaluating
transportation impacts in state environmental regulations (Exhibit 6) was developed and
provided as a resource for cities and counties in developing vehicle miles traveled
thresholds of significance and screening criteria for their respective jurisdictions. This
resource contains recommendations regarding evaluation of vehicle miles traveled,
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 3 of 221
thresholds of significance, screening criteria and mitigation measures. It also provides
substantial evidence for its recommendations. In some cases, the office provided a
specific metric that should be applied to certain project types, i.e., 15% below regional
average vehicle miles traveled per employee. In other cases, the office provided specific
criteria that should be followed when developing a local metric. (For transportation
projects, five criteria should be met, as listed in Exhibit 1, Attachment 1, page 22.)
As detailed below, the City of Carlsbad followed the Office of Planning and Research
recommendations and criteria when developing the proposed citywide thresholds and
screening criteria, with one exception, which is briefly explained below and detailed in
the City of Carlsbad vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines. Definitions for all project
types are contained in the guidelines and supplemented by additional information in the
Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory.
Type of project Proposed threshold of significance
Residential A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per capita
exceeds a level 15% below the city average VMT per capita
Office
A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per
employee exceeds a level 15% below the regional average VMT per
employee
Regional Retail A significant transportation impact occurs if the project results in a net
increase in VMT
Industrial A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per
employee exceeds the average regional VMT per employee
Transportation A significant transportation impact occurs if the project creates a net
VMT increase in the affected area
Proposed screening criteria
Projects that generate less than 110 average daily trips
Residential, office or retail uses located within one‐half mile of a major public transit stop or a stop
along a high‐quality transit corridor
Locally serving retail uses
Residential projects made up of entirely affordable housing
Redevelopment projects that result in a net overall decrease in VMT for the site
Locally serving public‐facilities (Differs from OPR recommendations)
All screening criteria listed in OPR’s Technical Advisory for transportation projects (Exhibit 1)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 4 of 221
As noted above, staff is recommending only one difference to the Office of Planning and
Research screening criteria recommendations. That involves locally serving public
facilities. These facilities, which are not discussed in the office’s technical advisory
report, includes such uses as schools, parks, libraries and other facilities intended to
serve the local public.
However, like locally‐serving retail, locally‐serving public facilities redistribute trips
rather than create new trips. The construction of new public facilities shortens trips for
nearby community members. For those reasons, staff recommend that locally‐serving
public facilities are screened out and determined not to have a significant impact
resulting from vehicle miles traveled. It should be noted that if a proposed public facility
includes a use that may generate trips from outside the region, such as an amphitheater
or a public golf course, a study evaluating where users are coming from may be required
to demonstrate that a public facility is locally‐serving. Further evidence supporting this
deviation can be found in the City of Carlsbad vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines
(page B‐2). This screening criteria is also included in the guidelines used by both the city
and county of San Diego.
Mitigation measures
If a project is determined to have a significant transportation impact, the project can
apply vehicle miles traveled measures, also known as mitigation measures, to lower its
calculated values to a level below the significance threshold. The analysis guidelines
contain direction on methods for calculating vehicle miles traveled reductions and
appropriate applications of each mitigation measure. Typically, vehicle miles traveled
are reduced by implementing strategies that reduce the number of automobile trips or
the distance that people drive. Measures that reduce single‐occupant automobile trips
are called transportation demand management strategies and may include such
measures as ride‐sharing programs, transit passes and telecommuting.
There are a variety of mitigation measures and strategies to reduce vehicle miles
traveled depending upon the project type being proposed and the feasibility of the
measures being implemented. Builders have the flexibility to select from a variety of
measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled in a way that best fits their projects.
Generally, they may choose to use methodologies described in the California Air
Pollution Control Officers Association’s 2010 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation
Measures document (Exhibit 7) or the San Diego Association of Government’s Mobility
Management Guidebook/VMT Reduction Calculator Tool.1 Other methodologies may be
used to quantify vehicle miles traveled reductions if there is substantial evidence to
justify the calculated reduction.
Vehicle miles traveled analysis maps
CEQA guidelines allow a city or county to use models to estimate a project’s vehicle
miles traveled. Staff developed analysis maps to help an applicant quickly determine
whether a proposed project will result in a significant impact from vehicle miles traveled
in a particular area of the city. In developing these maps, staff obtained data from
1 This guidebook and calculation tool can be found at https://www.icommutesd.com/planners/TDM‐local‐
governments.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 5 of 221
regional travel demand computer models, which are managed and operated by the
SANDAG.
For small residential and office projects with under 2,400 average daily trips, the vehicle
miles traveled for the project are based on a citywide analysis of the regional travel
demand model. The city analysis provides travel data for smaller geographic areas of the
city. These geographic areas are called traffic analysis zones. The assumption for small
projects is that project vehicle miles traveled per capita or per employee can be
estimated based on the average values for those metrics in the traffic analysis zone in
which the project is located. The figure below illustrates the vehicle miles traveled that
would be associated with a project within the traffic analysis zone compared to the city
average.
Geographical Information System based maps with traffic analysis zone‐specific vehicle
miles traveled will be available for the public to use (Exhibits 9 and 10). This
methodology is consistent with the Office of Planning and Research technical advisory,
which states that new development in an area will likely result in a similar level of
vehicle miles traveled. For larger projects with over 2,400 average daily trips, a project‐
specific model run of the regional travel demand model must be used to obtain vehicle
miles traveled data for the project.
Traffic analysis zone‐level vehicle miles traveled
compared to citywide average
Traffic and Mobility Commission
On May 4, 2020, the proposed vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines were presented to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission, which unanimously supported staff’s proposal.
Following the commission meeting, staff revised the proposed significance thresholds for office
projects. Under the version presented to the commission, staff proposed that a significant
transportation impact would occur if a project’s vehicle miles traveled per employee exceeded
a level 15% below the city average per employee. It was staff’s original thought that a city
average better reflected the unique land use patterns and transit availability that affect
Carlsbad. This was a deviation from the Office of Planning and Research’s recommendations.
After further discussion and analysis, staff is recommending that the threshold be based on a
20.27 VMT/Capita
23.28 VMT/Emp
City Average
22.52 VMT/Capita 25.87 VMT/Emp
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 6 of 221
regional average considering that vehicle trips are not limited to city boundaries. A threshold
based on a regional average vehicle miles traveled per employee is consistent with the
recommendations in Office’s technical advisory report.
Next Steps
If the City Council approves, these vehicle miles traveled thresholds of significance and
screening criteria will become effective on July 1, 2020.
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) requires “thresholds of
significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review
process by ordinance, resolution, rule or regulation, and developed through a public review
process and supported by substantial evidence.” The courts have clarified that Section
15064.7(b) does not additionally require environmental review as a prerequisite for adopting
thresholds of significance. Requiring the preparation of a CEQA document would be redundant
with the public review process and substantial evidence standard already set forth in Section
15064.7. The city is meeting the requirement for public review by providing notice of the City
Council public hearing through publication in the newspaper, in accordance with Carlsbad
Municipal Code Chapter 21.54. The city provided an additional opportunity for public review
and input at the Traffic and Mobility Commission meeting held on May 4, 2020. Public notice of
the commission meeting was posted as described in the following section. City staff have also
shared the proposed thresholds and screening criteria with stakeholders, including
development project applicants and traffic consultants, and posted them on the city’s website.
The city’s thresholds of significance and screening criteria are supported by substantial
evidence as described in this report. Therefore, the city planner has determined that adoption
of the thresholds and screening criteria is not a project under Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5)
because the city is complying with the requirements of state CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.7(b) and no CEQA review is required.
Public Notification
The Office of Planning and Research performed a robust public outreach that occurred over five
years, with over 200 stakeholder meetings and other outreach events from 2013 through late
2018. Although the city of Carlsbad is following the office’s recommendations, the city
performed additional public review and outreach. Beginning in January 2020, the city reached
out to industry professionals and traffic consultants to review the initial recommendations of
the city’s thresholds and screening criteria. Information about the development of the policy
and a draft of the vehicle miles traveled guidelines was published on the city’s website and
in informational emails, with request for feedback, sent to subscribers in April 2020. In May
2020, staff presented recommendations for the new policy in a public meeting to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission. Following the commission
meeting, another informational email requesting feedback was sent to subscribers and the
feedback received is included in Exhibit 10. Public notice of this item was posted in accordance
with the Ralph M. Brown Act and in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 21.54.060 and it was available for public viewing and review at least 10 days before the
scheduled meeting.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 7 of 221
Exhibits
1. City Council resolution (includes Attachment A, Draft City of Carlsbad VMT Analysis
Guidelines)
2. Senate Bill 743
3. Senate Bill 32
4. Executive Order B‐30‐15
5. California Natural Resources Agency revisions to CEQA Guidelines
6. Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impact in
CEQA
7. Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures (California Air Pollution Control Officers
Association, 2010)
8. VMT/Capita Analysis Map
9. VMT/Employee Analysis Map
10. Public comments
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 8 of 221
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-114
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED THRESHOLDS OF
SIGNIFCANCE AND SCREENING CRITERIA FOR PUPRPOSES OF ANALYZING
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
EXHIBIT 1
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA Guidelines") encourage
public agencies to develop and publish generally applicable "thresholds of significance" to be used in
determining the significance of a project's environmental effects; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(a) defines a threshold of significance as "an
identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect,
noncompliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the
agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than
significant"; and
WHEREAS, screening criteria are applied to determine when a project should be expected to
cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(b) requires that thresholds of significance must be
adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulations, developed through a public review process, and
be supported by substantial evidence; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064. 7(c), when adopting thresholds of
significance, a public agency may consider thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by
other public agencies provided that the decision of the agency is supported by substantial evidence;
and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 743, enacted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code section
21099, required changes to the CEQA Guidelines regarding the criteria for determining the significance
of transportation impacts of projects; and
WHEREAS, in 2018, the Governor's Office of Planning and Research ("OPR") proposed, and the
California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted, new CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 that
identifies vehicle miles traveled ("VMT") -meaning the amount and distance of automobile travel
attributable to a project -as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project's transportation impacts;
and
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 9 of 221
EXHIBIT 1
WHEREAS, as a result, automobile delay, as measured by "level of service" and other similar
metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA; and
WHEREAS, CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 goes into effect on July 1, 2020, though public
agencies may elect to be governed by this section immediately; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, following internal study and a public review process consisting
of staff a presentation before the Transportation and Mobility Commission, wishes to adopt VMT
thresholds of significance for determining the significance of transportation impacts and screening
criteria; and
WHEREAS, on June 16, 2020, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this
Resolution, at which all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as
follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the City of Carlsbad hereby adopts the VMT thresholds of significance and
screening criteria for transportation impact analysis under CEQA that are included as
Attachment A. These thresholds of significance and screening criteria have been
developed through a public review process and are supported by substantial evidence,
as required by CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7.
3. This Resolution shall take effect on July 1, 2020.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 16th day of June 2020, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Hall, Blackburn, Bhat-Patel, Schumacher.
None.
None.
MATT HALL, Mayor
(SEAL)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 10 of 221
DRAFT
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT)
ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
June 2, 2020
ATTACHMENT A
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 11 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................1
1.1 SB 743 Legislation ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory ....................................... 1
1.3 Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines ....................................................................... 2
1.4 Consistency with City Goals and Policies ...................................................................................... 2
1.5 Discussion of Climate Action Plan and Transportation Demand Management Ordinance .......... 2
2 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE OF VMT ANALYSIS ..............................................................................3
2.1 Purpose of VMT Analysis............................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Purpose of VMT Analysis Guidelines............................................................................................. 3
2.3 Coordination with Other Agencies ................................................................................................ 3
2.4 Necessary Qualifications of Individuals Preparing VMT Analyses ................................................ 3
3 LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ..................................................................................................4
3.1 Overview of Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Screening Criteria .......................................................................................................................... 5
Small Projects ........................................................................................................................ 5
Projects Located Near Transit ............................................................................................... 5
Local-Serving Retail and Similar Land Uses ........................................................................... 5
Local-Serving Public Facilities ................................................................................................ 7
Affordable Housing Projects ................................................................................................. 7
Redevelopment Projects That Result in a Net Reduction of VMT ........................................ 7
3.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis .................................................................................................... 7
Single Land-Use Residential or Office Projects ..................................................................... 8
Mixed-Use Projects ............................................................................................................... 8
Redevelopment Projects ....................................................................................................... 9
Regional Retail Projects ........................................................................................................ 9
Industrial Projects ................................................................................................................. 9
3.4 Significance Thresholds ............................................................................................................... 10
3.5 Mitigation .................................................................................................................................... 10
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 12 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | ii
4 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS .................................................................................................... 11
4.1 Screening Criteria ........................................................................................................................ 11
4.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis .................................................................................................. 12
4.3 Significance Thresholds ............................................................................................................... 13
4.4 Mitigation .................................................................................................................................... 13
5 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS ........................................... 14
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 – Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis for Land Use Projects ................................................... 6
APPENDICES
Appendix A – VMT Analysis of Non-Standard Land Use Types
Appendix B – Screening Criteria and Threshold Evidence
Appendix C – Vehicel Miles Traveled Reduction Strategies and Effectiveness Calculations
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 13 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 1
1 BACKGROUND
This chapter provides background information on Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) and the need to conduct
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analyses for CEQA transportation studies.
1.1 SB 743 Legislation
SB 743 was passed by the legislature and signed into law in the fall of 2013. This legislation led to
a change in the way that transportation impacts will be measured under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Starting on July 1, 2020, automobile delay and level of service
(LOS) may no longer be used as the performance measure to determine the transportation impacts
of land development projects under CEQA. Instead, an alternative metric that supports the goals
of the SB 743 legislation will be required. Although there is no requirement to use any particular
metric, the use of VMT has been recommended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
(OPR). This requirement does not modify the discretion lead agencies have to develop their own
methodologies or guidelines, or to analyze impacts to other components of the transportation
system, such as walking, bicycling, transit, and safety. SB 743 also applies to transportation
projects, although agencies were given flexibility in the determination of the performance measure
for these types of projects.
The intent of SB 743 is to bring CEQA transportation analyses into closer alignment with other
statewide policies regarding greenhouse gases, complete streets, and smart growth. Using VMT as
a performance measure instead of LOS is intended to discourage suburban sprawl, reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, and encourage the development of smart growth, complete streets, and
multimodal transportation networks.
1.2 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory
The SB 743 legislation designated OPR to write detailed guidelines for implementation. The process
of writing guidelines started in January 2014 and concluded in 2018. SB 743 was incorporated into
CEQA by the Natural Resources Agency in December 2018 with a required implementation date of
July 1,2020. The incorporation documents included a December 2018 Technical Advisory written
by OPR which represents the current statewide guidance for the implementation of SB 743.
Under CEQA, lead agencies can determine their own methodologies and significance thresholds for
CEQA technical analyses, but they are also required to provide substantial evidence as a basis of
their decisions, if challenged. In its Technical Advisory, OPR generally provides substantial evidence
for its recommendation. However, even OPR’s recommendations are subject to challenge, and if
an agency were to rely on the Technical Advisory recommendations, that agency would need to be
prepared to defend the recommendations and produce the substantial evidence. OPR is not in a
position to defend the Technical Advisory recommendations on behalf of agencies that choose to
use it.
While OPR provides recommendations on many aspects of conducting a CEQA transportation
analysis using VMT, OPR’s guidance is not comprehensive and some key decisions are left for lead
agencies to determine.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 14 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 2
1.3 Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines
In May of 2019, the San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) prepared
an update to the regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines to incorporate SB 743. The
regional guidelines provided information on aspects of VMT analysis that were not addressed in
OPR’s Technical Advisory. In addition, the regional guidelines differed from some of the
recommendations provided by OPR to address situations local to the San Diego region. In cases
where the regional guidelines differed from OPR’s recommendations, justification was provided
that may be able to be used as substantial evidence.
The regional guidelines do not provide guidance on every aspect of SB 743 and VMT analysis. For
some key decisions, analysis is provided along with a recommendation that final decisions need to
be made by the lead agency.
The regional guidelines prepared by ITE are a technical resource that are not officially sanctioned
by any public agency. Local agencies in the San Diego region can choose to adopt all or portions of
the regional guidelines for use in their agencies and they are also able to develop their own
guidelines if desired.
1.4 Consistency with City Goals and Policies
The intent of SB 743 is directly related to three of the city’s core values as stated in the General
Plan: Walking, Biking, Public Transportation, and Connectivity; Sustainability; and Neighborhood
Revitalization, Community Design, and Livability. It is also consistent with many of the goals and
policies included in the General Plan.
In addition, SB 743 is consistent with the city’s Climate Action Plan and Transportation Management
Ordinance as described below.
1.5 Discussion of Climate Action Plan and Transportation Demand Management
Ordinance
One of the goals of the city’s Climate Action Plan is to reduce greenhouse gases. SB 743 seeks to
reduce VMT. Since the vehicle miles traveled by automobiles produce greenhouse gases, SB 743’s
goal of reducing VMT is consistent with the Climate Action Plan’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. The VMT generated by automobiles produces a substantial portion of total greenhouse
gas emissions.
The city’s Transportation Demand Management Ordinance (TDM Ordinance) seeks to reduce the
number of trips generated in the city by encouraging travelers to use ridesharing, transit, bicycling,
and walking. SB 743 seeks to reduce VMT through similar mode shifts. Therefore, the two policies
are consistent even though the TDM Ordinance uses trips as the performance measure and SB 743
uses VMT as a performance measure. Reduction in automobile traffic and a shift to other modes is
a common goal that is shared by these two policies. Additional information is provided in Section
3.5 under mitigation for land development projects and in Appendix C.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 15 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 3
2 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE OF VMT ANALYSIS
2.1 Purpose of VMT Analysis
Given the information provided in Chapter 1, the purposes of VMT analysis can be stated as follows:
VMT analysis is needed to meet statewide requirements for transportation analyses
conducted under CEQA.
VMT analysis (along with efforts to reduce VMT) can help support the City of Carlsbad’s
goals and policies related to its General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and City of Carlsbad Core
Values.
2.2 Purpose of VMT Analysis Guidelines
The VMT Analysis Guidelines provide direction to city staff, consultants, and project applicants
regarding the methodologies and thresholds to be used for VMT analysis in the City of Carlsbad.
They generally follow the state guidance provided in OPR’s Technical Advisory but add detail that
is specific to the San Diego region and the City of Carlsbad.
Although these guidelines are intended to be comprehensive, not all aspects of VMT analysis can
be addressed in a single document. City staff will need to use judgment in applying these guidelines
to specific projects and situations. Exceptions and additions to the guidelines will need to occur on
a case-by-case basis.
2.3 Coordination with Other Agencies
Preparation of a VMT analysis will require coordination with other agencies as follows:
• Caltrans will review and provide comments on certain VMT analyses, particularly if the
project requires a Caltrans encroachment permit or if it is considered to have a substantial
effect on state highway facilities.
• Coordination with SANDAG will be needed if a model run of the SANDAG regional travel
model is required.
• Coordination with the North County Transit District (NCTD) will be needed if project
mitigation measures related to transit are proposed.
• Detailed coordination with adjacent cities and the County of San Diego will not normally be
required unless a proposed mitigation measure crosses jurisdictional boundaries.
2.4 Necessary Qualifications of Individuals Preparing VMT Analyses
Normally, a VMT analysis would be prepared under the direction of an individual who is a licensed
Traffic Engineer in the State of California or who has equivalent knowledge and experience.
Individuals who have equivalent level of knowledge and experience should contact City of Carlsbad
staff for approval prior to preparing a VMT analysis.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 16 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 4
3 LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
This chapter provides guidance on conducting VMT analyses for land development projects, including
single-use projects, mixed-use projects, and redevelopment projects.
3.1 Overview of Analysis
The City of Carlsbad generally follows the VMT analysis methodology recommended in OPR’s
Technical Advisory. OPR recommends analyzing VMT for most residential and office projects based
on efficiency metrics. Projects evaluated in this way are analyzed using VMT/capita or
VMT/employee rather than total VMT.
For large projects (over 2,400 average daily trips), a model run of the regional travel model operated
by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is used to determine the project’s
VMT/capita or VMT/employee. For projects (under 2,400 average daily trips), VMT/capita and
VMT/employee are also based on the regional travel model. However, rather than using an
individual model run for each project, VMT/capita and VMT/employee are determined from maps
prepared by the City of Carlsbad using output from the model. The VMT analysis maps show
VMT/capita and VMT/employee for each traffic analysis zone (TAZ) in the city. TAZ’s are
geographical areas of varying size set up in the regional travel model. The assumption for small
projects is that project VMT/capita or VMT/employee can be estimated based on the average
VMT/capita or VMT/employee for the TAZ in which it is located. In some cases, TAZ’s do not have
sufficient existing development to form the basis for VMT calculations. In these cases, the VMT is
determined based on the census tract in which the TAZ is located. Census tracts are larger
geographic areas that typically contain several TAZ’s.
Project trip generation should normally be determined using the SANDAG trip generation guide
(Not So Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates in the San Diego Region, April 2002). Other
reliable sources, such as the current edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip
Generation Manual may be used in cases where the SANDAG trip generation guide has insufficient
information for a particular land use type. Reductions for internal trips and pass-by trips (if
appropriate) should be made prior to determination of project trip generation. If a project’s total
trip generation exceeds 2,400 daily trips but is reduced below this value after taking into account
internal trips and pass-by trips, it would not require a model run.
The more detailed process described above for calculating project VMT/capita and VMT/employee
values is recommended in the San Diego Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
Thresholds of significance for VMT analysis are also based on OPR’s recommendations, but some
refinements have been made to reflect regional and local conditions:
OPR recommends that a residential project may have a significant impact if its VMT/capita
exceeds a level 15% below the regional or city VMT/capita. The City of Carlsbad uses the
same threshold but only uses a comparison to city VMT/capita.
OPR recommends that a residential project may have a significant impact if its
VMT/employee exceeds a level 15% below regional VMT/employee. This threshold is also
used by the City of Carlsbad.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 17 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 5
OPR recommends that a regional retail project may have a significant impact if causes a net
increase in total VMT. This threshold is also used by the City of Carlsbad.
OPR does not recommend a specific threshold for industrial projects. In the City of
Carlsbad, an industrial project has a significant impact if its VMT/employee exceeds the
regional average VMT/employee. It should be noted that goods movement is not subject
to VMT analysis. Therefore, goods movement trips associated with an industrial project
would not be included when determining VMT/employee.
Figure 3-1 shows a flow chart that summarizes the VMT analysis process.
3.2 Screening Criteria
Following is a description of projects that would have a less than significant transportation impact
due to project type or location. If a project meets at least one of the following screening criteria, it
would not require a detailed VMT analysis. However, a discussion summarizing the applicability of
relevant screening criteria is required. Further details on screening criteria can be found in OPR’s
Technical Advisory.
Small Projects
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory, projects that generate less than 110 ADT would be presumed
to have a less than significant transportation impact. Projects that can demonstrate that
they would generate an ADT of less than 110 after applying trip-reduction strategies would
be screened out from performing additional analysis.
Projects Located Near Transit
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory, residential, retail, or office projects or projects that have a
mix of those uses whose project site boundaries are within one half mile of an existing or
planned major transit stop or a stop/transit center along a high-quality transit corridor
would normally be presumed to have a less than significant transportation impact. In the
City of Carlsbad, this would apply to projects within one half mile of the Carlsbad Village or
Carlsbad Poinsettia Coaster stations, as well as projects within one-half mile of the Plaza
Camino Real transit center. Certain types of projects that are located near transit would
not have a presumption of a less than significant transportation impact even if located near
transit. This would include, for example, projects with low density or high levels of parking.
OPR Technical Advisory includes additional detail on determining the status of projects
located near transit.
Local-Serving Retail and Similar Land Uses
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory, local-serving retail uses are presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT since they tend to attract trips from adjacent areas that would
have otherwise been made to more distant retail locations.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 18 of 221
Figure 3-1
VMT Analysis for Land Development Projects
Daily Project Trips
VMT impacts presumed to be less than significant for certain projects, including local-serving retail projects, affordable
housing projects, and projects within transit priority areas. See section 3.2
1.
0 - 110 ADT
VMT Analysis Methodology Level of Significance and Mitigations
Less than significant Impact
110 - 2,400 ADT
Use Carlsbad
VMT Analysis
Maps
Below Threshold
Exceeds Threshold
Less than significant Impact
Mitigate to Below Threshold?
>2,400 ADT
Run SANDAG
Model
Less Than
Significant
Impact
Significant
Impact
YES NO
Project Screening
Yes
No
Is project screened out
from VMT analysis due
to project type or
location?
Regional retail and regional public facilities would use a model run even if ADT is between 110 and 2,400.2.
1
2June 16, 2020Item #7 Page 19 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 7
In the City of Carlsbad, local-serving retail is defined as retail development that is less than
50,000 sq. ft. or retail development greater than 50,000 sq. ft. with an approved market
study indicating that it serves primarily local uses.
Local-Serving Public Facilities
Similar to retail land uses, local-serving public facilities are presumed to have a less than
significant impact on VMT. This would include government facilities intended to serve the
local public, parks, and public elementary schools, public middle schools, and public high
schools. A study evaluating the user capture area may be required in order to demonstrate
that a public facility is local-serving. Typically, private schools, charter schools, or public
facilities with unique uses will be required to provide a user capture area study. See
Appendix A for evaluating regional-serving public facilities.
Affordable Housing Projects
OPR’s Technical Advisory allows for a less than significant finding for transportation impacts
of residential projects that are 100% affordable housing located in infill areas. Affordable
housing projects in the City of Carlsbad could use this recommendation if they demonstrate
that they are located in infill areas based on urban planning considerations.
Redevelopment Projects That Result in a Net Reduction of VMT
Per CEQA, projects are considered to have a less than significant impact if they result in a
net reduction in the relevant performance measure (in this case VMT). Therefore,
redevelopment projects in the City of Carlsbad that generate less VMT than the existing
project they are replacing would be considered to have a less than significant impact on
VMT. Since VMT/capita and VMT/employee are efficiency metrics, a redevelopment
project that would produce more VMT than the existing project it is replacing would need
to conduct a VMT analysis assuming the proposed land use (with no credit taken for the
existing land use) to determine whether the proposed project meets the applicable
significance thresholds).
Mixed-use projects located in efficient VMT areas would be considered to have a less than
significant impact for the entire project if each component of the project was shown to be
below relevant VMT significance thresholds. Otherwise a VMT analysis would need to be
conducted to determine the level of significance.
3.3 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
For projects that do not meet the criteria listed above, a detailed VMT analysis would be needed.
This section provides guidance on how a VMT analysis would be conducted for various types of land
development projects. See Appendix A or consult city staff for project types that are not listed
below.
The methodology described below applies to projects that are consistent with the General Plan and
are evaluated using efficiency metrics (VMT/capita and VMT/employee). For projects that are
inconsistent with the General Plan or are evaluated using total VMT, a cumulative VMT analysis
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 20 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 8
may be required. Consultation with city staff should be conducted in these cases to determine the
appropriate VMT analysis methodology.
Single Land-Use Residential or Office Projects
Typical residential or office single land-use projects generating less than 2,400 ADT would
use the City of Carlsbad VMT/capita and VMT/employee analysis maps and would
determine VMT/capita or VMT/employee for the traffic analysis zone in which the project
is located. If the project VMT/capita or VMT/employee exceeds the corresponding
threshold of significance, a significant impact would be indicated. Mitigation measures
would then be considered.
Typical single land-use projects generating more than 2,400 ADT would use a model run of
the SANDAG regional travel demand model with the project to determine the project’s
VMT/capita or VMT/employee. If the resulting VMT/capita or VMT/employee exceeds the
corresponding threshold of significance, a significant impact would be indicated. Mitigation
measures would then be considered.
Mixed-Use Projects
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory, VMT analysis for mixed-use projects would be conducted by
analyzing each individual land use independently and applying the significance threshold
for each project type. Internal capture should be considered in the evaluation of each use.
The Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines provide one methodology for
accounting for internal capture, which is described as follows. However, any method used
to evaluate a mixed-project is required to be based on substantial evidence.
Mixed-use projects that generate more than 2,400 daily trips would use a model run of the
SANDAG regional travel demand model with the project to determine VMT/capita or
VMT/employee. Typically, the model would be set up so that the project has its own TAZ’s
and each land use within the project would have its own TAZ. The model would calculate
VMT/employee and VMT/capita values for each land use.
When the project generates less than 2,400 daily trips, the city’s VMT analysis maps may
be used for VMT analysis of mixed-use projects. The following approach can be considered
based on the methodology for VMT reduction of mixed-use projects provided in the
Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines:
1. Determine the percentage in VMT due to internal capture based on guidance provided
in the ITE Trip Generation manual, MXD methodologies or other techniques. An
approximation to convert reduction in external vehicle trips to VMT may be required.
If necessary, the resulting internal capture percentage should be reduced to match the
maximum recommended in CAPCOA guidance (see Appendix C).
2. Determine the total project mixed-use VMT for residential, office, and industrial land
uses (local-serving retail and similar uses will skip this step). This can be calculated by
multiplying the zonal VMT/capita or VMT/employee by the number of residents or
employees expected to be present at the project site.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 21 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 9
3. Allocate the reduction in total VMT to residential, office, and industrial land uses. The
reduction in VMT should be allocated to individual land uses using the analyst’s
judgement. After allocating the reduction in VMT to each land use, determine
VMT/capita and VMT/employee values by dividing total VMT for each land use by the
number of residents or employees expected to occur with that land use.
4. After conducting this calculation, if all land uses are below the appropriate thresholds,
the project can presume a less than significant transportation impact. If not, mitigation
measures can be considered.
Redevelopment Projects
Redevelopment projects that do not meet the screening criteria above would need to
conduct a VMT analysis to determine whether they meet the appropriate significance
thresholds based on the project type. For analysis that uses efficiency metrics, it would be
based solely on the characteristics of the new project to be developed without any
consideration of the development that is being replaced.
Regional Retail Projects
All retail projects that do not meet the screening criteria above are considered regional
retail projects and require a model run. Regional retail projects that result in a net increase
in VMT compared to the no project condition would have a significant transportation
impact.
Industrial Projects
For the purposes of VMT analysis, industrial projects include establishment whose primary
purpose is the manufacture of goods. The ITE Trip Generation manual can be used as a
guide in determining which projects are industrial versus other land use types. The manual
includes the following categories of development as industrial:
General Light Industrial
Manufacturing
Warehousing (including high-cube warehouses, parcel hubs, fulfillment centers,
and cold storage warehouses)
Data Center
Utility
Special Trade Contractor
Typical industrial projects generating less than 2,400 ADT would use the City of Carlsbad
VMT/employee analysis maps and would determine VMT/employee for the traffic analysis
zone in which the project is located. If the project VMT/employee exceeds the regional
average VMT/employee, a potentially significant impact would be indicated. Mitigation
measures would then be considered.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 22 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 10
Typical industrial projects generating more than 2,400 ADT would use a model run of the
SANDAG regional travel demand model with the project to determine VMT/employee. If
the resulting VMT/employee exceeds the regional average VMT/employee, a potentially
significant impact would be indicated. Mitigation measures would then be considered.
It should be noted that goods movement is not subject to VMT analysis. Therefore, goods
movement trips associated with an industrial project would not be included when
determining VMT/employee.
3.4 Significance Thresholds
Significance thresholds for land development projects are summarized below. Additional
discussion and substantial evidence can be found in Appendix B.
Residential Projects: A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per
capita exceeds a level 15% below the city average VMT per capita
Office Projects: A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per employee
exceeds a level 15% below the regional average VMT per employee
Regional Retail Projects: A significant transportation impact occurs if the project results in
a net increase in VMT
Industrial Projects: A significant transportation impact occurs if the project VMT per
employee exceeds the average regional VMT per employee
City average VMT per capita and regional average VMT per employee values are determined using
the SANDAG regional travel demand model. The appropriate values can be obtained from the City
of Carlsbad analysis maps.
3.5 Mitigation
Projects can apply VMT reductions to lower their calculated resident VMT/capita or employee
VMT/employee below the significance threshold. Typically, VMT is reduced by implementing
strategies that achieve one of the following:
Reducing the number of automobile trips generated by the project or by the residents or
employees of the project.
Reducing the distance that people drive.
Measures that reduce single occupant automobile trips or reduce travel distances are called
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies. Several TDM strategies applied in
combination is referred to as a TDM plan or program. TDM strategies are included as part of the
City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan (see Section 4.8 of the Climate Action Plan) that provides a
long-range approach to reduce Carlsbad’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. By reducing
transportation VMT, TDM measures contribute to reduced GHG emissions.
See Appendix C for additional information on mitigation measures for land development projects.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 23 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 11
4 TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS
SB 743 also applies to transportation projects, which are projects that improve transportation facilities for
any mode of travel. Per revised CEQA Section 15064.3, lead agencies have the discretion to continue
using level of service and delay as the performance measure to determine the impacts of transportation
projects or to choose a different performance measure. As recommended in OPR’s Technical Advisory,
the City of Carlsbad has decided to use VMT as the performance measure for transportation projects.
4.1 Screening Criteria
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory, certain types of transportation projects are presumed to have a less than
significant impact on transportation. These include the following:
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,
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 as 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 one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety
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
Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially
improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit
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
Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles
Reduction in number of through lanes
Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a
lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles
Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal
Priority (TSP) features
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 24 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 12
Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs
and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow
Timing of signals to optimize 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 new transit service
Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in 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 vehicle capacity
Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within
existing public rights-of-way
Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-
motorized travel
Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure
Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do
not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor
4.2 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis
For projects that do require VMT analysis, the typical approach would be to use the SANDAG
regional travel model and compare a model run without the project to a model run with the project
and determine the net change in total VMT. Any net increase in VMT would result in a significant
impact. It may also be possible to manually calculate VMT for a small-scale transportation project
if the size of the project would so small as to be inappropriate for inclusion in a regional travel
model.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 25 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 13
4.3 Significance Thresholds
The significance thresholds for transportation projects is the following:
Transportation Projects: A significant transportation impact occurs if the project results in
a net increase in VMT
4.4 Mitigation
Guidance on mitigation measures for transportation projects may be found in OPR’s Technical
Advisory or the San Diego Regional Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 26 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | 14
5 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES FOR VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS
This chapter provides locations of websites that can be used to locate additional resources that may be
useful in conducting VMT analyses in the City of Carlsbad:
• City of Carlsbad VMT Analysis Maps: (Link to city web page to be added later)
• Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (ORP): http://www.opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/sb-
743/
• California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). This organization has provided
one of the most widely used resources for VMT mitigation (Quantifying Greenhouse Gas
Mitigation Measures, August2010). It can be found at the following website:
http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-
Final.pdf
• SANDAG Mobility Management Project and VMT Reduction Tool:
https://www.icommutesd.com/planners/tdm-local-governments
• Caltrans SB 743 Website: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/transportation-planning/office-of-smart-
mobility-climate-change/sb-743
• San Diego Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers and the San Diego Regional
Transportation Impact Study Guidelines: https://sandiegoite.org/tcm-task-force
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 27 of 221
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
APPENDIX A
VMT ANALYSIS
FOR NON-
STANDARD LAND
USE TYPES
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 28 of 221
TABLE A-1: VMT ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE NON-STANDARD LAND USE TYPES
LAND USE TYPE BASIS FOR VMT ANALYSIS (1)
Religious (Local-Serving) See local-serving retail
Religious (Regional) See regional retail
Education (Local-Serving) See local-serving public facilities
Education (Regional) See regional retail
Hotel See office
Medical Office See office
Hospital or Regional-Service Medical See office
Regional-Serving Public Facilities See regional retail
Theme Parks See regional retail
(1) Check with city staff for guidance prior to conducting VMT analysis for the analysis of non-
standard land use types. For project types not listed above, the County of San Diego
Transportation Study Guidelines can be considered.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 29 of 221
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
APPENDIX B
SCREENING
CRITERIA AND
THRESHOLD
EVIDENCE
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 30 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-1
SCREENING CRITERIA AND THRESHOLD EVIDENCE
This appendix provides context and evidence for the screening criteria and threshold evidence included
in Chapters 3 for Land Development Projects and Chapter 4 for Transportation Projects.
Screening Criteria
Certain types of development projects are presumed to have less than significant impacts to the
transportation system, and therefore would not be required to conduct a VMT analysis, if any of the
following criteria are established, based on substantial evidence.
Small Projects
Small projects that would generate less than 110 average daily vehicle trips (ADT), would also not result
in significant transportation impacts on the transportation system:
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory states that “projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips
per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-significant impact.” This is supported by the fact
that CEQA provides a categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures
of up to 10,000 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to
allow for maximum planned development, and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area.
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15301(e)(2).) Typical project types for which trip generation increases relatively
linearly with building footprint (e.g., general office building, single tenant office building, office park, or
business park) generate or attract an additional 110- 124 trips per 10,000 square feet. Therefore, absent
substantial evidence otherwise, it is reasonable to conclude that the addition of 110 or fewer trips could
be considered not to lead to a significant impact.
Projects Located Near Transit
Per OPR’s Technical Advisory projects whose project site boundaries are within a half mile of an existing
or planned major transit stop or a major stop along a high-quality transit corridor can be screened out of
VMT analysis. Withing the City of Carlsbad, this would apply to projects within one half mile of the
Carlsbad Village or Carlsbad Poinsettia Coaster stations, as well as projects within one-half mile of the
Plaza Camino Real transit center. This presumption would not apply, however, if project-specific or
location-specific information indicates that the project will still generate significant levels of VMT.
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory states that “Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3,
subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including
residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½
mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor will have a
less-than-significant impact on VMT. This presumption would not apply, however, if project-specific or
location-specific information indicates that the project will still generate significant levels of VMT.” Pub.
Resources Code, § 21064.3 clarifies the definition of a major transit stop (“ ‘Major transit stop’ means a
site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service,
or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or
less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”). Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 clarifies
the definition of a major transit stop (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 31 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-2
a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak
commute hours..”).
Local-Serving Retail and Similar Uses
Local-serving retail is defined in the City of Carlsbad as retail that is less than 50,000 square feet of total
gross floor area or retail development that is greater than 50,000 square feet that has a market area study
showing a market capture area that is primarily within Carlsbad and the adjacent cities of Oceanside, Vista,
San Marcos, and Encinitas.
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “because new retail development typically
redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips, estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the
difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a
retail project’s transportation impacts.” Local serving retail generally shortens trips as longer trips from
regional retail are redistributed to new local retail. The OPR Technical Advisory states that stores larger
than 50,000 square feet may be considered regional-serving. Since the type of retail influences whether
it will be locally serving or retail serving (for example grocery, drug stores, convenience stores, etc.) and
the size of these facilities may be above 50,000 square feet, an applicant can provide a market survey
demonstrating that the project serves the local community if it is over 50,000 square feet.
Local-Serving Public Facilities
Similar to local-serving retail, local-serving public facilities serve the community and either produce very
low VMT or divert existing trips from established local facilities.
Evidence – Similar to local serving retail, local serving public facilities would redistribute trips and would
not create new trips. Thus, similar to local serving retail, trips are generally shortened as longer trips from
a regional facility are redistributed to the local serving public facility. The evidence from the OPR Technical
Advisory described above also applies to local-serving public facilities.
Affordable Housing Projects
Residents of affordable residential projects typically generate less VMT than residents in market rate
residential projects. This pattern is particularly evident in affordable residential projects near transit. In
recognition of this effect, and in accordance with the OPR Technical Advisory, deed- restricted affordable
housing projects meet the City’s screening criteria and would not require a VMT analysis.
Projects that provide affordable housing affordable to persons with a household income equal to or less
than 50 percent of the area median income as defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 50093,
housing for senior citizens (as defined in Section 143.0720(e)), housing for transitional foster youth,
disabled veterans, or homeless persons (as defined in 143.0720(f)) are not required to complete a VMT
analysis.
Evidence –Affordable residential projects generate fewer trips than market rate residential projects. This
supports the assumption that the rate of vehicle ownership is expected to be less for persons that qualify
for affordable housing. Additionally, senior citizens, transitional foster youth, disabled veterans, and
homeless individuals also have low vehicle ownership rates.
Redevelopment Projects That Cause a Net Reduction in VMT
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 32 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-3
A redevelopment project that demonstrates that the total project VMT is less than the existing land use’s
total VMT is not required to complete a VMT analysis.
Evidence – Consistent with the OPR Technical Advisory, “[w]here a project replaces existing VMT-
generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall decrease in VMT, the project would lead to
a less-than-significant transportation impact. If the project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the
thresholds described above should apply.” Per CEQA, projects are considered to have a less than
significant impact if they result in a net reduction in the relevant performance measure.
Thresholds
If a project is required to complete a VMT analysis, the project’s impacts to the transportation system
would be significant if the VMT would exceed any of the thresholds below.
Residential Projects
Threshold – 15% below city average household VMT/Capita.
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “residential development that would generate vehicle
travel that is 15 or more percent below the existing residential VMT per capita, measured against the
region or city, may indicate a less-than-significant transportation impact.”
Office/Employment Projects
Threshold – 15% below regional average VMT/Employee.
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “office projects that would generate vehicle travel
exceeding 15 percent below existing VMT per employee for the region may indicate a significant
transportation impact.”
Industrial Projects
Threshold – Above the regional average VMT/employee
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “[o]f land use projects, residential, office, and retail
projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT. For that reason, OPR recommends the quantified
thresholds described above for purposes of analysis and mitigation. Lead agencies, using more location-
specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use
types.” Purely industrial uses are desired to be located in locations that are less dense and not within urban
areas which typically have higher VMT per employee. Industrial land uses are land intensive; therefore,
placing industrial land uses in less urban areas characterized by having higher VMT per employee allows
land in efficient VMT areas to be more effectively utilized as high density residential and commercial uses.
This threshold is consistent with achieving an overall reduction in VMT. It recognizes that industrial uses,
which generate relatively lower total VMT are most appropriate in areas that have a lower potential to
reduce VMT. This allows more available land within areas with a high potential to achieve VMT reductions
available for more dense development.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 33 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-4
Regional Retail
Regional retail uses are retail uses that are larger than 50,000 square feet of total gross floor area and do
not have a market study indicating that they are local-serving.
Threshold – A net increase in total regional VMT
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory provides that “because new retail development typically
redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips, estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the
difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a
retail project’s transportation impacts…Regional-serving retail development,… which can lead to
substitution of longer trips for shorter ones, may tend to have a significant impact. Where such
development decreases VMT, lead agencies should consider the impact to be less-than- significant.”
Transportation Project Screening Criteria
This section provides a list of transportation projects that are presumed to have a less than significant
impact, and therefore, would not be required to conduct VMT analysis.
Project types that would not result in increased vehicle travel have a less than significant impact and can
be screened out from performing VMT analysis. These types of projects include:
Rehabilitation/maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity
Addition of bicycle facilities
Intersection traffic signal improvements/turn-lane configuration changes
Additional capacity on local/collector streets if conditions are substantially improved for active
transportation modes
Installation of roundabouts and traffic calming devices
The following specific project types are presumed to have a less than significant impact to VMT:
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,
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 as 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 one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 34 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-5
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
Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially
improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit
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
Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles
Reduction in number of through lanes
Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a
lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles
Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal
Priority (TSP) features
Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs
and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow
Timing of signals to optimize 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 new transit service
Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in 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 vehicle capacity
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 35 of 221
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines | B-6
Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within
existing public rights-of-way
Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-
motorized travel
Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure
Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do
not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor
Evidence – The list above is consistent with recommendations in the OPR Technical Advisory that indicates
projects that can be presumed to have a less than significant impact on VMT due to overall project
characteristics.
Threshold
For transportation projects, significant impact occurs if the project results in a net increase in VMT.
Evidence – Use of any net increase in the performance measure (in this case VMT) is considered to be the
most conservative possible threshold possible under CEQA, assuming that any degradation in the
performance measure cause a significant impact. In the OPR Technical Advisory, the determination of a
performance measure for transportation projects is left to the discretion of the lead agency.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 36 of 221
APPENDIX C
VEHICLE MILES
TRAVELED
REDUCTION
STRATEGIES AND
EFFECTIVENESS
CALCULATIONS
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 37 of 221
VMT REDUCTION STRATEGIES UNDER CEQA
Projects can apply VMT reductions to lower their calculated VMT to below the significance threshold.
Typically, VMT is reduced by implementing strategies that achieve one of the following:
• Reducing the number of automobile trips generated by the project or by the residents or
employees of the project.
• Reducing the distance that people drive.
Measures that reduce single occupant automobile trips or reduce travel distances are called
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies. Several TDM strategies applied in combination
is referred to as a TDM plan or program. TDM strategies are included as part of the City of Carlsbad
Climate Action Plan (see Section 4.8 of the Climate Action Plan) that provides a long-range approach to
reduce Carlsbad’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. By reducing transportation VMT, TDM measures
contribute to reduced GHG emissions.
QUANTIFYING TDM EFFECTIVENESS
To be effective mitigation measures, TDM strategies must have sufficient evidence to quantify the level
of VMT reduction that a strategy could achieve for a given project site. In general, the TDM strategies
can be quantified using the methodologies described in Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation
Measures (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), 2010) or the SANDAG Mobility
Management Guidebook/VMT Reduction Calculator Tool; however, there are some important
limitations for project site applications and combining strategies as explained below. Other
methodologies may be used to quantify VMT reductions provided there is substantial evidence to justify
the calculated reduction. All assumptions regarding participation, eligibility, and other variables should
be clearly documented for each proposed TDM strategy.
Table 1 identifies common TDM measures that are included in the CAPCOA report, the SANDAG
calculator tool, the City of Carlsbad TDM Menu of Options (from the Citywide TDM Program), or that
have been observed in other jurisdictions within the County of San Diego. This table provides a
description of each measure with example applications where applicable, notes on which measures
must be grouped with others to be effective, a range of effectiveness (if available), and guidance for the
application of each measure for VMT reduction.
Some of the TDM strategies can be combined with others to increase the effectiveness of VMT
mitigation; however, the interaction between the various strategies is complex and sometimes
counterintuitive. As described in the CAPCOA report, strategy effectiveness levels are not directly
additive, and when determining the overall VMT reduction, the VMT reduction separately calculated for
each individual strategy (within their overall TDM strategy category) should be dampened, or
diminished, according to a multiplicative formula to account for the fact that some of the strategies may
be redundant or applicable to the same populations. Ultimately, the intent of this dampening is to
provide a mechanism for minimizing the possibility of overstating VMT reduction effectiveness. To
quantify the VMT reduction that results from combining strategies, the formula below can be applied
absent additional knowledge or information:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 38 of 221
𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅𝑇𝑇𝑅𝑅 = (1 − 𝑃𝑃a) ∗ (1 – 𝑃𝑃b) ∗ (1 – 𝑃𝑃c) ∗ …
Where: 𝑃𝑃x = percent reduction of each VMT reduction strategy
For example, if two strategies were proposed with corresponding VMT reductions of 20 percent and 10
percent, the equation would be [1-(1-20%)*(1-10%)] or [1-(80%*90%)], which equates to a 28 percent
reduction rather than the 30 percent reduction that would otherwise result from a direct sum. This
adjustment methodology is simply a mathematical approach to dampening the potential effectiveness
and is not supported by research related to the actual effectiveness of combined strategies. As noted
above, this approach minimizes possibility of overstating VMT reduction effectiveness.
When calculating the VMT reduction of a combination of strategies, the effectiveness of each strategy
should be calculated using the same method consistently. For example, the effectiveness of a program
with both parking policies and a carpool program should not calculate the reduction due to parking
using the CAPCOA formula and the reduction due to carpooling using the SANDAG calculator tool.
Instead, the same tool should be applied to all strategies before determining the total VMT reduction by
using the dampening equation.
While the SANDAG calculator tool includes this dampening equation for determining combined VMT
effectiveness, the calculator tool has other limitations that must be noted. For one, the SANDAG
calculator tool is divided into two scales: 1) Project scale and 2) Community/City scale. The calculator
tool does not allow for community/city level strategies to be applied at the project scale, which limits
project scale strategies to: employer commute programs, land use strategies (mixed-use development
and transit-oriented development), and parking (parking cash-out and pricing). Furthermore, care must
be taken when utilizing the calculator tool because the tool can result in very large VMT reductions for
certain strategies, including in suburban contexts. The calculator tool does not account for the category
and global maximum reductions that are reasonable for a project based on the land use context, as
CAPCOA does (see CAPCOA report page 55).
Per CAPCOA, category-specific maximum reasonable VMT reductions are identified depending on the
surrounding land use of a project. For the City of Carlsbad, which is comprised mostly of suburban land
uses, CAPCOA indicates that the combination of any land uses strategies is expected to provide a
maximum feasible combined reduction of 5 percent. Similar maximums are provided for each category
of measures, as well as for combined effectiveness across categories. Within Carlsbad, the combination
of all measures is expected to have a maximum feasible overall reduction of 20 percent. For a TDM
Program consisting of many measures, care must be taken to verify that the calculated VMT reductions
account for these maximums within each category and combined effectiveness across categories.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 39 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Employment Measures
Voluntary Employer Commute Program
A multi-strategy program implemented by employers on a voluntary basis. The program includes:
• Carpooling encouragement
• Ride-matching assistance
• Preferential carpool parking
• Flexible works schedules for carpools
• Half time transportation coordinator
• Vanpool assistance
• Bicycle end-trip facilities
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-1 Project-Level
1.0-6.2% (CAPCOA) Up to 6.2% (SANDAG)
The TDM calculation should be based on the effectiveness of the program and not each individual measure to avoid double-counting. Also, either but not both of a Voluntary and Mandatory Program should be applied to prevent double-counting.
The SANDAG Tool ensures that double-counting does not occur with individual carpool, vanpool, or transit subsidy mitigation measures. The SANDAG Tool also ensures that double-counting does not occur between multi-strategy programs by requiring that either but not both of a Voluntary and Mandatory Program be selected. Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Mandatory Employer Commute Program
A similar program to the Voluntary one described above, but where participation is required. A reduction goal is specified, and ongoing monitoring and reporting assesses the program’s effectiveness. It is noted that the City of Carlsbad TDM Ordinance does not qualify as a mandatory employer commute program because employees are not necessarily required to participate in the provided TDM program under the Ordinance.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-2 Project-Level
4.2-21.0% (CAPCOA) Up to 26.0% (SANDAG)
The TDM calculation should be based on the effectiveness of the program and not each individual measure to avoid double-counting. Also, either but not both of a Voluntary and Mandatory Program should be applied to prevent double-counting.
The SANDAG Tool ensures that double-counting does not occur with individual carpool, vanpool, or transit subsidy mitigation measures. The SANDAG Tool also ensures that double-counting does not occur between multi-strategy programs by requiring that either but not both of a Voluntary and Mandatory Program be selected. However, the tool allows a maximum reduction of 26 percent for this measure, which exceeds the maximum feasible reduction for a suburban area (20 percent) as provided by the CAPCOA report. Also note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Telecommuting and Alternative Work Schedules
This strategy relies on effective internet access and speeds to individual project sites/buildings to provide the opportunity for telecommuting. The effectiveness of the strategy depends on the ultimate building tenants and this should be a factor in considering the potential VMT reduction. Example applications include: telework, compressed work week, staggered shifts.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-6 Project-Level X
0.07-5.50% (CAPCOA) Up to 44.0% (SANDAG)
The SANDAG tool allows a maximum reduction of 44 percent for this measure, which exceeds the maximum feasible reduction for a suburban area (20 percent) as provided by the CAPCOA report. Also note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 40 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Price Workplace Parking
Implement workplace parking via charging for parking, charge above market rate pricing, and/or validating parking for guests. Reductions apply only if complementary strategies are in place to limit spill-over to on-street parking. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-14 Project-Level X
0.1-19.7% (CAPCOA) Up to 7.5% (SANDAG)
The SANDAG Tool ensures that double-counting does not occur with Voluntary or Mandatory Commute Programs. Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Employee Parking Cashout
Provide employees with a choice of forgoing parking for a cash payment equivalent to the cost of the parking space to the employer. Reductions apply only if complementary strategies are in place to limit spill-over to on-street parking. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-15 Project-Level X
0.6-7.7% (CAPCOA) Up to 12.0% (SANDAG)
The SANDAG Tool ensures that double-counting does not occur with Voluntary or Mandatory Commute Programs. Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Bike Parking in Non-Residential Projects
Provide short-term and long-term bicycle parking facilities to meet peak season demand.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-6 X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Improve Design of Development (LUT-9) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Market Pricing for Public Parking (On-Street)
Implement a pricing strategy for on-street parking near the project for all CBD/employment center/retail center on-street parking. Pricing should be designed to encourage “park once” behavior. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Retail Office Mixed-Use PDT-3 2.8-5.5%
Note that this measure is only effective if spillover parking is controlled (i.e., residential permits). This measure may not be effective in areas outside of central business/activity centers.
Subsidize Walking Expenses
Subsidize walking expenses in order to encourage employees to walk. Example applications include reimbursing cost of shoes, reflective vests, headlamps/flashlight.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Subsidize Bicycle Expenses
Subsidize bicycling expenses in order to encourage employees to bike. Example applications include monetary contributions for bikes, bike repair, helmets, reflective vests, etc.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Commuter Recognition Program
Implement a program to track employee commute trips and recognize top commuters with prizes, newsletter features, and email blasts.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Promotional Events
Participate and promote regional events that encourage alternative commute options, and possibly organize worksite events in parallel with regional events.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Raffle Contests Reward employees who commute using alternate modes by entering them into raffle drawings for prizes.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 41 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH)
Refer individuals to iCommute to sign up for the program for employees who use non-driving for their commute to have a safety net when they have an emergency.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Pre-Tax Commuter Benefits Allow employees to set aside pre-tax income for qualified commute expenses.
Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Residential Measures
Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing
Provide affordable housing, which provides greater opportunity for lower income families to live closer to jobs centers and achieve jobs/housing match near transit, and allows a greater number of families to be accommodated within a given building footprint.
Residential Mixed-Use LUT-6 0.04-1.2%
School Pool Program
Provide a ridesharing program for school children who do not currently have access to school bus service due to location or type of school.
Residential Mixed-Use TRT-10 7.2-15.8% Note that this measure’s effectiveness only applies to school-related VMT.
School Bus Program Coordinate with school district to expand school bus service to the project site. Residential Mixed-Use TRT-13 38.0-63.0% Note that this measure’s effectiveness only applies to school-related VMT.
Bike Parking with Multi-Unit Residential Projects
Provide long-term bicycle parking in apartment complexes or condominiums without garages. Residential SDT-7 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Improve Design of Development (LUT-9) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Employment and Residential Measures
Increase Land Use Density
Increase the density of land use in an area in order to lower vehicle mode share. This is particularly effective when focused near major transit stops as Transit Oriented Development.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-1 1.5-30.0%
Increase Location Efficiency Locate projects within infill or suburban center areas in order to take advantage of built-out centers offering a variety of land uses.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-2 10.0-65.0%
Increase Land Use Diversity
Provide a variety of land uses within a single project. In the suburban context of Carlsbad, projects would include three of the following within ¼ mile of the project: - Residential - Retail - Park - Open Space - Office
Mixed-Use LUT-3 Project-Level
9-30% (CAPCOA) Up to 30.0% (SANDAG)
The SANDAG tool allows a maximum reduction of 30 percent for this measure, which exceeds the maximum feasible reduction for a suburban area (20 percent) as provided by the CAPCOA report. Also note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 42 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Increase Destination Accessibility Locate the project near a major job center.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-4 6.7-20.0%
Increase Transit Accessibility Locate the project near a major transit center to increase the likelihood of project site/building tenants utilizing transit for travel.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-5 Project-Level
0.5-24.6% (CAPCOA) Up to 14.4% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Orient Project Toward Non-Auto Corridor
Design the project around an existing or planned transit, bicycle, or pedestrian corridor to encourage alternative mode use. This measure is most effective when applied in combination of multiple design elements that encourage non-auto use.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-7 grouped This measure must be grouped with Increase Land Use Diversity (LUT-3) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Locate Project near Bike Path/Bike Lane
Locate the project near an existing or planned bike lane or bike path. This measure is most effective when applied in combination of multiple design elements that encourage bike use.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-8 grouped
This measure must be grouped with Increase Destination Accessibility (LUT-4) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Improve Design of Development
Enhance walkability and connectivity through characteristics such as block size, intersection density, sidewalk coverage, pedestrian crossings, etc.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
LUT-9 Community-Level
3.0-21.3% (CAPCOA) Up to 6.0% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Bike Lane Street Design (on-site)
Incorporate bicycle lanes, routes, and shared-use paths throughout street systems, new subdivisions, and large developments. Example applications include: bicycle facilities, signage and green paint.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-5 grouped
Note that this measure is grouped with Improve Design of Development (LUT-9) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Electric Vehicle Charging
Provide accessible electric vehicle charging and parking spaces with signage to prohibit parking for non-electric vehicles. Charging for electric passenger cars is not associated with a VMT reduction, but charging for NEV, electric bicycles, or other micromobility vehicles would support their use and associated VMT reduction.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-8 grouped
Note that CAPCOA requires that this measure be grouped with NEV Network (SDT-3) in order to quantify its effectiveness. Other micromobility vehicles that are able to use the existing bike network would provide a VMT reduction without requiring implementation at the community level (i.e., electric bicycles).
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 43 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Pedestrian Network Improvements
Create a pedestrian network within the project and provide connections to nearby destinations. Projects in the City of Carlsbad tend to be smaller so the emphasis of this strategy would likely be the construction of network improvements that connect the project site directly to nearby destinations. Alternatively, implementation could occur through an impact fee program or benefit/assessment district targeted to various areas in the city designated for improvements through local or regional plans. Example applications include:
• Construction of pedestrian resting area/recreation node
• Widening of sidewalk within the existing right-of-way
• Pop-outs or curb extensions
• High-visibility crosswalk
• Enhanced crosswalk paving
• Pedestrian enhancing hardscape (ex. median refuges)
• Pedestrian countdown signals
• Widening sidewalk (beyond required)
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-1 Community-Level X
0.0-2.0% (CAPCOA) Up to 1.4% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Bicycle Network Improvements
Provided dedicated bike facilities to provide connections to nearby destinations. Projects in the City of Carlsbad tend to be smaller so the emphasis of this strategy would likely be the construction of network improvements that connect the project site directly to nearby destinations. Alternatively, implementation could occur through an impact fee program or benefit/assessment district targeted to various areas in the city designated for improvements through local or regional plans. Example applications include:
• Enhanced bicycle conflict paving
• Bike signals
• Protected intersections
• Widening or upgrading bike facility (beyond required)
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
Community-Level X Up to 5.0% (SANDAG)
The SANDAG Tool ensures that double-counting does not occur between implementing a comprehensive bicycle network expansion as opposed to adding individual bike facilities. Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Non-Motorized Zones Convert a percentage of roadway miles in a central business district to transit malls, linear parks, or other non-motorized zones.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-4 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Pedestrian Network Improvements (SDT-1) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Vanpool/Shuttle Program Program offering employer-purchased or leased vehicles to provide commute transportation for project site/building tenants.
Residential Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-11 Project-Level X
0.3-13.4% (CAPCOA) Up to 7.1% (SANDAG)
While CAPCOA does not indicate that this measure is applicable to residential projects, the iCommute program would allow for residential developments in the San Diego region to leverage this TDM measure.
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Ride-sharing Program
This strategy focuses on encouraging carpooling by project site/building tenants. Existing ride-share companies could also be leveraged by providing subsidies for shared ride purchases (e.g., Waze Carpool or equivalent).
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-3 Project-Level X
1.0-15.0% (CAPCOA) Up to 7.1% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 44 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Transit Fare Reduction Reduce transit fares system-wide or in specific zones. Small citywide Large Multi-use Developments Community-Level Up to 1.2% (SANDAG) Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Transit Pass Subsidy
Subsidized or discounted public transit passes are provided to project site/building tenants. Example applications include:
• Subsidized/discounted daily or monthly public transit passes
• Free transfers between all shuttles and transit
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-4 Project-Level X
0.3-20.0% (CAPCOA) Up to 10.9% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
End of Trip Facilities
Non-residential projects provide facilities such as showers or secure bike lockers to encourage commuting by bike. This strategy is supportive in nature and can help boost the effectiveness of the other strategies listed.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-5 X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with the Voluntary Employer Commute Program (TRT-1), Mandatory Employer Commute Program (TRT-2), or Employer Ride-sharing Program (TRT-3) in order to quantify effectiveness. The measure should only be grouped with one of the above measures to avoid double-counting.
Commute Trip Reduction Marketing
Promote and advertise various transportation options, including promoting information and resources regarding Carlsbad’s Citywide TDM Plan as well as SANDAG’s iCommute program, which provides support to commuters through a variety of TDM measures such as carpool matching services, vanpool, and other services. As resources are available through Carlsbad’s Citywide TDM Program, those should be advertised and applied as well.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-7 Community-Level X
0.8-4.0% (CAPCOA) Up to 2.0% when grouped with customized travel planning (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Preferential Parking Permit Incentivize carpool, vanpool, ride-share, car-share, or alternatively fueled vehicles through discounted or priority parking.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-8 X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with the Voluntary Employer Commute Program (TRT-1), Mandatory Employer Commute Program (TRT-2), or Employer Ride-sharing Program (TRT-3) in order to quantify effectiveness. The measure should only be grouped with one of the above measures to avoid double-counting.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 45 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Car-Sharing Program
Provide convenient access to a shared vehicle in order to reduce the need to own a vehicle or reduce the number of vehicles owned by a household.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-9 Community-Level X
0.4-0.7% (CAPCOA) Up to 0.7% (SANDAG)
Note that available research documents effectiveness of car-share at the community level, and implementation of this strategy at that scale would require regional or local agency implementation and coordination and would not likely be applicable for individual development projects. However, individual projects are also expected to achieve VMT reductions through implementation of this measure.
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Bike-sharing Program
Provide shared bicycles for employees to use to access nearby transit or commercial centers. Note that this measure is most applicable to the suburban-center areas of Carlsbad, and will be most effective when complemented by enhanced bike facilities.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TRT-12 Community-Level X
grouped (CAPCOA) Up to 0.1% (SANDAG)
Note that this measure must be grouped with Incorporate Bike Lane Street Design (SDT-5) or Improve Design of Development (LUT-9) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) Network
Create a local “light” vehicle network that provides a network for NEVs or other similar “low speed vehicles”. The necessary infrastructure including the following should also be implemented: NEV parking, charging facilities, striping, signage, and education tools. In Carlsbad, an electric bike share program would combine a bike share program with electric bikes, which is a type of electric vehicle similar to the NEV program considered by CAPCOA. Placed strategically throughout the city, this measure would support the provision of a low-stress bicycle network as more people would have access to bicycles. The electric features of the bicycles also make cycling feasible for longer trips with greater elevation changes than would be appealing with a standard bicycle.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-3 Community-Level X (only electric bike- and scooter-share)
0.5-12.7% (CAPCOA) Up to 0.1% (SANDAG)
Note that available research documents effectiveness of NEV networks at the community level, and implementation of this strategy at that scale would require regional or local agency implementation and coordination and would not likely be applicable for individual development projects. However, individual projects are also expected to achieve VMT reductions through implementation of electric bike share or other micromobility vehicles that can use the existing bike network.
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Residential Area Parking Permits
Require the purchase of residential parking permits (RPPs) for long-term use of on-street parking in residential areas. Projects with non-residential land use may institute residential area parking permits in order to limit spillover parking from their employees. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
PDT-4 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with at least one of the following: Parking Supply Limitations (PDT-1), Unbundle Parking Costs from Property Cost (PDT-2), Market Rate Parking Pricing (PDT-3) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 46 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Limit Parking Supply
Eliminate or reduce minimum parking requirements, create maximum parking requirements, provision of shared parking. Reductions apply only if complementary strategies are in place to limit spill-over to on-street parking. Note that this may require coordination with the local agency as proposed supply may not be consistent with policy requirements. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
PDT-1 X (only shared parking) 5-12.5%
Traffic Calming Measures
Provide traffic calming measures, including:
• Marked or high-visibility crosswalks
• Count-down signal timers
• Curb extensions
• Speed tables
• Raised crosswalks
• Raised intersections
• Median islands
• Tight corner radii
• Roundabouts or mini-circles
• On-street parking
• Planter strips with street trees
• Chicanes/chokers
• Speed feedback signs
• Enhanced crosswalk paving Traffic calming measures encourage people to walk or bike instead of taking a vehicle.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-2 0.25-1%
Dedicate Land for Bike Trails
Provide for, contribute to, or dedicate land for off-street and off-site bicycle trails linking the project to existing routes or key destinations
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
SDT-9 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Improve Design of Development (LUT-9) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Unbundle Parking
Unbundle parking by separating parking from property cost and requiring and additional cost for parking spaces. Reductions apply only if complementary strategies are in place to limit spill-over to on-street parking. Note that this may require coordination with the local agency as proposed supply may not be consistent with policy requirements. Depending on project location and availability of alternative transportation options, implementation of parking measures may require implementing other supportive strategies.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
PDT-2 X 2.6-13%
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 47 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Transit Access Improvements
Improve access to transit facilities by providing sidewalk/crosswalk safety enhancements and bus shelter improvements at transit stops serving the project site. Example applications include:
• Benches
• Public art
• Static schedule and route display
• Trash receptacles
• Bike parking
• Addition of shelter/weather protection
• Real time user information monitors
• Lighting
• Enhanced sense of security
• Communicating/providing a direct link to a transit stop (map, signage, pathway improvements)
• On-site transit pass outlet to purchase transit passes on-site
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TST-2 X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Transit Network Expansion (TST-3) or Transit Service Frequency and Speed (TST-4) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Transit Encouragement Programs
Provide transit encouragement programs to encourage employees/residents to take transit. Example applications include:
• Transit route planning assistance/transit riders guide
• Free trial transit rides
• Transit field trips
• Creating transit groups or buddies
• Providing incentives
• Gamifying transit use (i.e. prizes/incentives for number of transit trips taken)
• Creation of a transit app that provides stop information for private shuttles and public transit
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Expand Transit Network Expand local transit network by adding or modifying existing transit service to best serve the project.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TST-3 Community-Level
0.1-8.2% (CAPCOA) Up to 5.9% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 48 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Increase Transit Service Frequency/Speed
Provide reduced transit headways and increase transit speed by increasing the number of transit vehicles, installing a bus-only lane, or other measures. Recently, a demand-responsive service was started known as the Carlsbad Connector, which helps to encourage commuters to Carlsbad to use the COASTER by offering low-cost and convenient connections from the Poinsettia Station to nearby offices, as well as offering mid-day service from offices to lunch destinations. This program and/or existing North County Transit District (NCTD) bus service could be expanded to cover a larger service area, duplicated at the Carlsbad Village station, and/or supplemented with service for those commuting from Carlsbad. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) could also offer addition travel time competitive options for regional connections that aren’t served by the COASTER commuter rail. Note that implementation of this strategy would require regional or local agency implementation, substantial changes to current transit practices, and would not likely be applicable for individual development projects.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TST-4 Community-Level
0.02-2.5% (CAPCOA) Up to 8.2% (SANDAG)
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined. The SANDAG Tool separately calculates the benefit of increasing frequency and the benefit of increasing speed/reliability through supportive treatments.
Bike Parking Near Transit
Provide short-term and long-term bicycle parking near transit to encourage bicycling between the transit station and the project site and encourage the use of transit.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TST-5 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Transit Network Expansion (TST-3) or Transit Service Frequency and Speed (TST-4) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Provide Local Shuttles
Provide local shuttle service, like the Carlsbad Connector, that connects the project site to existing transit or destinations. This shuttle service could be provided using small electric vehicles, similar to NEVs or golf carts.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
TST-6 grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Transit Network Expansion (TST-3) or Transit Service Frequency and Speed (TST-4) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Walking Supportive Measures
Provide walking supportive measures to encourage walking to work or for short trips within the project area. Example applications include:
• Mapping walking routes
• Creating walking groups or buddies
• Providing incentives
• Gamifying walking (i.e. prizes/incentives for number of days walked)
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Bicycle riders guide
Provide a bicycle riders guide to assist residents/employees with riding a bicycle. Example applications include: Handout, posted materials, or app with information on connected bicycle facilities and amenities (i.e. parking, showers, etc.)
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 49 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Bicycle Supportive Measures
Provide bicycling supportive measures to encourage biking to work or for short trips within the project area. Example applications include:
• Bike-to-work day
• Creating biking groups
• Developing a bicycle buddies program
• Gamifying bicycling (i.e. prizes/incentives for number of days biked)
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Bicycle Repair Station Provide on-site tools and space for bicycle repair, including repair stands, air pumps, and wrenches/screwdrivers.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with Provide End of Trip Facilities (TRT-5), a Commute Trip Reduction Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2), or Provide Ride-Sharing Program (TRT-3).
Real-Time Parking Demand Management
Provide real-time information on parking availability to reduce the time it takes to find parking and distribute parking across different facilities.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
On-site Transit Pass Sales Sell transit passes on-site for employees and tenants to conveniently purchase passes at a regular or discounted price.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Personalized Commute Assistance
Provide trip planning assistance and resources for employees or tenants to create a customized commute plan.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped Community-Level X
grouped (CAPCOA) Up to 2.0% when grouped with marketing (SANDAG)
Note that this measure must be grouped with an Employer Commute Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Note that Project-Level and Community-Level measures cannot be combined.
Transportation Coordinator
Designate a key person at worksites or residential developments to act as the main point of contact regarding commuter benefits and to promote trip reduction programs.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
grouped X grouped
Note that this measure must be grouped with an Employer Commute Program (TRT-1 or TRT-2) in order to quantify its effectiveness.
Free Bicycle Tune-Ups Provide complimentary bike tune-ups to employees or tenants who travel by bike.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 50 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
Bicycle Safety & Maintenance Classes Offer classes about basic bike safety & maintenance.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Free Bike Safety Incentives Provide complimentary bike safety gear, such as helmets and bike lights, to employees or tenants who travel by bike.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Fitness Membership Provide subsidized or complimentary fitness membership to a nearby gym for employees or tenants.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Bikeshare Membership Provide subsidized or complimentary bikeshare memberships for employees or tenants.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Free “Try Transit” Passes Provide free, limited-use passes for first-time transit commuters.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Wayfinding Install wayfinding signage to help people navigate the site and find mobility services and facilities.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
On-Site Amenities Provide on-site services such as coffee, food, fitness, dry cleaners, day care, etc. to reduce the number of trips made in the day.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Internal Transportation Website
Provide employees or tenants access to transportation information electronically on the site-specific web portal.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 51 of 221
Table 1: TDM Measure Summary
TDM Method Description Applicable Land Use
CAPCOA Measure (if applicable)1
SANDAG Calculator Tool Application Level (if applicable)2
Part of Carlsbad TDM Menu? Range of Effectiveness3 CAPCOA Calculation Notes SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox Calculation Notes
WiFi Provide free public WiFi at transit stops and/or mobility hubs to help riders check arrival times and stay productive while waiting.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
New Employee/Tenant Information Package
New employee/tenant information packages should include information about mobility options/services, incentive programs, and subsidies.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Transit Ridership Education Host workshops that teach individuals how to take transit.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Real-Time Travel Information Provide real-time transit and shared mobility service information via digital or app-based displays.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Information Kiosk or Bulletin Board A real-time or static display with information about transit, rideshare, multimodal access guide, etc.
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
X
Build a Mobility Hub
Construct a transportation terminal designed to integrate diverse travel options and support services. Example applications include:
• Bus or train station
• Ferry terminal
• Comprehensive transit stations
Residential Retail Office Industrial Mixed-Use
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2020. 1 CAPCOA Designations: LUT: Land Use/Location; SDT: Neighborhood/Site Design; TRT: Trip Reduction Programs; TST: Transit System Improvement; PDT: Parking Policies/Pricing 2 Care must be taken when utilizing the SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox calculator tool because the tool can result in very large VMT reductions for some strategies, including in suburban contexts. The SANDAG Mobility Management Toolbox and calculator tool is divided into two scales: 1) Project scale and 2) Community/City scale. The community/city level strategies are not allowed to be applied at the project scale, which limits project scale strategies to: employer commute programs, land use strategies (mixed-use development and transit-oriented development), and parking (parking cash-out and pricing).
3 Range of effectiveness is based on the CAPCOA report unless otherwise specified. Recent research conducted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has indicated that the ranges of effectiveness provided for measures in the CAPCOA report are higher than currently justified. Future publications are expected to include reduced effectiveness. Measures that are “grouped” and measures without a range provided are those that have not been researched in order to determine their individual effectiveness.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 52 of 221
Senate Bill No. 743
CHAPTER 386
An act to amend Sections 65088.1 and 65088.4 of the Government Code,
and to amend Sections 21181, 21183, 21186, 21187, 21189.1, and 21189.3
of, to add Section 21155.4 to, to add Chapter 2.7 (commencing with Section
21099) to Division 13 of, to add and repeal Section 21168.6.6 of, and to
repeal and add Section 21185 of, the Public Resources Code, relating to
environmental quality.
[Approved by Governor September 27, 2013. Filed with
Secretary of State September 27, 2013.]
legislative counsel’s digest
SB 743, Steinberg. Environmental quality: transit oriented infill projects,
judicial review streamlining for environmental leadership development
projects, and entertainment and sports center in the City of Sacramento.
(1)The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental
Leadership Act of 2011 requires a party bringing an action or proceeding
alleging that a lead agency’s approval of a project certified by the Governor
as an environmental leadership development project is in violation of the
California Environmental Quality Act to file the action or proceeding with
the Court of Appeal with geographic jurisdiction over the project and requires
the Court of Appeal to issue its decision within 175 days of the filing of the
petition. The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through Environmental
Leadership Act of 2011 requires the lead agency to concurrently prepare
the record of proceeding for the leadership project with the review and
consideration of the project. The Jobs and Economic Improvement Through
Environmental Leadership Act of 2011 provides that the above provision
does not apply to a project for which a lead agency fails to certify an
environmental impact report on or before June 1, 2014. The Jobs and
Economic Improvement Through Environmental Leadership Act of 2011
is repealed by its own terms on January 1, 2015.
This bill would instead require the Judicial Council, on or before July 1,
2014, to adopt a rule of court to establish procedures applicable to actions
or proceedings seeking judicial review of a public agency’s action in
certifying the environmental impact report and in granting project approval
that requires the actions or proceedings, including any appeals therefrom,
be resolved, within 270 days of the certification of the record of proceedings.
The bill would extend the operation of the judicial review procedures unless
the lead agency fails to certify an environmental impact report for an
environmental leadership project on or before January 1, 2016. The bill
would provide that the above provisions do not apply to a project if the
Governor does not certify the project as an environmental leadership
EXHIBIT 2
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 53 of 221
development project prior to January 1, 2016. Because this bill would extend
the time period for which a lead agency would be required to concurrently
prepare the record of proceeding with the review and consideration of the
environmental leadership development projects, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program. The bill would require the lead agency, within
10 days of the Governor’s certification, to issue, at the applicant’s expense,
a specified public notice, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program.
The bill would repeal the Jobs and Economic Improvement Through
Environmental Leadership Act of 2011 on January 1, 2017.
(2) The California Environmental Quality Act, commonly known as
CEQA, requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be
prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on
a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant
effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that
the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to
prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a
significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid
or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project,
as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA
establishes a procedure by which a person may seek judicial review of the
decision of the lead agency made pursuant to CEQA.
This bill would provide that aesthetic and parking impacts of a residential,
mixed-use residential, or employment center project, as defined, on an infill
site, as defined, within a transit priority area, as defined, shall not be
considered significant impacts on the environment. The bill would require
the Office of Planning and Research to prepare and submit to the Secretary
of the Natural Resources Agency, and the secretary to certify and adopt,
revisions to the guidelines for the implementation of CEQA establishing
criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects
within transit priority areas.
This bill would, except for specified circumstances, exempt from CEQA
residential, employment center, and mixed-use development projects meeting
specified criteria. Because a lead agency would be required to determine
the applicability of this exemption, this bill would impose a state-mandated
local program.
This bill would require the public agency, in certifying the environmental
impact report and in granting approvals for a specified entertainment and
sports center project located in the City of Sacramento, including the
concurrent preparation of the record of proceedings and the certification of
the record of proceeding within 5 days of the filing of a specified notice, to
comply with specified procedures. Because a public agency would be
required to comply with those new procedures, this bill would impose a
state-mandated local program. The bill would require the Judicial Council,
on or before July 1, 2014, to adopt a rule of court to establish procedures
applicable to actions or proceedings seeking judicial review of a public
agency’s action in certifying the environmental impact report and in granting
project approval that requires the actions or proceedings, including any
2 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 54 of 221
appeals therefrom, be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of
the certification of the record of proceedings. The bill would provide that
the above provisions are inoperative and repealed on January 1 of the
following year if the applicant fails to notify the lead agency before the
release of the draft environmental impact report for public comment that
the applicant is electing to proceed pursuant to the above provisions.
(3) Existing law requires the development, adoption, and updating of a
congestion management program for each county that includes an urbanized
area, as defined. The plan is required to contain specified elements and to
be submitted to regional agencies, as defined, for determination of whether
the program is consistent with regional transportation plans. The regional
agency is then directed to monitor the implementation of all elements of
each congestion management program. The required elements include traffic
level of service standards for a system of designated highways and roadways.
Existing law defines “infill opportunity zone” for purposes of the
above-described provisions and exempts streets and highways in an infill
opportunity zone from the level of service standards specified in the
above-described provisions and instead requires alternate level of service
standards to be applied. Existing law prohibits a city or county from
designating an infill opportunity zone after December 31, 2009.
This bill would revise the definition of “infill opportunity zone,” as
specified. The bill would authorize the designation of an infill opportunity
zone that is a transit priority area within a sustainable communities strategy
or alternative planning strategy adopted by an applicable metropolitan
planning organization.
(4) Existing law terminates the designation of an infill opportunity zone
if no development project is completed within that zone within 4 years from
the date of the designation.
This bill would repeal this provision.
This bill would make findings and declarations as to the necessity of a
special statute for the City of Sacramento.
(5) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local
agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory
provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for
a specified reason.
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares the following:
(1) With the adoption of Chapter 728 of the Statutes of 2008, popularly
known as the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008,
the Legislature signaled its commitment to encouraging land use and
transportation planning decisions and investments that reduce vehicle miles
traveled and contribute to the reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
required in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Division
3
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 55 of 221
25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety Code).
Similarly, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Chapter 657 of the
Statutes of 2008) requires local governments to plan for a balanced,
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets,
roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel.
(2) Transportation analyses under the California Environmental Quality
Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources
Code) typically study changes in automobile delay. New methodologies
under the California Environmental Quality Act are needed for evaluating
transportation impacts that are better able to promote the state’s goals of
reducing greenhouse gas emissions and traffic-related air pollution,
promoting the development of a multimodal transportation system, and
providing clean, efficient access to destinations.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature to do both of the following:
(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.
SEC. 2. The Legislature further finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The Federal Reserve has stated that “[m]ost policymakers estimate
the longer-run normal rate of unemployment is between 5.2 and 6 percent.”
At 7.6 percent, the current United States unemployment rate remains
markedly higher than the normal rate and both the unemployment rates in
Sacramento County and California are higher than the current national
unemployment rate.
(b) The California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing
with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code) requires that the
environmental impacts of development projects be identified and mitigated.
The act also guarantees the public an opportunity to review and comment
on the environmental impacts of a project and to participate meaningfully
in the development of mitigation measures for potentially significant
environmental impacts.
(c) The existing home of the City of Sacramento’s National Basketball
Association (NBA) team, the Sleep Train Arena, is an old and outmoded
facility located outside of the City of Sacramento’s downtown area and is
not serviced by the region’s existing heavy and light rail transportation
networks. It was constructed 25 years ago and a new, more efficient
entertainment and sports center located in downtown Sacramento is needed
to meet the city’s and region’s needs.
(d) The City of Sacramento and the region would greatly benefit from
the addition of a multipurpose event center capable of hosting a wide range
of events including exhibitions, conventions, sporting events, as well as
musical, artistic, and cultural events in downtown Sacramento.
4 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 56 of 221
(e) The proposed entertainment and sports center project is a
public-private partnership between the City of Sacramento and the applicant
that will result in the construction of a new state-of-the-art multipurpose
event center, and surrounding infill development in downtown Sacramento
as described in the notice of preparation released by the City of Sacramento
on April 12, 2013.
(f) The project will generate over 4,000 full-time jobs including
employees hired both during construction and operation of the entertainment
and sports center project. This employment estimate does not include the
substantial job generation that will occur with the surrounding development
uses, which will generate additional hospitality, office, restaurant, and retail
jobs in Sacramento’s downtown area.
(g) The project also presents an unprecedented opportunity to implement
innovative measures that will significantly reduce traffic and air quality
impacts and mitigate the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the project.
The project site is located in downtown Sacramento near heavy and light
rail transit facilities, situated to maximize opportunities to encourage
nonautomobile modes of travel to the entertainment and sports center project,
and is consistent with the policies and regional vision included in the
Sustainable Communities Strategy adopted pursuant to Chapter 728 of the
Statutes of 2008 by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments in April
of 2012. The project is also located within close proximity to three major
infill development areas including projects (The Bridge District, Railyards,
and Township Nine) that received infill infrastructure grants from the state
pursuant to Proposition 1C.
(h) It is in the interest of the state to expedite judicial review of the
entertainment and sports center project, as appropriate, while protecting the
environment and the right of the public to review, comment on, and, if
necessary, seek judicial review of, the adequacy of the environmental impact
report for the project.
SEC. 3. Section 65088.1 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65088.1. As used in this chapter the following terms have the following
meanings:
(a) Unless the context requires otherwise, “agency” means the agency
responsible for the preparation and adoption of the congestion management
program.
(b) “Bus rapid transit corridor” means a bus service that includes at least
four of the following attributes:
(1) Coordination with land use planning.
(2) Exclusive right-of-way.
(3) Improved passenger boarding facilities.
(4) Limited stops.
(5) Passenger boarding at the same height as the bus.
(6) Prepaid fares.
(7) Real-time passenger information.
(8) Traffic priority at intersections.
(9) Signal priority.
5
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 57 of 221
(10) Unique vehicles.
(c) “Commission” means the California Transportation Commission.
(d) “Department” means the Department of Transportation.
(e) “Infill opportunity zone” means a specific area designated by a city
or county, pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 65088.4, that is within
one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor included
in a regional transportation plan. A major transit stop is as defined in Section
21064.3 of the Public Resources Code, except that, for purposes of this
section, it also includes major transit stops that are included in the applicable
regional transportation plan. For purposes of this section, a high-quality
transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service
intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
(f) “Interregional travel” means any trips that originate outside the
boundary of the agency. A “trip” means a one-direction vehicle movement.
The origin of any trip is the starting point of that trip. A roundtrip consists
of two individual trips.
(g) “Level of service standard” is a threshold that defines a deficiency
on the congestion management program highway and roadway system which
requires the preparation of a deficiency plan. It is the intent of the Legislature
that the agency shall use all elements of the program to implement strategies
and actions that avoid the creation of deficiencies and to improve multimodal
mobility.
(h) “Local jurisdiction” means a city, a county, or a city and county.
(i) “Multimodal” means the utilization of all available modes of travel
that enhance the movement of people and goods, including, but not limited
to, highway, transit, nonmotorized, and demand management strategies
including, but not limited to, telecommuting. The availability and practicality
of specific multimodal systems, projects, and strategies may vary by county
and region in accordance with the size and complexity of different urbanized
areas.
(j) (1) “Parking cash-out program” means an employer-funded program
under which an employer offers to provide a cash allowance to an employee
equivalent to the parking subsidy that the employer would otherwise pay
to provide the employee with a parking space. “Parking subsidy” means the
difference between the out-of-pocket amount paid by an employer on a
regular basis in order to secure the availability of an employee parking space
not owned by the employer and the price, if any, charged to an employee
for use of that space.
(2) A parking cash-out program may include a requirement that employee
participants certify that they will comply with guidelines established by the
employer designed to avoid neighborhood parking problems, with a provision
that employees not complying with the guidelines will no longer be eligible
for the parking cash-out program.
(k) “Performance measure” is an analytical planning tool that is used to
quantitatively evaluate transportation improvements and to assist in
determining effective implementation actions, considering all modes and
6 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 58 of 221
strategies. Use of a performance measure as part of the program does not
trigger the requirement for the preparation of deficiency plans.
(l) “Urbanized area” has the same meaning as is defined in the 1990
federal census for urbanized areas of more than 50,000 population.
(m) Unless the context requires otherwise, “regional agency” means the
agency responsible for preparation of the regional transportation
improvement program.
SEC. 4. Section 65088.4 of the Government Code is amended to read:
65088.4. (a) It is the intent of the Legislature to balance the need for
level of service standards for traffic with the need to build infill housing
and mixed use commercial developments within walking distance of mass
transit facilities, downtowns, and town centers and to provide greater
flexibility to local governments to balance these sometimes competing
needs.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, level of service standards
described in Section 65089 shall not apply to the streets and highways within
an infill opportunity zone.
(c) The city or county may designate an infill opportunity zone by
adopting a resolution after determining that the infill opportunity zone is
consistent with the general plan and any applicable specific plan, and is a
transit priority area within a sustainable communities strategy or alternative
planning strategy adopted by the applicable metropolitan planning
organization.
SEC. 5. Chapter 2.7 (commencing with Section 21099) is added to
Division 13 of the Public Resources Code, to read:
Chapter 2.7. Modernization of Transportation Analysis for
Transit-Oriented Infill Projects
21099. (a) For purposes of this section, the following terms mean the
following:
(1) “Employment center project” means a project located on property
zoned for commercial uses with a floor area ratio of no less than 0.75 and
that is located within a transit priority area.
(2) “Floor area ratio” means the ratio of gross building area of the
development, excluding structured parking areas, proposed for the project
divided by the net lot area.
(3) “Gross building area” means the sum of all finished areas of all floors
of a building included within the outside faces of its exterior walls.
(4) “Infill site” means a lot located within an urban area that has been
previously developed, or on a vacant site where at least 75 percent of the
perimeter of the site adjoins, or is separated only by an improved public
right-of-way from, parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses.
(5) “Lot” means all parcels utilized by the project.
7
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 59 of 221
(6) “Net lot area” means the area of a lot, excluding publicly dedicated
land and private streets that meet local standards, and other public use areas
as determined by the local land use authority.
(7) “Transit priority area” means an area within one-half mile of a major
transit stop that is existing or planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to
be completed within the planning horizon included in a Transportation
Improvement Program adopted pursuant to Section 450.216 or 450.322 of
Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
(b) (1) The Office of Planning and Research shall prepare, develop, and
transmit to the Secretary of the Natural Resources Agency for certification
and adoption proposed revisions to the guidelines adopted pursuant to
Section 21083 establishing criteria for determining the significance of
transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas. Those criteria
shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development
of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. In
developing the criteria, the office shall recommend potential metrics to
measure transportation impacts that may include, but are not limited to,
vehicle miles traveled, vehicle miles traveled per capita, automobile trip
generation rates, or automobile trips generated. The office may also establish
criteria for models used to analyze transportation impacts to ensure the
models are accurate, reliable, and consistent with the intent of this section.
(2) Upon certification of the guidelines by the Secretary of the Natural
Resources Agency pursuant to this section, automobile delay, as described
solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic
congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment
pursuant to this division, except in locations specifically identified in the
guidelines, if any.
(3) This subdivision does not relieve a public agency of the requirement
to analyze a project’s potentially significant transportation impacts related
to air quality, noise, safety, or any other impact associated with
transportation. The methodology established by these guidelines shall not
create a presumption that a project will not result in significant impacts
related to air quality, noise, safety, or any other impact associated with
transportation. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the adequacy of parking for
a project shall not support a finding of significance pursuant to this section.
(4) This subdivision 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.
(5) On or before July 1, 2014, the Office of Planning and Research shall
circulate a draft revision prepared pursuant to paragraph (1).
(c) (1) The Office of Planning and Research may adopt guidelines
pursuant to Section 21083 establishing alternative metrics to the metrics
used for traffic levels of service for transportation impacts outside transit
priority areas. The alternative metrics may include the retention of traffic
levels of service, where appropriate and as determined by the office.
(2) This subdivision shall not affect the standard of review that would
apply to the new guidelines adopted pursuant to this section.
8 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 60 of 221
(d) (1) Aesthetic and parking impacts of a residential, mixed-use
residential, or employment center project on an infill site within a transit
priority area shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.
(2) (A) This subdivision does not affect, change, or modify the authority
of a lead agency to consider aesthetic impacts pursuant to local design review
ordinances or other discretionary powers provided by other laws or policies.
(B) For the purposes of this subdivision, aesthetic impacts do not include
impacts on historical or cultural resources.
(e) This section does not affect the authority of a public agency to
establish or adopt thresholds of significance that are more protective of the
environment.
SEC. 6. Section 21155.4 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read:
21155.4. (a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), a residential,
employment center, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section
21099, or mixed-use development project, including any subdivision, or
any zoning, change that meets all of the following criteria is exempt from
the requirements of this division:
(1) The project is proposed within a transit priority area, as defined in
subdivision (a) of Section 21099.
(2) The project is undertaken to implement and is consistent with a
specific plan for which an environmental impact report has been certified.
(3) The project is consistent with the general use designation, density,
building intensity, and applicable policies specified for the project area in
either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning strategy
for which the State Air Resources Board, pursuant to subparagraph (H) of
paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 65080 of the Government Code,
has accepted a metropolitan planning organization’s determination that the
sustainable communities strategy or the alternative planning strategy would,
if implemented, achieve the greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.
(b) Further environmental review shall be conducted only if any of the
events specified in Section 21166 have occurred.
SEC. 7. Section 21168.6.6 is added to the Public Resources Code, to
read:
21168.6.6. (a) For the purposes of this section, the following definitions
shall have the following meanings:
(1) “Applicant” means a private entity or its affiliates that proposes the
project and its successors, heirs, and assignees.
(2) “City” means the City of Sacramento.
(3) “Downtown arena” means the following components of the
entertainment and sports center project from demolition and site preparation
through operation:
(A) An arena facility that will become the new home to the City of
Sacramento’s National Basketball Association (NBA) team that does both
of the following:
(i) Receives Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
gold certification for new construction within one year of completion of the
first NBA season.
9
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 61 of 221
(ii) Minimizes operational traffic congestion and air quality impacts
through either or both project design and the implementation of feasible
mitigation measures that will do all of the following:
(I) Achieve and maintain carbon neutrality or better by reducing to at
least zero the net emissions of greenhouse gases, as defined in subdivision
(g) of Section 38505 of the Health and Safety Code, from private automobile
trips to the downtown arena as compared to the baseline as verified by the
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
(II) Achieve a per attendee reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from
automobiles and light trucks compared to per attendee greenhouse gas
emissions associated with the existing arena during the 2012–13 NBA season
that will exceed the carbon reduction targets for 2020 and 2035 achieved
in the sustainable communities strategy prepared by the Sacramento Area
Council of Governments for the Sacramento region pursuant to Chapter 728
of the Statutes of 2008.
(III) Achieve and maintain vehicle-miles-traveled per attendee for NBA
events at the downtown arena that is no more than 85 percent of the baseline.
(B) Associated public spaces.
(C) Facilities and infrastructure for ingress, egress, and use of the arena
facility.
(4) “Entertainment and sports center project” or “project” means a project
that substantially conforms to the project description for the entertainment
and sports center project set forth in the notice of preparation released by
the City of Sacramento on April 12, 2013.
(b) (1) The city may prosecute an eminent domain action for 545 and
600 K Street, Sacramento, California, and surrounding publicly accessible
areas and rights-of-way within 200 feet of 600 K Street, Sacramento,
California, through order of possession pursuant to the Eminent Domain
Law (Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3 of the Code of
Civil Procedure) prior to completing the environmental review under this
division.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any other eminent domain actions
prosecuted by the City of Sacramento or to eminent domain actions based
on a finding of blight.
(c) Notwithstanding any other law, the procedures established pursuant
to subdivision (d) shall apply to an action or proceeding brought to attack,
review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of the environmental impact
report for the project or the granting of any project approvals.
(d) On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall adopt a rule of
court to establish procedures applicable to actions or proceedings brought
to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of the
environmental impact report for the project or the granting of any project
approvals that require the actions or proceedings, including any potential
appeals therefrom, be resolved, to the extent feasible, within 270 days of
certification of the record of proceedings pursuant to subdivision (f).
(e) (1) The draft and final environmental impact report shall include a
notice in not less than 12-point type stating the following:
10 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 62 of 221
THIS EIR IS SUBJECT TO SECTION 21168.6.6 OF THE PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE, WHICH PROVIDES, AMONG OTHER THINGS,
THAT THE LEAD AGENCY NEED NOT CONSIDER CERTAIN
COMMENTS FILED AFTER THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD FOR THE DRAFT EIR. ANY JUDICIAL ACTION
CHALLENGING THE CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR OR THE
APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT DESCRIBED IN THE EIR IS SUBJECT
TO THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN SECTION 21168.6.6 OF THE
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE. A COPY OF SECTION 21168.6.6 OF THE
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE IS INCLUDED IN THE APPENDIX TO
THIS EIR.
(2) The draft environmental impact report and final environmental impact
report shall contain, as an appendix, the full text of this section.
(3) Within 10 days after the release of the draft environmental impact
report, the lead agency shall conduct an informational workshop to inform
the public of the key analyses and conclusions of that report.
(4) Within 10 days before the close of the public comment period, the
lead agency shall hold a public hearing to receive testimony on the draft
environmental impact report. A transcript of the hearing shall be included
as an appendix to the final environmental impact report.
(5) (A) Within five days following the close of the public comment
period, a commenter on the draft environmental impact report may submit
to the lead agency a written request for nonbinding mediation. The lead
agency and applicant shall participate in nonbinding mediation with all
commenters who submitted timely comments on the draft environmental
impact report and who requested the mediation. Mediation conducted
pursuant to this paragraph shall end no later than 35 days after the close of
the public comment period.
(B) A request for mediation shall identify all areas of dispute raised in
the comment submitted by the commenter that are to be mediated.
(C) The lead agency shall select one or more mediators who shall be
retired judges or recognized experts with at least five years experience in
land use and environmental law or science, or mediation. The applicant
shall bear the costs of mediation.
(D) A mediation session shall be conducted on each area of dispute with
the parties requesting mediation on that area of dispute.
(E) The lead agency shall adopt, as a condition of approval, any measures
agreed upon by the lead agency, the applicant, and any commenter who
requested mediation. A commenter who agrees to a measure pursuant to
this subparagraph shall not raise the issue addressed by that measure as a
basis for an action or proceeding challenging the lead agency’s decision to
certify the environmental impact report or to grant one or more initial project
approvals.
11
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 63 of 221
(6) The lead agency need not consider written comments submitted after
the close of the public comment period, unless those comments address any
of the following:
(A) New issues raised in the response to comments by the lead agency.
(B) New information released by the public agency subsequent to the
release of the draft environmental impact report, such as new information
set forth or embodied in a staff report, proposed permit, proposed resolution,
ordinance, or similar documents.
(C) Changes made to the project after the close of the public comment
period.
(D) Proposed conditions for approval, mitigation measures, or proposed
findings required by Section 21081 or a proposed reporting and monitoring
program required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 21081.6,
where the lead agency releases those documents subsequent to the release
of the draft environmental impact report.
(E) New information that was not reasonably known and could not have
been reasonably known during the public comment period.
(7) The lead agency shall file the notice required by subdivision (a) of
Section 21152 within five days after the last initial project approval.
(f) (1) The lead agency shall prepare and certify the record of the
proceedings in accordance with this subdivision and in accordance with
Rule 3.1365 of the California Rules of Court. The applicant shall pay the
lead agency for all costs of preparing and certifying the record of
proceedings.
(2) No later than three business days following the date of the release of
the draft environmental impact report, the lead agency shall make available
to the public in a readily accessible electronic format the draft environmental
impact report and all other documents submitted to or relied on by the lead
agency in the preparation of the draft environmental impact report. A
document prepared by the lead agency or submitted by the applicant after
the date of the release of the draft environmental impact report that is a part
of the record of the proceedings shall be made available to the public in a
readily accessible electronic format within five business days after the
document is prepared or received by the lead agency.
(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (2), documents submitted to or relied on
by the lead agency that were not prepared specifically for the project and
are copyright protected are not required to be made readily accessible in an
electronic format. For those copyright protected documents, the lead agency
shall make an index of these documents available in an electronic format
no later than the date of the release of the draft environmental impact report,
or within five business days if the document is received or relied on by the
lead agency after the release of the draft environmental impact report. The
index must specify the libraries or lead agency offices in which hardcopies
of the copyrighted materials are available for public review.
(4) The lead agency shall encourage written comments on the project to
be submitted in a readily accessible electronic format, and shall make any
12 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 64 of 221
such comment available to the public in a readily accessible electronic
format within five days of its receipt.
(5) Within seven business days after the receipt of any comment that is
not in an electronic format, the lead agency shall convert that comment into
a readily accessible electronic format and make it available to the public in
that format.
(6) The lead agency shall indicate in the record of the proceedings
comments received that were not considered by the lead agency pursuant
to paragraph (6) of subdivision (e) and need not include the content of the
comments as a part of the record.
(7) Within five days after the filing of the notice required by subdivision
(a) of Section 21152, the lead agency shall certify the record of the
proceedings for the approval or determination and shall provide an electronic
copy of the record to a party that has submitted a written request for a copy.
The lead agency may charge and collect a reasonable fee from a party
requesting a copy of the record for the electronic copy, which shall not
exceed the reasonable cost of reproducing that copy.
(8) Within 10 days after being served with a complaint or a petition for
a writ of mandate, the lead agency shall lodge a copy of the certified record
of proceedings with the superior court.
(9) Any dispute over the content of the record of the proceedings shall
be resolved by the superior court. Unless the superior court directs otherwise,
a party disputing the content of the record shall file a motion to augment
the record at the time it files its initial brief.
(10) The contents of the record of proceedings shall be as set forth in
subdivision (e) of Section 21167.6.
(g) (1) As a condition of approval of the project subject to this section,
the lead agency shall require the applicant, with respect to any measures
specific to the operation of the downtown arena, to implement those
measures that will meet the requirements of this division by the end of the
first NBA regular season or June of the first NBA regular season, whichever
is later, during which an NBA team has played at the downtown arena.
(2) To maximize public health, environmental, and employment benefits,
the lead agency shall place the highest priority on feasible measures that
will reduce greenhouse gas emissions on the downtown arena site and in
the neighboring communities of the downtown arena. Mitigation measures
that shall be considered and implemented, if feasible and necessary, to
achieve the standards set forth in subclauses (I) to (III), inclusive, of clause
(ii) of subparagraph (A) of paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), including, but
not limited to:
(A) Temporarily expanding the capacity of a public transit line, as needed,
to serve downtown arena events.
(B) Providing private charter buses or other similar services, as needed,
to serve downtown arena events.
(C) Paying its fair share of the cost of measures that expand the capacity
of a public fixed or light rail station that is used by spectators attending
downtown arena events.
13
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 65 of 221
(3) Offset credits shall be employed by the applicant only after feasible
local emission reduction measures have been implemented. The applicant
shall, to the extent feasible, place the highest priority on the purchase of
offset credits that produce emission reductions within the city or the
boundaries of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District.
(h) (1) (A) In granting relief in an action or proceeding brought pursuant
to this section, the court shall not stay or enjoin the construction or operation
of the downtown arena unless the court finds either of the following:
(i) The continued construction or operation of the downtown arena
presents an imminent threat to the public health and safety.
(ii) The downtown arena site contains unforeseen important Native
American artifacts or unforeseen important historical, archaeological, or
ecological values that would be materially, permanently, and adversely
affected by the continued construction or operation of the downtown arena
unless the court stays or enjoins the construction or operation of the
downtown arena.
(B) If the court finds that clause (i) or (ii) is satisfied, the court shall only
enjoin those specific activities associated with the downtown arena that
present an imminent threat to public health and safety or that materially,
permanently, and adversely affect unforeseen important Native American
artifacts or unforeseen important historical, archaeological, or ecological
values.
(2) An action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul a
determination, finding, or decision of the lead agency granting a subsequent
project approval shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 6
(commencing with Section 21165).
(3) Where an action or proceeding brought pursuant to this section
challenges aspects of the project other than the downtown arena and those
portions or specific project activities are severable from the downtown arena,
the court may enter an order as to aspects of the project other than the
downtown arena that includes one or more of the remedies set forth in
Section 21168.9.
(i) The provisions of this section are severable. If any provision of this
section or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other
provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application.
(j) (1) This section does not apply to the project and shall become
inoperative on the date of the release of the draft environmental impact
report and is repealed on January 1 of the following year, if the applicant
fails to notify the lead agency prior to the release of the draft environmental
impact report for public comment that the applicant is electing to proceed
pursuant to this section.
(2) The lead agency shall notify the Secretary of State if the applicant
fails to notify the lead agency of its election to proceed pursuant to this
section.
SEC. 8. Section 21181 of the Public Resources Code is amended to read:
14 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 66 of 221
21181. This chapter does not apply to a project if the Governor does not
certify a project as an environmental leadership development project eligible
for streamlining provided pursuant to this chapter prior to January 1, 2016.
SEC. 9. Section 21183 of the Public Resources Code is amended to read:
21183. The Governor may certify a leadership project for streamlining
pursuant to this chapter if all the following conditions are met:
(a) The project will result in a minimum investment of one hundred
million dollars ($100,000,000) in California upon completion of construction.
(b) The project creates high-wage, highly skilled jobs that pay prevailing
wages and living wages and provide construction jobs and permanent jobs
for Californians, and helps reduce unemployment. For purposes of this
subdivision, “jobs that pay prevailing wages” means that all construction
workers employed in the execution of the project will receive at least the
general prevailing rate of per diem wages for the type of work and
geographic area, as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations
pursuant to Sections 1773 and 1773.9 of the Labor Code. If the project is
certified for streamlining, the project applicant shall include this requirement
in all contracts for the performance of the work.
(c) The project does not result in any net additional emission of
greenhouse gases, including greenhouse gas emissions from employee
transportation, as determined by the State Air Resources Board pursuant to
Division 25.5 (commencing with Section 38500) of the Health and Safety
Code.
(d) The project applicant has entered into a binding and enforceable
agreement that all mitigation measures required pursuant to this division to
certify the project under this chapter shall be conditions of approval of the
project, and those conditions will be fully enforceable by the lead agency
or another agency designated by the lead agency. In the case of
environmental mitigation measures, the applicant agrees, as an ongoing
obligation, that those measures will be monitored and enforced by the lead
agency for the life of the obligation.
(e) The project applicant agrees to pay the costs of the Court of Appeal
in hearing and deciding any case, including payment of the costs for the
appointment of a special master if deemed appropriate by the court, in a
form and manner specified by the Judicial Council, as provided in the Rules
of Court adopted by the Judicial Council pursuant to subdivision (f) of
Section 21185.
(f) The project applicant agrees to pay the costs of preparing the
administrative record for the project concurrent with review and
consideration of the project pursuant to this division, in a form and manner
specified by the lead agency for the project.
SEC. 10. Section 21185 of the Public Resources Code is repealed.
SEC. 11. Section 21185 is added to the Public Resources Code, to read:
21185. On or before July 1, 2014, the Judicial Council shall adopt a rule
of court to establish procedures applicable to actions or proceedings brought
to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul the certification of the
environmental impact report for an environmental leadership development
15
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 67 of 221
project certified by the Governor pursuant to this chapter or the granting of
any project approvals that require the actions or proceedings, including any
potential appeals therefrom, be resolved, within 270 days of certification
of the record of proceedings pursuant to Section 21186.
SEC. 12. Section 21186 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
21186. Notwithstanding any other law, the preparation and certification
of the administrative record for a leadership project certified by the Governor
shall be performed in the following manner:
(a) The lead agency for the project shall prepare the administrative record
pursuant to this division concurrently with the administrative process.
(b) All documents and other materials placed in the administrative record
shall be posted on, and be downloadable from, an Internet Web site
maintained by the lead agency commencing with the date of the release of
the draft environmental impact report.
(c) The lead agency shall make available to the public in a readily
accessible electronic format the draft environmental impact report and all
other documents submitted to, or relied on by, the lead agency in the
preparation of the draft environmental impact report.
(d) A document prepared by the lead agency or submitted by the applicant
after the date of the release of the draft environmental impact report that is
a part of the record of the proceedings shall be made available to the public
in a readily accessible electronic format within five business days after the
document is released or received by the lead agency.
(e) The lead agency shall encourage written comments on the project to
be submitted in a readily accessible electronic format, and shall make any
comment available to the public in a readily accessible electronic format
within five days of its receipt.
(f) Within seven business days after the receipt of any comment that is
not in an electronic format, the lead agency shall convert that comment into
a readily accessible electronic format and make it available to the public in
that format.
(g) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) to (f), inclusive, documents submitted
to or relied on by the lead agency that were not prepared specifically for the
project and are copyright protected are not required to be made readily
accessible in an electronic format. For those copyright-protected documents,
the lead agency shall make an index of these documents available in an
electronic format no later than the date of the release of the draft
environmental impact report, or within five business days if the document
is received or relied on by the lead agency after the release of the draft
environmental impact report. The index must specify the libraries or lead
agency offices in which hardcopies of the copyrighted materials are available
for public review.
(h) The lead agency shall certify the final administrative record within
five days of its approval of the project.
(i) Any dispute arising from the administrative record shall be resolved
by the superior court. Unless the superior court directs otherwise, a party
16 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 68 of 221
disputing the content of the record shall file a motion to augment the record
at the time it files its initial brief.
(j) The contents of the record of proceedings shall be as set forth in
subdivision (e) of Section 21167.6.
SEC. 13. Section 21187 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
21187. Within 10 days of the Governor certifying an environmental
leadership development project pursuant to this section, the lead agency
shall, at the applicant’s expense, issue a public notice in no less than 12-point
type stating the following:
“THE APPLICANT HAS ELECTED TO PROCEED UNDER CHAPTER
6.5 (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 21178) OF THE PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE, WHICH PROVIDES, AMONG OTHER THINGS,
THAT ANY JUDICIAL ACTION CHALLENGING THE
CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR OR THE APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT
DESCRIBED IN THE EIR IS SUBJECT TO THE PROCEDURES SET
FORTH IN SECTIONS 21185 TO 21186, INCLUSIVE, OF THE PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE. A COPY OF CHAPTER 6.5 (COMMENCING
WITH SECTION 21178) OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE IS
INCLUDED BELOW.”
The public notice shall be distributed by the lead agency as required for
public notices issued pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of Section
21092.
SEC. 14. Section 21189.1 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
21189.1. If, prior to January 1, 2016, a lead agency fails to approve a
project certified by the Governor pursuant to this chapter, then the
certification expires and is no longer valid.
SEC. 15. Section 21189.3 of the Public Resources Code is amended to
read:
21189.3. This chapter shall remain in effect until January 1, 2017, and
as of that date is repealed unless a later enacted statute extends or repeals
that date.
SEC. 16. With respect to certain provisions of this measure, the
Legislature finds and declares that a special law is necessary and that a
general law cannot be made applicable within the meaning of Section 16
of Article IV of the California Constitution because of the unique need for
the development of an entertainment and sports center project in the City
of Sacramento in an expeditious manner.
SEC. 17. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section
6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because a local agency or
school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments
17
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 69 of 221
sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act,
within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.
O
18 June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 70 of 221
Exhibit 3
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 71 of 221
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 72 of 221
5/18/2020
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 1/7
Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.EXHIBIT 4
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 73 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 2/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 74 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 3/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 75 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 4/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 76 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 5/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 77 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 6/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 78 of 221
5/18/2020 Governor Brown Establishes Most Ambitious Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target in North America | Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr.
https://www.ca.gov/archive/gov39/2015/04/29/news18938/index.html 7/7June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 79 of 221
Sections Amended: 15004, 15051, 15061, 15062, 15063, 15064, 15064.4, 15064.7, 15072, 15075,
15082, 15086, 15087, 15088, 15094, 15107, 15124, 15125, 15126.2, 15126.4, 15152, 15155, 15168,
15182, 15222, 15269, 15301, 15357, 15370, Appendix G, Appendix M and Appendix N.
Sections Added: 15064.3 and 15234
Sections Repealed: None
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 1. General
§ 15004. Time of Preparation.
(a)Before granting any approval of a project subject to CEQA, every lead agency or responsible agency
shall consider a final EIR or negative declaration or another document authorized by these guidelines to
be used in the place of an EIR or negative declaration. See the definition of "approval" in Section 15352.
(b)Choosing the precise time for CEQA compliance involves a balancing of competing factors. EIRs and
negative declarations should be prepared as early as feasible in the planning process to enable
environmental considerations to influence project program and design and yet late enough to provide
meaningful information for environmental assessment.
(1)With public projects, at the earliest feasible time, project sponsors shall incorporate environmental
considerations into project conceptualization, design, and planning. CEQA compliance should be
completed prior to acquisition of a site for a public project.
(2)To implement the above principles, public agencies shall not undertake actions concerning the
proposed public project that would have a significant adverse effect or limit the choice of alternatives or
mitigation measures, before completion of CEQA compliance. For example, agencies shall not:
(A)Formally make a decision to proceed with the use of a site for facilities which would require CEQA
review, regardless of whether the agency has made any final purchase of the site for these facilities,
except that agencies may designate a preferred site for CEQA review and may enter into land acquisition
agreements when the agency has conditioned the agency's future use of the site on CEQA compliance.
(B)Otherwise take any action which gives impetus to a planned or foreseeable project in a manner that
forecloses alternatives or mitigation measures that would ordinarily be part of CEQA review of that
public project.
(3)With private projects, the Lead Agency shall encourage the project proponent to incorporate
environmental considerations into project conceptualization, design, and planning at the earliest
feasible time.
EXHIBIT 5
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 80 of 221
(4) While mere interest in, or inclination to support, a project does not constitute approval, a public
agency entering into preliminary agreements regarding a project prior to approval shall not, as a
practical matter, commit the agency to the project. For example, an agency shall not grant any vested
development entitlements prior to compliance with CEQA. Further, any such pre-approval agreement
should, for example:
(A) Condition the agreement on compliance with CEQA;
(B) Not bind any party, or commit to any definite course of action, prior to CEQA compliance;
(C) Not restrict the lead agency from considering any feasible mitigation measures and alternatives,
including the “no project” alternative; and
(D) Not restrict the lead agency from denying the project.
(c) The environmental document preparation and review should be coordinated in a timely fashion with
the existing planning, review, and project approval processes being used by each public agency. These
procedures, to the maximum extent feasible, are to run concurrently, not consecutively. When the lead
agency is a state agency, the environmental document shall be included as part of the regular project
report if such a report is used in its existing review and budgetary process.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21003, 21061 and
21105, Public Resources Code; Friends of Mammoth v. Board of Supervisors, (1972) 8 Cal. 3d 247;
Mount Sutro Defense Committee v. Regents of the University of California, (1978) 77 Cal. App. 3d 20;
and Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 Cal.4th 116.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 4. Lead Agency
§ 15051. Criteria for Identifying the Lead Agency.
Where two or more public agencies will be involved with a project, the determination of which agency
will be the lead agency shall be governed by the following criteria:
(a) If the project will be carried out by a public agency, that agency shall be the lead agency even if the
project would be located within the jurisdiction of another public agency.
(b) If the project is to be carried out by a nongovernmental person or entity, the lead agency shall be the
public agency with the greatest responsibility for supervising or approving the project as a whole.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 81 of 221
(1) The lead agency will normally be the agency with general governmental powers, such as a city or
county, rather than an agency with a single or limited purpose such as an air pollution control district or
a district which will provide a public service or public utility to the project.
(2) Where a city prezones an area, the city will be the appropriate lead agency for any subsequent
annexation of the area and should prepare the appropriate environmental document at the time of the
prezoning. The local agency formation commission shall act as a responsible agency.
(c) Where more than one public agency equally meet the criteria in subdivision (b), the agency which
will act first on the project in question will normally shall be the lead agency.
(d) Where the provisions of subdivisions (a), (b), and (c) leave two or more public agencies with a
substantial claim to be the lead agency, the public agencies may by agreement designate an agency as
the lead agency. An agreement may also provide for cooperative efforts by two or more agencies by
contract, joint exercise of powers, or similar devices.
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21165, Public
Resources Code.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 5. Preliminary Review of Projects and Conduct of Initial Study
§ 15061. Review for Exemption.
(a) Once a lead agency has determined that an activity is a project subject to CEQA, a lead agency shall
determine whether the project is exempt from CEQA.
(b) A project is exempt from CEQA if:
(1) The project is exempt by statute (see, e.g. Article 18, commencing with Section 15260).
(2) The project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption (see Article 19, commencing with
Section 15300) and the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the
exceptions set forth in Section 15300.2.
(3) The activity is covered by the general rule common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to
projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. 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.
(4) The project will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency. (See Section 15270(b)).
(5) The project is exempt pursuant to the provisions of Article 12.5 of this Chapter.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 82 of 221
[…subdivisions (c) through (e)…]
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080(b), 21080.9,
21080.10, 21084, 21108(b), 21151, 21152(b) and 21159.21, Public Resources Code; Muzzy Ranch Co. v.
Solano County Airport Land Use Commission (2007) 41 Cal. 4th 372, No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles
(1974) 13 Cal. 3d 68.
§ 15062. Notice of Exemption.
(a) When a public agency decides that a project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15061, and
the public agency approves or determines to carry out the project, the agency may, file a notice of
exemption. The notice shall be filed, if at all, after approval of the project. Such a notice shall include:
(1) A brief description of the project,
(2) The location of the project (either by street address and cross street for a project in an urbanized
area or by attaching a specific map, preferably a copy of a U.S.G.S. 15' or 7-1/2' topographical map
identified by quadrangle name),
(3) A finding that the project is exempt from CEQA, including a citation to the State Guidelines section or
statute under which it is found to be exempt,
(4) A brief statement of reasons to support the finding, and
(5) The applicant's name, if any.
(6) If different from the applicant, the identity of the person undertaking the project which is
supported, in whole or in part, through contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance
from one or more public agencies or the identity of the person receiving a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use from one or more public agencies.
(b) A notice of exemption may be filled out and may accompany the project application through the
approval process. The notice shall not be filed, with the county clerk or OPR until the project has been
approved.
(c) When a public agency approves an applicant's project, either the agency or the applicant may file a
notice of exemption.
(1) When a state agency files this notice, the notice of exemption shall be filed with the Office of
Planning and Research. A form for this notice is provided in Appendix E (Revised 2011). A list of all such
notices shall be posted on a weekly basis at the Office of Planning and Research, 1400 Tenth Street,
Sacramento, California. The list shall remain posted for at least 30 days. The Office of Planning and
Research shall retain each notice for not less than 12 months.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 83 of 221
(2) When a local agency files this notice, the notice of exemption shall be filed with the county clerk of
each county in which the project will be located. Copies of all such notices will be available for public
inspection and such notices shall be posted within 24 hours of receipt in the office of the county clerk.
Each notice shall remain posted for a period of 30 days. Thereafter, the clerk shall return the notice to
the local agency with a notation of the period it was posted. The local agency shall retain the notice for
not less than 12 months.
(3) All public agencies are encouraged to make postings pursuant to this section available in electronic
format on the Internet. Such electronic postings are in addition to the procedures required by these
guidelines and the Public Resources Code.
(4) When an applicant files this notice, special rules apply.
(A) The notice filed by an applicant is filed in the same place as if it were filed by the agency granting the
permit. If the permit was granted by a state agency, the notice is filed with the Office of Planning and
Research. If the permit was granted by a local agency, the notice is filed with the county clerk of the
county or counties in which the project will be located.
(B) The notice of exemption filed by an applicant shall contain the information required in subdivision (a)
together with a certified document issued by the public agency stating that the agency has found the
project to be exempt. The certified document may be a certified copy of an existing document or record
of the public agency.
(C) A notice filed by an applicant is subject to the same posting and time requirements as a notice filed
by a public agency.
(d) The filing of a Notice of Exemption and the posting on the list of notices start a 35 day statute of
limitations period on legal challenges to the agency's decision that the project is exempt from CEQA. If a
Notice of Exemption is not filed, a 180 day statute of limitations will apply.
(e) When a local agency determines that a project is not subject to CEQA under sections 15193, 15194,
or 15195, and it approves or determines to carry out that project, the local agency or person seeking
project approval shall file a notice with OPR identifying the section under which the exemption is
claimed.
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083 and 21108, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21108,
21152 and 21152.1, Public Resources Code.
§ 15063. Initial Study.
(a) Following preliminary review, the lead agency shall conduct an initial study determine if the project
may have a significant effect on the environment. If the lead agency can determine that an EIR will
clearly be required for the project, an initial study is not required but may still be desirable.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 84 of 221
(1) All phases of project planning, implementation, and operation must be considered in the initial study
of the project.
(2) To meet the requirements of this section, the lead agency may use an environmental assessment or
a similar analysis prepared pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act.
(3) An initial study may rely upon expert opinion supported by facts, technical studies or other
substantial evidence to document its findings. However, an initial study is neither intended nor required
to include the level of detail included in an EIR.
(4) The lead agency may use any of the arrangements or combination of arrangements described in
Section 15084(d) to prepare an initial study. The initial study sent out for public review must reflect
the independent judgment of the Lead Agency.
(b) Results.
(1) If the agency determines 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 lead agency shall do one of the following:
(A) Prepare an EIR or
(B) Use a previously prepared EIR which the lead agency determines would adequately analyze the
project at hand, or
(C) Determine, pursuant to a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process, which of a project's
effects were adequately examined by an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Another appropriate
process may include, for example, a master EIR, a master environmental assessment, approval of
housing and neighborhood commercial facilities in urban areas, approval of residential projects pursuant
to a specific plan as described in section 15182, approval of residential projects consistent with a
community plan, general plan or zoning as described in section 15183, or an environmental document
prepared under a State certified regulatory program. The lead agency shall then ascertain which effects,
if any, should be analyzed in a later EIR or negative declaration.
(2) The lead agency shall prepare a negative declaration if there is no substantial evidence that the
project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
(c) Purposes. The purposes of an initial study are to:
(1) Provide the lead agency with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an EIR
or negative declaration;
(2) Enable an applicant or lead agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is
prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a negative declaration;
(3) Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 85 of 221
(A) Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant,
(B) Identifying the effects determined not to be significant,
(C) Explaining the reasons for determining that potentially significant effects would not be significant,
and
(D) Identifying whether a program EIR, tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis
of the project's environmental effects.
(4) Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project;
(5) Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a negative declaration that a project will
not have a significant effect on the environment;
(6) Eliminate unnecessary EIRs;
(7) Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.
(d) Contents. An initial study shall contain in brief form:
(1) A description of the project including the location of the project;
(2) An identification of the environmental setting;
(3) An identification of environmental effects by use of a checklist, matrix, or other method, provided
that entries on a checklist or other form are briefly explained to indicate that there is some evidence to
support the entries. The brief explanation may be either through a narrative or a reference to another
information source such as an attached map, photographs, or an earlier EIR or negative declaration. A
reference to another document should include, where appropriate, a citation to the page or pages
where the information is found.
(4) A discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified, if any;
(5) An examination of whether the project would be consistent with existing zoning, plans, and other
applicable land use controls;
(6) The name of the person or persons who prepared or participated in the initial study.
(e) Submission of Data. If the project is to be carried out by a private person or private organization, the
lead agency may require such person or organization to submit data and information which will enable
the lead agency to prepare the initial study. Any person may submit any information in any form to
assist a lead agency in preparing an initial study.
(f) Format. Sample forms for an applicant's project description and a review form for use by the lead
agency are contained in Appendices G and H. When used together, these forms would meet the
requirements for an initial study, provided that the entries on the checklist are briefly explained
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 86 of 221
pursuant to subdivision (d)(3). These forms are only suggested, and public agencies are free to devise
their own format for an initial study. A previously prepared EIR may also be used as the initial study for a
later project.
(g) Consultation. As soon as a lead agency has determined that an initial study will be required for the
project, the lead agency shall consult informally with all responsible agencies and all trustee agencies
responsible for resources affected by the project to obtain the recommendations of those agencies as to
whether an EIR or a negative declaration should be prepared. During or immediately after preparation
of an initial study for a private project, the lead agency may consult with the applicant to determine if
the applicant is willing to modify the project to reduce or avoid the significant effects identified in the
initial study.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080(c), 21080.1,
21080.3, 21082.1, 21100 and 21151, Public Resources Code; Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36
Cal.App.4th 1359, San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v. County of Stanislaus (1994) 27
Cal.App.4th 713, Leonoff v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337.
§ 15064. Determining the Significance of the Environmental Effects Caused by a Project.
(a) Determining whether a project may have a significant effect plays a critical role in the CEQA process.
(1) If there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may
have a significant effect on the environment, the agency shall prepare a draft EIR.
(2) When a final EIR identifies one or more significant effects, the lead agency and each responsible
agency shall make a finding under Section 15091 for each significant effect and may need to make a
statement of overriding considerations under Section 15093 for the project.
(b) (1) The determination of whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment calls for
careful judgment on the part of the public agency involved, based to the extent possible on scientific
and factual data. An ironclad definition of significant effect is not always possible because the
significance of an activity may vary with the setting. For example, an activity which may not be
significant in an urban area may be significant in a rural area.
(2) Thresholds of significance, as defined in Section 15064.7(a), may assist lead agencies in
determining whether a project may cause a significant impact. When using a threshold, the lead
agency should briefly explain how compliance with the threshold means that the project's impacts are
less than significant. Compliance with the threshold does not relieve a lead agency of the obligation
to consider substantial evidence indicating that the project’s environmental effects may still be
significant.
(c) In determining whether an effect will be adverse or beneficial, the lead agency shall consider the
views held by members of the public in all areas affected as expressed in the whole record before the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 87 of 221
lead agency. Before requiring the preparation of an EIR, the lead agency must still determine whether
environmental change itself might be substantial.
(d) In evaluating the significance of the environmental effect of a project, the lead agency shall consider
direct physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project and reasonably
foreseeable indirect physical changes in the environment which may be caused by the project.
(1) A direct physical change in the environment is a physical change in the environment which is caused
by and immediately related to the project. Examples of direct physical changes in the environment are
the dust, noise, and traffic of heavy equipment that would result from construction of a sewage
treatment plant and possible odors from operation of the plant.
(2) An indirect physical change in the environment is a physical change in the environment which is not
immediately related to the project, but which is caused indirectly by the project. If a direct physical
change in the environment in turn causes another change in the environment, then the other change is
an indirect physical change in the environment. For example, the construction of a new sewage
treatment plant may facilitate population growth in the service area due to the increase in sewage
treatment capacity and may lead to an increase in air pollution.
(3) An indirect physical change is to be considered only if that change is a reasonably foreseeable impact
which may be caused by the project. A change which is speculative or unlikely to occur is not reasonably
foreseeable.
(e) Economic and social changes resulting from a project shall not be treated as significant effects on the
environment. Economic or social changes may be used, however, to determine that a physical change
shall be regarded as a significant effect on the environment. Where a physical change is caused by
economic or social effects of a project, the physical change may be regarded as a significant effect in the
same manner as any other physical change resulting from the project. Alternatively, economic and social
effects of a physical change may be used to determine that the physical change is a significant effect on
the environment. If the physical change causes adverse economic or social effects on people, those
adverse effects may be used as a factor in determining whether the physical change is significant. For
example, if a project would cause overcrowding of a public facility and the overcrowding causes an
adverse effect on people, the overcrowding would be regarded as a significant effect.
(f) The decision as to whether a project may have one or more significant effects shall be based on
substantial evidence in the record of the lead agency.
(1) If the lead agency determines there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a
significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare an EIR (Friends of B Street v. City of
Hayward (1980) 106 Cal. App. 3d 988). Said another way, if a lead agency is presented with a fair
argument that a project may have a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare
an EIR even though it may also be presented with other substantial evidence that the project will not
have a significant effect (No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal. 3d 68).
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 88 of 221
(2) If the lead agency determines there is substantial evidence in the record that the project may have a
significant effect on the environment but the lead agency determines that revisions in the project plans
or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a
point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur and there is no substantial
evidence in light of the whole record before the public agency that the project, as revised, may have a
significant effect on the environment then a mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared.
(3) If the lead agency determines there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant
effect on the environment, the lead agency shall prepare a negative declaration (Friends of B Street v.
City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal. App. 3d 988).
(4) The existence of public controversy over the environment effects of a project will not require
preparation of an EIR if there is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project may have a
significant effect on the environment.
(5) Argument, speculation, unsubstantiated opinion or narrative, or evidence that is clearly inaccurate or
erroneous, or evidence that is not credible, shall not constitute substantial evidence. Substantial
evidence shall include facts, reasonable assumptions predicated upon facts, and expert opinion
supported by facts.
(6) Evidence of economic and social impacts that do not contribute to or are not caused by physical
changes in the environment is not substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on
the environment.
(7) The provisions of sections 15162, 15163, and 15164 apply when the project being analyzed is a
change to, or further approval for, a project for which an EIR or negative declaration was previously
certified or adopted (e.g. a tentative subdivision, conditional use permit). Under case law, the fair
argument standard does not apply to determinations of significance pursuant to sections 15162, 15163,
and 15164.
(g) After application of the principles set forth above in Section 15064(f), and in marginal cases where it
is not clear whether there is substantial evidence that a project may have a significant effect on the
environment, the lead agency shall be guided by the following principle: If there is disagreement among
expert opinion supported by facts over the significance of an effect on the environment, the Lead
Agency shall treat the effect as significant and shall prepare an EIR.
(h)(1) When assessing whether a cumulative effect requires an EIR, the lead agency shall consider
whether the cumulative impact is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively
considerable. An EIR must be prepared if the cumulative impact may be significant and the project's
incremental effect, though individually limited, is cumulatively considerable. "Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 89 of 221
(2) A lead agency may determine in an initial study that a project's contribution to a significant
cumulative impact will be rendered less than cumulatively considerable and thus is not significant. When
a project might contribute to a significant cumulative impact, but the contribution will be rendered less
than cumulatively considerable through mitigation measures set forth in a mitigated negative
declaration, the initial study shall briefly indicate and explain how the contribution has been rendered
less than cumulatively considerable.
(3) A lead agency may determine that a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not
cumulatively considerable if the project will comply with the requirements in a previously approved plan
or mitigation program (including, but not limited to, water quality control plan, air quality attainment or
maintenance plan, integrated waste management plan, habitat conservation plan, natural community
conservation plan, plans or regulations for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions) that provides
specific requirements that will avoid or substantially lessen the cumulative problem within the
geographic area in which the project is located. Such plans or programs must be specified in law or
adopted by the public agency with jurisdiction over the affected resources through a public review
process to implement, interpret, or make specific the law enforced or administered by the public
agency. When relying on a plan, regulation or program, the lead agency should explain how
implementing the particular requirements in the plan, regulation or program ensure that the project's
incremental contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable. If there is substantial
evidence that the possible effects of a particular project are still cumulatively considerable
notwithstanding that the project complies with the specified plan or mitigation program addressing the
cumulative problem, an EIR must be prepared for the project.
(4) The mere existence of significant cumulative impacts caused by other projects alone shall not
constitute substantial evidence that the proposed project's incremental effects are cumulatively
considerable.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21003,
21065, 21068, 21080, 21082, 21082.1, 21082.2, 21083, 21083.05 and 21100, Public Resources Code; No
Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 Cal.3d 68; San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Center v. County of
Stanislaus (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 608; Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359; Laurel
Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112; and
Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98;
Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099; and
Rominger v. County of Colusa (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 690.
New Section 15064.3. Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts.
(a) Purpose.
This section describes specific considerations for evaluating a project’s transportation impacts.
Generally, vehicle miles traveled is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 90 of 221
purposes of this section, “vehicle miles traveled” refers to the amount and distance of automobile
travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project
on transit and non-motorized travel. Except as provided in subdivision (b)(2) below (regarding
roadway capacity), a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant
environmental impact.
(b) Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts.
(1) Land Use Projects. Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may
indicate a significant impact. Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major
transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less
than significant transportation impact. Projects that decrease vehicle miles traveled in the project
area compared to existing conditions should be presumed to have a less than significant
transportation impact.
(2) Transportation Projects. Transportation projects that reduce, or have no impact on, vehicle miles
traveled should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact. For roadway
capacity projects, agencies have discretion to determine the appropriate measure of transportation
impact consistent with CEQA and other applicable requirements. To the extent that such impacts
have already been adequately addressed at a programmatic level, such as in a regional transportation
plan EIR, a lead agency may tier from that analysis as provided in Section 15152 .
(3) Qualitative Analysis. If existing models or methods are not available to estimate the vehicle miles
traveled for the particular project being considered, a lead agency may analyze the project’s vehicle
miles traveled qualitatively. Such a qualitative analysis would evaluate factors such as the availability
of transit, proximity to other destinations, etc. For many projects, a qualitative analysis of
construction 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.
(c) Applicability.
The provisions of this section shall apply prospectively as described in section 15007. A lead agency
may elect to be governed by the provisions of this section immediately. Beginning on July 1, 2020, the
provisions of this section shall apply statewide.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 91 of 221
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21099, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21099
and 21100, Public Resources Code; Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of
Governments (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 413; Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248
Cal.App.4th 256; California Clean Energy Committee v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal. App. 4th 173.
§ 15064.4. Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
(a) The determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the
lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency should shall make a good-
faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data, to describe, calculate or estimate
the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project. A lead agency shall have discretion to
determine, in the context of a particular project, whether to:
(1) Use a model or methodology to q Quantify greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project, and
which model or methodology to use. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or
methodology it considers most appropriate provided it supports its decision with substantial
evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology
selected for use; and/or
(2) Rely on a qualitative analysis or performance based standards.
(b) In determining the significance of a project’s greenhouse gas emissions, the lead agency should
focus its analysis on the reasonably foreseeable incremental contribution of the project’s emissions to
the effects of climate change. A project’s incremental contribution may be cumulatively considerable
even if it appears relatively small compared to statewide, national or global emissions. The agency’s
analysis should consider a timeframe that is appropriate for the project. The agency’s analysis also
must reasonably reflect evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes. A lead agency
should consider the following factors, among others, when assessing determining the significance of
impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment:
(1) The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as compared to
the existing environmental setting;
(2) Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines
applies to the project.
(3) The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement
a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions (see,
e.g., section 15183.5(b)). Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through
a public review process and must reduce or mitigate the project's incremental contribution of
greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a particular
project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the adopted regulations
or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project. In determining the significance of impacts,
the lead agency may consider a project’s consistency with the State’s long-term climate goals or
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 92 of 221
strategies, provided that substantial evidence supports the agency’s analysis of how those goals or
strategies address the project’s incremental contribution to climate change and its conclusion that
the project’s incremental contribution is not cumulatively considerable.
(c) A lead agency may use a model or methodology to estimate greenhouse gas emissions resulting
from a project. The lead agency has discretion to select the model or methodology it considers most
appropriate to enable decision makers to intelligently take into account the project’s incremental
contribution to climate change. The lead agency must support its selection of a model or methodology
with substantial evidence. The lead agency should explain the limitations of the particular model or
methodology selected for use.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21001,
21002, 21003, 21065, 21068, 21080, 21082, 21082.1, 21082.2, 21083.05 and 21100, Public Resources
Code; Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497;
Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Investment & Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal.App.5th 160;
Center for Biological Diversity v. Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204; Communities for a
Better Environment v. City of Richmond (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 70; Eureka Citizens for Responsible
Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Mejia v. City of Los Angeles (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th
322; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1099;
Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98;
Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay Com. v. Board of Port Comm. (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1344; and City of
Irvine v. Irvine Citizens Against Overdevelopment (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 868.
§ 15064.7. Thresholds of Significance.
(a) Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency
uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. A threshold of significance is an
identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-
compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and
compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.
(b) Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency
uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. Thresholds of significance to be
adopted for general use as part of the lead agency's environmental review process must be adopted by
ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and developed through a public review process and be
supported by substantial evidence. Lead agencies may also use thresholds on a case-by-case basis as
provided in Section 15064(b)(2).
(c) When adopting or using thresholds of significance, a lead agency may consider thresholds of
significance previously adopted or recommended by other public agencies or recommended by experts,
provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 93 of 221
(d) Using environmental standards as thresholds of significance promotes consistency in significance
determinations and integrates environmental review with other environmental program planning and
regulation. Any public agency may adopt or use an environmental standard as a threshold of
significance. In adopting or using an environmental standard as a threshold of significance, a public
agency shall explain how the particular requirements of that environmental standard reduce project
impacts, including cumulative impacts, to a level that is less than significant, and why the
environmental standard is relevant to the analysis of the project under consideration. For the
purposes of this subdivision, an “environmental standard” is a rule of general application that is
adopted by a public agency through a public review process and that is all of the following:
(1) a quantitative, qualitative or performance requirement found in an ordinance, resolution, rule,
regulation, order, plan or other environmental requirement;
(2) adopted for the purpose of environmental protection;
(3) addresses the environmental effect caused by the project; and,
(4) applies to the project under review.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21000, 21082 and
21083, Public Resources Code; Communities for a Better Environment v. California Resources Agency
(2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 98; Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004)
116 Cal. App. 4th 1099.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 6. Negative Declaration Process
§ 15072. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration.
(a) A lead agency shall provide a notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or mitigated negative
declaration to the public, responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the county clerk of each county
within which the proposed project is located, sufficiently prior to adoption by the lead agency of the
negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration to allow the public and agencies the review
period provided under Section 15105.
(b) The lead agency shall mail a notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or mitigated negative
declaration to the last known name and address of all organizations and individuals who have previously
requested such notice in writing and shall also give notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or
mitigated negative declaration by at least one of the following procedures to allow the public the review
period provided under Section 15105:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 94 of 221
(1) Publication at least one time by the lead agency in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
affected by the proposed project. If more than one area is affected, the notice shall be published in the
newspaper of largest circulation from among the newspapers of general circulation in those areas.
(2) Posting of notice by the lead agency on and off site in the area where the project is to be located.
(3) Direct mailing to the owners and occupants of property contiguous to the project. Owners of such
property shall be identified as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll.
(c) The alternatives for providing notice specified in subdivision (b) shall not preclude a lead agency from
providing additional notice by other means if the agency so desires, nor shall the requirements of this
section preclude a lead agency from providing the public notice at the same time and in the same
manner as public notice required by any other laws for the project.
(d) The county clerk of each county within which the proposed project is located shall post such notices
in the office of the county clerk within 24 hours of receipt for a period of at least 20 days.
(e) For a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance, the lead agency shall also provide
notice to transportation planning agencies and public agencies which have transportation facilities
within their jurisdictions which could be affected by the project as specified in Section 21092.4(a) of the
Public Resources Code. “Transportation facilities” includes: major local arterials and public transit within
five miles of the project site and freeways, highways and rail transit service within 10 miles of the
project site. The lead agency should also consult with public transit agencies with facilities within one-
half mile of the proposed project.
(f) If the United States Department of Defense or any branch of the United States Armed Forces has
given a lead agency written notification of the specific boundaries of a low-level flight path, military
impact zone, or special use airspace and provided the lead agency with written notification of the
military contact office and address for the military service pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section
15190.5, then the lead agency shall include the specified military contact office in the list of
organizations and individuals receiving a notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or a mitigated
negative declaration pursuant to this section for projects that meet the criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Section 15190.5. The lead agency shall send the specified military contact office such notice of
intent sufficiently prior to adoption by the lead agency of the negative declaration or mitigated negative
declaration to allow the military service the review period provided under Section 15105.
(g) A notice of intent to adopt a negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration shall specify the
following:
(1) A brief description of the proposed project and its location.
(2) The starting and ending dates for the review period during which the lead agency will receive
comments on the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration. This shall include
starting and ending dates for the review period. If the review period has been is shortened pursuant to
Section 15105, the notice shall include a statement to that effect.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 95 of 221
(3) The date, time, and place of any scheduled public meetings or hearings to be held by the lead agency
on the proposed project, when known to the lead agency at the time of notice.
(4) The address or addresses where copies of the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative
declaration including the revisions developed under Section 15070(b) and all documents incorporated
by reference referenced in the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration are
available for review. This location or locations shall be readily accessible to the public during the lead
agency's normal working hours.
(5) The presence of the site on any of the lists enumerated under Section 65962.5 of the Government
Code including, but not limited to lists of hazardous waste facilities, land designated as hazardous waste
property, and hazardous waste disposal sites, and the information in the Hazardous Waste and
Substances Statement required under subdivision (f) of that section.
(6) Other information specifically required by statute or regulation for a particular project or type of
project.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21091, 21092,
21092.2, 21092.4, 21092.3, 21092.6, 21098 and 21151.8, Public Resources Code.
§ 15075. Notice of Determination on a Project for Which a Proposed Negative or Mitigated Negative
Declaration Has Been Approved.
(a) The lead agency shall file a notice of determination within five working days after deciding to carry
out or approve the project. For projects with more than one phase, the lead agency shall file a notice of
determination for each phase requiring a discretionary approval.
(b) The notice of determination shall include:
(1) An identification of the project including the project title as identified on the proposed negative
declaration, its location, and the State Clearinghouse identification number for the proposed negative
declaration if the notice of determination is filed with the State Clearinghouse.
(2) A brief description of the project.
(3) The agency's name, the applicant's name, if any, and the date on which the agency approved the
project.
(4) The determination of the agency that the project will not have a significant effect on the
environment.
(5) A statement that a negative declaration or a mitigated negative declaration was adopted pursuant to
the provisions of CEQA.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 96 of 221
(6) A statement indicating whether mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the
project, and whether a mitigation monitoring plan/program was adopted.
(7) The address where a copy of the negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration may be
examined.
(8) The identity of the person undertaking a project which is supported, in whole or in part, through
contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies or
the identity of the person receiving a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use
from one or more public agencies.
(c) If the lead agency is a state agency, the lead agency shall file the notice of determination with the
Office of Planning and Research within five working days after approval of the project by the lead
agency.
(d) If the lead agency is a local agency, the local agency shall file the notice of determination with the
county clerk of the county or counties in which the project will be located within five working days after
approval of the project by the lead agency. If the project requires discretionary approval from any state
agency, the local lead agency shall also, within five working days of this approval, file a copy of the
notice of determination with the Office of Planning and Research.
(e) A notice of determination filed with the county clerk shall be available for public inspection and shall
be posted by the county clerk within 24 hours of receipt for a period of at least 30 days. Thereafter, the
clerk shall return the notice to the local lead agency with a notation of the period during which it was
posted. The local lead agency shall retain the notice for not less than 12 months.
(f) A notice of determination filed with the Office of Planning and Research shall be available for public
inspection and shall be posted for a period of at least 30 days. The Office of Planning and Research shall
retain each notice for not less than 12 months.
(g) The filing of the notice of determination pursuant to subdivision (c) above for state agencies and the
filing and posting of the notice of determination pursuant to subdivisions (d) and (e) above for local
agencies, start a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA.
(h) A sample Notice of Determination (Rev. 2011) is provided in Appendix D. Each public agency may
devise its own form, but the minimum content requirements of subdivision (b) above shall be met.
Public agencies are encouraged to make copies of all notices filed pursuant to this section available in
electronic format on the Internet. Such electronic notices are in addition to the posting requirements of
these guidelines and the Public Resources Code.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21152, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080(c),
21108(a), 21108(c), 21152 and 21167(b), Public Resources Code; Citizens of Lake Murray Area
Association v. City Council, (1982) 129 Cal. App. 3d 436.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 97 of 221
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 7. EIR Process
§ 15082. Notice of Preparation and Determination of Scope of EIR.
(a) Notice of Preparation. Immediately after deciding that an environmental impact report is required
for a project, the lead agency shall send a notice of preparation stating that an environmental impact
report will be prepared to the Office of Planning and Research and each responsible and trustee agency
a notice of preparation stating that an environmental impact report will be prepared and file with the
county clerk of each county in which the project will be located. This notice shall also be sent to every
federal agency involved in approving or funding the project. If the United States Department of Defense
or any branch of the United States Armed Forces has given the lead agency written notification of the
specific boundaries of a low-level flight path, military impact zone, or special use airspace and provided
the lead agency with written notification of the military contact office and address for the military
service pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 15190.5, then the lead agency shall include the specified
military contact office in the list of organizations and individuals receiving a notice of preparation of an
EIR pursuant to this section for projects that meet the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section
15190.5.
(1) The notice of preparation shall provide the responsible and trustee agencies, and the Office of
Planning and Research and county clerk with sufficient information describing the project and the
potential environmental effects to enable the responsible agencies to make a meaningful response. At a
minimum, the information shall include:
(A) Description of the project,
(B) Location of the project (either by street address and cross street, for a project in an urbanized area,
or by attaching a specific map, preferably a copy of a U.S.G.S. 15'or 7 1/2'topographical map identified
by quadrangle name), and
(C) Probable environmental effects of the project.
(2) A sample notice of preparation is shown in Appendix I. Public agencies are free to devise their own
formats for this notice. A copy of the initial study may be sent with the notice to supply the necessary
information.
(3) To send copies of the notice of preparation, the lead agency shall use either certified mail or any
other method of transmittal that provides it with a record that the notice was received.
(4) The lead agency may begin work on the draft EIR immediately without awaiting responses to the
notice of preparation. The draft EIR in preparation may need to be revised or expanded to conform to
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 98 of 221
responses to the notice of preparation. A lead agency shall not circulate a draft EIR for public review
before the time period for responses to the notice of preparation has expired.
(b) Response to Notice of Preparation. Within 30 days after receiving the notice of preparation under
subdivision (a), each responsible and trustee agency and the Office of Planning and Research shall
provide the lead agency with specific detail about the scope and content of the environmental
information related to the responsible or trustee agency's area of statutory responsibility that must be
included in the draft EIR.
(1) The response at a minimum shall identify:
(A) The significant environmental issues and reasonable alternatives and mitigation measures that the
responsible or trustee agency, or the Office of Planning and Research will need to have explored in the
draft EIR; and
(B) Whether the agency will be a responsible agency or trustee agency for the project.
(2) If a responsible or trustee agency, or the Office of Planning and Research fails by the end of the 30-
day period to provide the lead agency with either a response to the notice or a well-justified request for
additional time, the lead agency may presume that none of those entities have a response to make.
(3) A generalized list of concerns not related to the specific project shall not meet the requirements of
this section for a response.
(c) Meetings. In order to expedite the consultation, the lead agency, a responsible agency, a trustee
agency, the Office of Planning and Research, or a project applicant may request one or more meetings
between representatives of the agencies involved to assist the lead agency in determining the scope and
content of the environmental information that the responsible or trustee agency may require. Such
meetings shall be convened by the lead agency as soon as possible, but no later than 30 days after the
meetings were requested. On request, the Office of Planning and Research will assist in convening
meetings that involve state agencies.
(1) For projects of statewide, regional or areawide significance pursuant to Section 15206, the lead
agency shall conduct at least one scoping meeting. A scoping meeting held pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act, 42 USC 4321 et seq.(NEPA) in the city or county within which the project is
located satisfies this requirement if the lead agency meets the notice requirements of subsection (c)(2)
below.
(2) The lead agency shall provide notice of the scoping meeting to all of the following:
(A) any county or city that borders on a county or city within which the project is located, unless
otherwise designated annually by agreement between the lead agency and the county or city;
(B) any responsible agency
(C) any public agency that has jurisdiction by law with respect to the project;
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 99 of 221
(D) any organization or individual who has filed a written request for the notice.
(3) A lead agency shall call at least one scoping meeting for a proposed project that may affect highways
or other facilities under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation if the meeting is requested
by the department. The lead agency shall call the scoping meeting as soon as possible but not later than
30 days after receiving the request from the Department of Transportation.
(d) The Office of Planning and Research. The Office of Planning and Research will ensure that the state
responsible and trustee agencies reply to the lead agency within 30 days of receipt of the notice of
preparation by the state responsible and trustee agencies.
(e) Identification Number. When the notice of preparation is submitted to the State Clearinghouse, the
state identification number issued by the Clearinghouse shall be the identification number for all
subsequent environmental documents on the project. The identification number should be referenced
on all subsequent correspondence regarding the project, specifically on the title page of the draft and
final EIR and on the notice of determination.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21083.9, 21080.4,
21092.3 and 21098, Public Resources Code.
§ 15086.Consultation Concerning Draft EIR.
(a) The lead agency shall consult with and request comments on the draft EIR from:
(1) Responsible agencies,
(2) Trustee agencies with resources affected by the project, and
(3) Any other state, federal, and local agencies which have jurisdiction by law with respect to the project
or which exercise authority over resources which may be affected by the project, including water
agencies consulted pursuant to section 15083.5.
(4) Any city or county which borders on a city or county within which the project is located.
(5) For a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance, the transportation planning agencies
and public agencies which have transportation facilities within their jurisdictions which could be affected
by the project. “Transportation facilities” includes: major local arterials and public transit within five
miles of the project site, and freeways, highways and rail transit service within 10 miles of the project
site. The lead agency should also consult with public transit agencies with facilities within one-half
mile of the proposed project.
(6) For a state lead agency when the EIR is being prepared for a highway or freeway project, the
California Air Resources Board as to the air pollution impact of the potential vehicular use of the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 100 of 221
highway or freeway and if a non-attainment area, the local air quality management district for a
determination of conformity with the air quality management plan.
(7) For a subdivision project located within one mile of a facility of the State Water Resources
Development System, the California Department of Water Resources.
(b) The lead agency may consult directly with:
(1) Any person who has special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved,
(2) Any member of the public who has filed a written request for notice with the lead agency or the clerk
of the governing body.
(3) Any person identified by the applicant whom the applicant believes will be concerned with the
environmental effects of the project.
(c) A responsible agency or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those
activities involved in the project that are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required
to be carried out or approved by the responsible agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific
documentation.
(d) Prior to the close of the public review period, a responsible agency or trustee agency which has
identified what that agency considers to be significant environmental effects shall advise the lead
agency of those effects. As to those effects relevant to its decision, if any, on the project, the responsible
or trustee agency shall either submit to the lead agency complete and detailed performance objectives
for mitigation measures addressing those effects or refer the lead agency to appropriate, readily
available guidelines or reference documents concerning mitigation measures. If the responsible or
trustee agency is not aware of mitigation measures that address identified effects, the responsible or
trustee agency shall so state.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections
21081.6, 21092.4, 21092.5, 21104 and 21153, Public Resources Code.
§ 15087. Public Review of Draft EIR.
(a) The lead agency shall provide public notice of the availability of a draft EIR at the same time as it
sends a notice of completion to the Office of Planning and Research. If the United States Department of
Defense or any branch of the United States Armed Forces has given the lead agency written notification
of the specific boundaries of a low-level flight path, military impact zone, or special use airspace and
provided the lead agency with written notification of the contact office and address for the military
service pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 15190.5, then the lead agency shall include the specified
military contact office in the list of organizations and individuals receiving a notice of availability of a
draft EIR pursuant to this section for projects that meet the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 101 of 221
15190.5. The public notice shall be given as provided under Section 15105 (a sample form is provided in
Appendix L). Notice shall be mailed to the last known name and address of all organizations and
individuals who have previously requested such notice in writing, and shall also be given by at least one
of the following procedures:
(1) Publication at least one time by the public agency in a newspaper of general circulation in the area
affected by the proposed project. If more than one area is affected, the notice shall be published in the
newspaper of largest circulation from among the newspapers of general circulation in those areas.
(2) Posting of notice by the public agency on and off the site in the area where the project is to be
located.
(3) Direct mailing to the owners and occupants of property contiguous to the parcel or parcels on which
the project is located. Owners of such property shall be identified as shown on the latest equalized
assessment roll.
(b) The alternatives for providing notice specified in subdivision (a) shall not preclude a public agency
from providing additional notice by other means if such agency so desires, nor shall the requirements of
this section preclude a public agency from providing the public notice required by this section at the
same time and in the same manner as public notice otherwise required by law for the project.
(c) The notice shall disclose the following:
(1) A brief description of the proposed project and its location.
(2) The starting and ending dates for the review period during which the lead agency will receive
comments, and the manner in which the lead agency will receive those comments. If the review period
is shortened, the notice shall disclose that fact.
(3) The date, time, and place of any scheduled public meetings or hearings to be held by the lead agency
on the proposed project when known to the lead agency at the time of notice.
(4) A list of the significant environmental effects anticipated as a result of the project, to the extent
which such effects are known to the lead agency at the time of the notice.
(5) The address where copies of the EIR and all documents incorporated by reference referenced in the
EIR will be available for public review. This location shall be readily accessible to the public during the
lead agency's normal working hours.
(6) The presence of the site on any of the lists of sites enumerated under Section 65962.5 of the
Government Code including, but not limited to lists of hazardous waste facilities, land designated as
hazardous waste property, hazardous waste disposal sites and others, and the information in the
Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement required under subdivision (f) of that Section.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 102 of 221
(d) The notice required under this section shall be posted in the office of the county clerk of each county
in which the project will be located for a period of at least 30 days. The county clerk shall post such
notices within 24 hours of receipt.
(e) In order to provide sufficient time for public review, the review period for a draft EIR shall be as
provided in Section 15105. The review period shall be combined with the consultation required under
Section 15086. When a draft EIR has been submitted to the State Clearinghouse, the public review
period shall be at least as long as the review period established by the State Clearinghouse. The public
review period and the state agency review period may, but are not required to, begin and end at the
same time. Day one of the state review period shall be the date that the State Clearinghouse distributes
the document to state agencies.
(f) Public agencies shall use the State Clearinghouse to distribute draft EIRs to state agencies for review
and should use areawide clearinghouses to distribute the documents to regional and local agencies.
(g) To make copies of EIRs available to the public, lead agencies should furnish copies of draft EIRs to
public library systems serving the area involved. Copies should also be available in offices of the lead
agency.
(h) Public agencies should compile listings of other agencies, particularly local agencies, which have
jurisdiction by law and/or special expertise with respect to various projects and project locations. Such
listings should be a guide in determining which agencies should be consulted with regard to a particular
project.
(i) Public hearings may be conducted on the environmental documents, either in separate proceedings
or in conjunction with other proceedings of the public agency. Public hearings are encouraged, but not
required as an element of the CEQA process.
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21091, 21092,
21092.2, 21092.3, 21092.6, 21098, 21104, 21152, 21153 and 21161, Public Resources Code.
§ 15088. Evaluation of and Response to Comments.
(a) The lead agency shall evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons who
reviewed the draft EIR and shall prepare a written response. The lead agency shall respond to comments
raising significant environmental issues received during the noticed comment period and any
extensions and may respond to late comments.
(b) The lead agency shall provide a written proposed response, either in a printed copy or in an
electronic format, to a public agency on comments made by that public agency at least 10 days prior to
certifying an environmental impact report.
(c) The written response shall describe the disposition of significant environmental issues raised (e.g.,
revisions to the proposed project to mitigate anticipated impacts or objections). In particular, the major
environmental issues raised when the lead agency's position is at variance with recommendations and
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 103 of 221
objections raised in the comments must be addressed in detail giving reasons why specific comments
and suggestions were not accepted. There must be good faith, reasoned analysis in response.
Conclusory statements unsupported by factual information will not suffice. The level of detail
contained in the response, however, may correspond to the level of detail provided in the comment
(i.e., responses to general comments may be general). A general response may be appropriate when
a comment does not contain or specifically refer to readily available information, or does not explain
the relevance of evidence submitted with the comment.
(d) The response to comments may take the form of a revision to the draft EIR or may be a separate
section in the final EIR. Where the response to comments makes important changes in the information
contained in the text of the draft EIR, the lead agency should either:
(1) Revise the text in the body of the EIR, or
(2) Include marginal notes showing that the information is revised in the response to comments.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21091; 21092.5, 21104
and 21153, Public Resources Code; People v. County of Kern, (1974) 39 Cal. App. 3d 830; Cleary v.
County of Stanislaus, (1981) 118 Cal. App. 3d 348; Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water
Agency (2003) 108 Cal. App. 4th 859; Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development
v. City of San Diego (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 515; Consolidated Irrigation Dist. v. Superior Court (2012)
205 Cal. App. 4th 697.
§ 15094. Notice of Determination.
(a) The lead agency shall file a Notice of Determination (Rev. 2011) within five working days after
deciding to carry out or approve the project.
(b) The notice of determination shall include:
(1) An identification of the project including the project title as identified on the draft EIR, and the
location of the project (either by street address and cross street for a project in an urbanized area or by
attaching a specific map, preferably a copy of a U.S.G.S. 15' or 7-1/2' topographical map identified by
quadrangle name). If the notice of determination is filed with the State Clearinghouse, the State
Clearinghouse identification number for the draft EIR shall be provided.
(2) A brief description of the project.
(3) The lead agency's name, the applicant's name, if any, and the date on which the agency approved
the project. If a responsible agency files the notice of determination pursuant to Section 15096(i), the
responsible agency's name, the applicant's name, if any, and date of approval shall also be identified.
(4) The determination of the agency whether the project in its approved form will have a significant
effect on the environment.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 104 of 221
(5) A statement that an EIR was prepared and certified pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
(6) Whether mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project, and whether a
mitigation monitoring plan/program was adopted.
(7) Whether findings were made pursuant to Section 15091.
(8) Whether a statement of overriding considerations was adopted for the project.
(9) The address where a copy of the final EIR and the record of project approval may be examined.
(10) If different from the applicant, the identity of the person undertaking the project which is
supported, in whole or in part, through contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance
from one or more public agencies or the identity of the person receiving a lease, permit, license,
certificate, or other entitlement for use from one or more public agencies.
(c) If the lead agency is a state agency, the lead agency shall file the notice of determination with the
Office of Planning and Research within five working days after approval of the project by the lead
agency.
(d) If the lead agency is a local agency, the local lead agency shall file the notice of determination with
the county clerk of the county or counties in which the project will be located, within five working days
after approval of the project by the lead agency. If the project requires discretionary approval from any
state agency, the local lead agency shall also, within five working days of this approval, file a copy of the
notice of determination with the Office of Planning and Research.
(e) A notice of determination filed with the county clerk shall be available for public inspection and shall
be posted within 24 hours of receipt for a period of at least 30 days. Thereafter, the clerk shall return
the notice to the local lead agency with a notation of the period during which it was posted. The local
lead agency shall retain the notice for not less than 12 months.
(f) A notice of determination filed with the Office of Planning and Research shall be available for public
inspection and shall be posted for a period of at least 30 days. The Office of Planning and Research shall
retain each notice, for not less than 12 months.
(g) The filing of the notice of determination pursuant to subdivision (c) above for state agencies and the
filing and posting of the notice of determination pursuant to subdivisions (d) and (e) above for local
agencies, start a 30-day statute of limitations on court challenges to the approval under CEQA.
(h) A sample notice of determination is provided in Appendix D. Each public agency may devise its own
form, but any such form shall include, at a minimum, the information required by subdivision (b). Public
agencies are encouraged to make copies of all notices filed pursuant to this section available in
electronic format on the Internet. Such electronic notices are in addition to the posting requirements of
the Guidelines and the Public Resources Code.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 105 of 221
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083 and 21152, Public Resources code. Reference: Sections 21108,
21152 and 21167, Public Resources code; Citizens of Lake Murray Area Association v. City Council, (1982)
129 Cal. App. 3d 436.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 8. Time Limits
§ 15107. Completion of Negative Declaration for Certain Private Projects.
With private projects involving the issuance of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement
for use by one or more public agencies, the negative declaration must be completed and approved
within 180 days from the date when the lead agency accepted the application as complete. Lead agency
procedures may provide that the 180-day time limit may be extended once for a period of not more
than 90 days upon consent of the lead agency and the applicant.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21100.2 and 21151.5,
Public Resources Code.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 9. Contents of Environmental Impact Reports
§ 15124. Project Description.
The description of the project shall contain the following information but should not supply extensive
detail beyond that needed for evaluation and review of the environmental impact.
(a) The precise location and boundaries of the proposed project shall be shown on a detailed map,
preferably topographic. The location of the project shall also appear on a regional map.
(b) A statement of the objectives sought by the proposed project. A clearly written statement of
objectives will help the lead agency develop a reasonable range of alternatives to evaluate in the EIR
and will aid the decision makers in preparing findings or a statement of overriding considerations, if
necessary. The statement of objectives should include the underlying purpose of the project and may
discuss the project benefits.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 106 of 221
(c) A general description of the project's technical, economic, and environmental characteristics,
considering the principal engineering proposals if any and supporting public service facilities.
(d) A statement briefly describing the intended uses of the EIR.
(1) This statement shall include, to the extent that the information is known to the lead agency,
(A) A list of the agencies that are expected to use the EIR in their decision-making, and
(B) A list of permits and other approvals required to implement the project.
(C) A list of related environmental review and consultation requirements required by federal, state, or
local laws, regulations, or policies. To the fullest extent possible, the lead agency should integrate CEQA
review with these related environmental review and consultation requirements.
(2) If a public agency must make more than one decision on a project, all its decisions subject to CEQA
should be listed, preferably in the order in which they will occur. On request, the Office of Planning and
Research will provide assistance in identifying state permits for a project.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080.3, 21080.4,
21165, 21166 and 21167.2, Public Resources Code; County of Inyo v. City of Los Angeles (1977) 71 Cal.
App. 3d 185.
§ 15125. Environmental Setting.
(a) An EIR must include a description of the physical environmental conditions in the vicinity of the
project. , as they exist at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation
is published, at the time environ-mental analysis is commenced, from both a local and regional
perspective. This environmental setting will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by
which a lead agency determines whether an impact is significant. The description of the environmental
setting shall be no longer than is necessary to provide an understanding of the significant effects of the
proposed project and its alternatives. The purpose of this requirement is to give the public and
decision makers the most accurate and understandable picture practically possible of the project's
likely near-term and long-term impacts.
(1) Generally, the lead agency should describe physical environmental conditions as they exist at the
time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is published, at the time
environmental analysis is commenced, from both a local and regional perspective. Where existing
conditions change or fluctuate over time, and where necessary to provide the most accurate picture
practically possible of the project’s impacts, a lead agency may define existing conditions by
referencing historic conditions, or conditions expected when the project becomes operational, or
both, that are supported with substantial evidence. In addition, a lead agency may also use baselines
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 107 of 221
consisting of both existing conditions and projected future conditions that are supported by reliable
projections based on substantial evidence in the record.
(2) A lead agency may use projected future conditions (beyond the date of project operations)
baseline as the sole baseline for analysis only if it demonstrates with substantial evidence that use of
existing conditions would be either misleading or without informative value to decision-makers and
the public. Use of projected future conditions as the only baseline must be supported by reliable
projections based on substantial evidence in the record.
(3) An existing conditions baseline shall not include hypothetical conditions, such as those that might
be allowed, but have never actually occurred, under existing permits or plans, as the baseline.
(b) When preparing an EIR for a plan for the reuse of a military base, lead agencies should refer to the
special application of the principle of baseline conditions for determining significant impacts contained
in Section 15229.
(c) Knowledge of the regional setting is critical to the assessment of environmental impacts. Special
emphasis should be placed on environmental resources that are rare or unique to that region and would
be affected by the project. The EIR must demonstrate that the significant environmental impacts of the
proposed project were adequately investigated and discussed and it must permit the significant effects
of the project to be considered in the full environmental context.
(d) The EIR shall discuss any inconsistencies between the proposed project and applicable general plans,
specific plans and regional plans. Such regional plans include, but are not limited to, the applicable air
quality attainment or maintenance plan or State Implementation Plan, area-wide waste treatment and
water quality control plans, regional transportation plans, regional housing allocation plans, regional
blueprint plans, plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, habitat conservation plans, natural
community conservation plans and regional land use plans for the protection of the coastal zone, Lake
Tahoe Basin, San Francisco Bay, and Santa Monica Mountains.
(e) Where a proposed project is compared with an adopted plan, the analysis shall examine the existing
physical conditions at the time the notice of preparation is published, or if no notice of preparation is
published, at the time environmental analysis is commenced as well as the potential future conditions
discussed in the plan.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections
21060.5, 21061 and 21100, Public Resources Code; Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line
Construction Authority (2013) 57 Cal. 4th 439; Communities for a Better Environment v. South Coast
Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310; Cherry Valley Pass Acres & Neighbors v. City of
Beaumont (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 316; San Francisco Baykeeper v. California State Lands Commission
(2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 202; North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 94;
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 108 of 221
E.P.I.C. v. County of El Dorado (1982) 131 Cal. App. 3d 350; San Joaquin Raptor/Wildlife Rescue Center v.
County of Stanislaus (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 713; Bloom v. McGurk (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1307.
§ 15126.2. Consideration and Discussion of Significant Environmental Impacts.
(a) The Significant Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project. An EIR shall identify and focus on the
significant environmental effects of the proposed project on the environment. In assessing the impact
of a proposed project on the environment, the lead agency should normally limit its examination to
changes in the existing physical conditions in the affected area as they exist at the time the notice of
preparation is published, or where no notice of preparation is published, at the time environmental
analysis is commenced. Direct and indirect significant effects of the project on the environment shall be
clearly identified and described, giving due consideration to both the short-term and long-term effects.
The discussion should include relevant specifics of the area, the resources involved, physical changes,
alterations to ecological systems, and changes induced in population distribution, population
concentration, the human use of the land (including commercial and residential development), health
and safety problems caused by the physical changes, and other aspects of the resource base such as
water, historical resources, scenic quality, and public services. The EIR shall also analyze any significant
environmental effects the project might cause or risk exacerbating by bringing development and people
into the area affected. For example, an EIR on a subdivision astride an active fault line should identify
as a significant effect the seismic hazard to future occupants of the subdivision. The subdivision would
have the effect of attracting people to the location and exposing them to the hazards found there.
Similarly, the EIR should evaluate any potentially significant direct, indirect, or cumulative
environmental impacts of locating development in other areas susceptible to hazardous conditions
(e.g., floodplains, coastlines, wildfire risk areas), including both short-term and long-term conditions, as
identified in authoritative hazard maps, risk assessments or in land use plans, addressing such hazards
areas.
(b) Energy Impacts. If analysis of the project’s energy use reveals that the project may result in
significant environmental effects due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary use of energy, or
wasteful use of energy resources, the EIR shall mitigate that energy use. This analysis should include
the project’s energy use for all project phases and components, including transportation-related
energy, during construction and operation. In addition to building code compliance, other relevant
considerations may include, among others, the project’s size, location, orientation, equipment use
and any renewable energy features that could be incorporated into the project. (Guidance on
information that may be included in such an analysis is presented in Appendix F.) This analysis is
subject to the rule of reason and shall focus on energy use that is caused by the project. This analysis
may be included in related analyses of air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation or
utilities in the discretion of the lead agency.
(c) Significant Environmental Effects Which Cannot be Avoided if the Proposed Project is Implemented.
Describe any significant impacts, including those which can be mitigated but not reduced to a level of
insignificance. Where there are impacts that cannot be alleviated without imposing an alternative
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 109 of 221
design, their implications and the reasons why the project is being proposed, notwithstanding their
effect, should be described.
(c)(d) Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes Which Would be Caused by the Proposed Project
Should it be Implemented. Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of
the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse
thereafter unlikely. Primary impacts and, particularly, secondary impacts (such as highway improvement
which provides access to a previously inaccessible area) generally commit future generations to similar
uses. Also irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project.
Irretrievable commitments of resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is
justified. (See Public Resources Code section 21100.1 and Title 14, California Code of Regulations,
section 15127 for limitations to applicability of this requirement.)
(d)(e) Growth-Inducing Impact of the Proposed Project. Discuss the ways in which the proposed project
could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or
indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Included in this are projects which would remove obstacles
to population growth (a major expansion of a waste water treatment plant might, for example, allow for
more construction in service areas). Increases in the population may tax existing community service
facilities, requiring construction of new facilities that could cause significant environmental effects. Also
discuss the characteristic of some projects which may encourage and facilitate other activities that could
significantly affect the environment, either individually or cumulatively. It must not be assumed that
growth in any area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21002,
21003 and 21100, Public Resources Code; CBIA v. BAAQMD (2015) 62 Cal.4th 369; Ukiah Citizens for
Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal. App. 4th 256; Tracy First v. City of Tracy (2009) 177
Cal.App.4th 912; Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors, (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights
Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California, (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376; Gentry v. City
of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359; Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the
University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112; and Goleta Union School Dist. v. Regents of the Univ. Of
Calif (1995) 37 Cal. App.4th 1025.
§ 15126.4. Consideration and Discussion of Mitigation Measures Proposed to Minimize Significant
Effects.
(a) Mitigation Measures in General.
(1) An EIR shall describe feasible measures which could minimize significant adverse impacts, including
where relevant, inefficient and unnecessary consumption of energy.
(A) The discussion of mitigation measures shall distinguish between the measures which are proposed
by project proponents to be included in the project and other measures proposed by the lead,
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 110 of 221
responsible or trustee agency or other persons which are not included but the lead agency determines
could reasonably be expected to reduce adverse impacts if required as conditions of approving the
project. This discussion shall identify mitigation measures for each significant environmental effect
identified in the EIR.
(B) 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 should shall
not be deferred until some future time. However, measures may specify performance standards which
would mitigate the significant effect of the project and which may be accomplished in more than one
specified way. The specific details of a mitigation measure, however, may be developed after project
approval when it is impractical or infeasible to include those details during the project’s
environmental review provided that the agency (1) commits itself to the mitigation, (2) adopts specific
performance standards the mitigation will achieve, and (3) identifies the type(s) of potential action(s)
that can feasibly achieve that performance standard and that will considered, analyzed, and
potentially incorporated in the mitigation measure. Compliance with a regulatory permit or other
similar process may be identified as mitigation if compliance would result in implementation of
measures that would be reasonably expected, based on substantial evidence in the record, to reduce
the significant impact to the specified performance standards.
(C) Energy conservation measures, as well as other appropriate mitigation measures, shall be discussed
when relevant. Examples of energy conservation measures are provided in Appendix F.
(D) If a mitigation measure would cause one or more significant effects in addition to those that would
be caused by the project as proposed, the effects of the mitigation measure shall be discussed but in
less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed. (Stevens v. City of Glendale (1981) 125
Cal.App.3d 986.)
(2) Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or other
legally-binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public
project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.
(3) Mitigation measures are not required for effects which are not found to be significant.
(4) Mitigation measures must be consistent with all applicable constitutional requirements, including the
following:
(A) There must be an essential nexus (i.e. connection) between the mitigation measure and a legitimate
governmental interest. Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825 (1987); and
(B) The mitigation measure must be “roughly proportional” to the impacts of the project. Dolan v. City of
Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994). Where the mitigation measure is an ad hoc exaction, it must be “roughly
proportional” to the impacts of the project. Ehrlich v. City of Culver City (1996) 12 Cal.4th 854.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 111 of 221
(5) If the lead agency determines that a mitigation measure cannot be legally imposed, the measure
need not be proposed or analyzed. Instead, the EIR may simply reference that fact and briefly explain
the reasons underlying the lead agency's determination.
(b) Mitigation Measures Related to Impacts on Historical Resources.
(1) Where maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or
reconstruction of the historical resource will be conducted in a manner consistent with the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving,
Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995), Weeks and Grimmer, the
project's impact on the historical resource shall generally be considered mitigated below a level of
significance and thus is not significant.
(2) In some circumstances, documentation of an historical resource, by way of historic narrative,
photographs or architectural drawings, as mitigation for the effects of demolition of the resource will
not mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur.
(3) Public agencies should, whenever feasible, seek to avoid damaging effects on any historical resource
of an archaeological nature. The following factors shall be considered and discussed in an EIR for a
project involving such an archaeological site:
(A) Preservation in place is the preferred manner of mitigating impacts to archaeological sites.
Preservation in place maintains the relationship between artifacts and the archaeological context.
Preservation may also avoid conflict with religious or cultural values of groups associated with the site.
(B) Preservation in place may be accomplished by, but is not limited to, the following:
1. Planning construction to avoid archaeological sites;
2. Incorporation of sites within parks, greenspace, or other open space;
3. Covering the archaeological sites with a layer of chemically stable soil before building tennis courts,
parking lots, or similar facilities on the site.
4. Deeding the site into a permanent conservation easement.
(C) When data recovery through excavation is the only feasible mitigation, a data recovery plan, which
makes provision for adequately recovering the scientifically consequential information from and about
the historical resource, shall be prepared and adopted prior to any excavation being undertaken. Such
studies shall be deposited with the California Historical Resources Regional Information Center.
Archaeological sites known to contain human remains shall be treated in accordance with the provisions
of Section 7050.5 Health and Safety Code. If an artifact must be removed during project excavation or
testing, curation may be an appropriate mitigation.
(D) Data recovery shall not be required for an historical resource if the lead agency determines that
testing or studies already completed have adequately recovered the scientifically consequential
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 112 of 221
information from and about the archaeological or historical resource, provided that the determination is
documented in the EIR and that the studies are deposited with the California Historical Resources
Regional Information Center.
(c) Mitigation Measures Related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
Consistent with section 15126.4(a), lead agencies shall consider feasible means, supported by
substantial evidence and subject to monitoring or reporting, of mitigating the significant effects of
greenhouse gas emissions. Measures to mitigate the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions may
include, among others:
(1) Measures in an existing plan or mitigation program for the reduction of emissions that are required
as part of the lead agency's decision;
(2) Reductions in emissions resulting from a project through implementation of project features, project
design, or other measures, such as those described in Appendix F;
(3) Off-site measures, including offsets that are not otherwise required, to mitigate a project's
emissions;
(4) Measures that sequester greenhouse gases;
(5) In the case of the adoption of a plan, such as a general plan, long range development plan, or plans
for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, mitigation may include the identification of specific
measures that may be implemented on a project-by-project basis. Mitigation may also include the
incorporation of specific measures or policies found in an adopted ordinance or regulation that reduces
the cumulative effect of emissions.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference:
Sections 5020.5, 21002, 21003, 21083.05, 21084.1 and 21100, Public Resources Code; Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors, (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents
of the University of California, (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376; Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th
1359; Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th
1112; Sacramento Old City Assn. v. City Council of Sacramento (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 1011; San
Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City & Co. of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th
656; Ass'n of Irritated Residents v. County of Madera (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1383; and Environmental
Council of Sacramento v. City of Sacramento (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1018; Clover Valley Foundation v.
City of Rocklin (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 200; Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee (2012) 210
Cal.App.4th 260; and Rialto Citizens for Responsible Growth v. City of Rialto (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th
899.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 113 of 221
Article 10. Considerations in Preparing EIRs and Negative Declarations
§ 15152. Tiering.
(a) “Tiering” refers to using the analysis of general matters contained in a broader EIR (such as one
prepared for a general plan or policy statement) with later EIRs and negative declarations on narrower
projects; incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR; and concentrating the
later EIR or negative declaration solely on the issues specific to the later project.
(b) Agencies are encouraged to tier the environmental analyses which they prepare for separate but
related projects including general plans, zoning changes, and development projects. This approach can
eliminate repetitive discussions of the same issues and focus the later EIR or negative declaration on the
actual issues ripe for decision at each level of environmental review. Tiering is appropriate when the
sequence of analysis is from an EIR prepared for a general plan, policy, or program to an EIR or negative
declaration for another plan, policy, or program of lesser scope, or to a site-specific EIR or negative
declaration. Tiering does not excuse the lead agency from adequately analyzing reasonably foreseeable
significant environmental effects of the project and does not justify deferring such analysis to a later tier
EIR or negative declaration. However, the level of detail contained in a first tier EIR need not be greater
than that of the program, plan, policy, or ordinance being analyzed.
(c) Where a lead agency is using the tiering process in connection with an EIR for a large-scale planning
approval, such as a general plan or component thereof (e.g., an area plan or community plan), the
development of detailed, site-specific information may not be feasible but can be deferred, in many
instances, until such time as the lead agency prepares a future environmental document in connection
with a project of a more limited geographical scale, as long as deferral does not prevent adequate
identification of significant effects of the planning approval at hand.
(d) Where an EIR has been prepared and certified for a program, plan, policy, or ordinance consistent
with the requirements of this section, any lead agency for a later project pursuant to or consistent with
the program, plan, policy, or ordinance should limit the EIR or negative declaration on the later project
to effects which:
(1) Were not examined as significant effects on the environment in the prior EIR; or
(2) Are susceptible to substantial reduction or avoidance by the choice of specific revisions in the
project, by the imposition of conditions, or other means.
(e) Tiering under this section shall be limited to situations where the project is consistent with the
general plan and zoning of the city or county in which the project is located, except that a project
requiring a rezone to achieve or maintain conformity with a general plan may be subject to tiering.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 114 of 221
(f) A later EIR shall be required when the initial study or other analysis finds that the later project may
cause significant effects on the environment that were not adequately addressed in the prior EIR. A
negative declaration shall be required when the provisions of Section 15070 are met.
(1) Where a lead agency determines that a cumulative effect has been adequately addressed in the prior
EIR, that effect is not treated as significant for purposes of the later EIR or negative declaration, and
need not be discussed in detail.
(2) When assessing whether there is a new significant cumulative effect, the lead agency shall consider
whether the incremental effects of the project would be considerable when viewed in the context of
past, present, and probable future projects. At this point, the question is not whether there is a
significant cumulative impact, but whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. For
a discussion on how to assess whether project impacts are cumulatively considerable, see Section
15064(i).
(3) Significant environmental effects have been “adequately addressed” if the lead agency determines
that:
(A) they have been mitigated or avoided as a result of the prior environmental impact report and
findings adopted in connection with that prior environmental report; or
(B) they have been examined at a sufficient level of detail in the prior environmental impact report to
enable those effects to be mitigated or avoided by site specific revisions, the imposition of conditions, or
by other means in connection with the approval of the later project.
(g) When tiering is used, the later EIRs or negative declarations shall refer to the prior EIR and state
where a copy of the prior EIR may be examined. The later EIR or negative declaration should state that
the lead agency is using the tiering concept and that it is being tiered with the earlier EIR.
(h) There are various types of EIRs that may be used in a tiering situation. The rules in this section
govern tiering generally. Several other methods to streamline the environmental review process
exist, which are governed by the more specific rules of those provisions. Where multiple methods
may apply, lead agencies have discretion regarding which to use. These other methods include, but
are not limited to, the following:
(1) General plan EIR (Section 15166).
(2) Staged EIR (Section 15167).
(3) Program EIR (Section 15168).
(4) Master EIR (Section 15175).
(5) Multiple-family residential development/residential and commercial or retail mixed-use
development (Section 15179.5).
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 115 of 221
(6) Redevelopment project (Section 15180).
(7) Projects consistent with community plan, general plan, or zoning (Section 15183).
(8) Infill projects (Section 15183.3).
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21003, 21061,
21083.3, 21093, 21094, 21100, and 21151, 21157, and 21158 Public Resources Code; Stanislaus Natural
Heritage Project, Sierra Club v. County of Stanislaus (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 182; Al Larson Boat Shop, Inc.
v. Board of Harbor Commissioners (1993) 18 Cal.App. 4th 729; and Sierra Club v. County of Sonoma
(1992) 6 Cal.App. 4th 1307.
§ 15155. Water Supply Analysis; City or County Consultation with Water Agencies.
(a) The following definitions are applicable to this section.
(1) A "water-demand project" means:
(A) A residential development of more than 500 dwelling units.
(B) A shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more
than 500,000 square feet of floor space.
(C) A commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000
square feet of floor space.
(D) A hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms.
(E) An industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than
1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor
area.
(F) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in subdivisions (a)(1)(A),
(a)(1)(B), (a)(1)(C), (a)(1)(D), (a)(1)(E), and (a)(1)(G) of this section.
(G) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of
water required by a 500 dwelling unit project.
(H) For public water systems with fewer than 5,000 service connections, a project that meets the
following criteria:
1. A proposed residential, business, commercial, hotel or motel, or industrial development that would
account for an increase of 10 percent or more in the number of a public water system's existing service
connections; or
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 116 of 221
2. A mixed-use project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the
amount of water required by residential development that would represent an increase of 10 percent or
more in the number of the public water system's existing service connections.
(2) "Public water system" means a system for the provision of piped water to the public for human
consumption that has 3000 or more service connections. A public water system includes all of the
following:
(A) Any collection, treatment, storage, and distribution facility under control of the operator of the
system which is used primarily in connection with the system.
(B) Any collection or pretreatment storage facility not under the control of the operator that is used
primarily in connection with the system.
(C) Any person who treats water on behalf of one or more public water systems for the purpose of
rendering it safe for human consumption.
(3) "Water acquisition plans" means any plans for acquiring additional water supplies prepared by the
public water system or a city or county lead agency pursuant to subdivision (a) of section 10911 of the
Water Code.
(4) "Water assessment" means the water supply assessment that must be prepared by the governing
body of a public water system, or the city or county lead agency, pursuant to and in compliance with
sections 10910 to 10915 of the Water Code, and that includes, without limitation, the elements of the
assessment required to comply with subdivisions (d), (e), (f), and (g) of section 10910 of the Water Code.
(5) "City or county lead agency" means a city or county, acting as lead agency, for purposes of certifying
or ap-proving an environmental impact report, a negative declaration, or a mitigated negative
declaration for a water-demand project.
(b) Subject to section 15155, subdivision (d) below, at the time a city or county lead agency determines
whether an environmental impact report, a negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration, or
any supplement thereto, is required for the water-demand project, the city or county lead agency shall
take the following steps:
(1) The city or county lead agency shall identify any water system that either: (A) is a public water
system that may supply water to the water-demand project, or (B) that may become such a public water
system as a result of supplying water to the water-demand project. The city or county lead agency shall
request the governing body of each such public water system to determine whether the projected water
demand associated with a water-demand project was included in the most recently adopted urban
water management plan adopted pursuant to Part 2.6 (commencing with section 10610) of the Water
Code, and to prepare a water assessment approved at a regular or special meeting of that governing
body.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 117 of 221
(2) If the city or county lead agency is not able to identify any public water system that may supply water
for the water-demand project, the city or county lead agency shall prepare a water assessment after
consulting with any entity serving domestic water supplies whose service area includes the site of the
water-demand project, the local agency formation commission, and the governing body of any public
water system adjacent to the site of the water-demand project. The governing body of the city or county
lead agency must approve the water assessment prepared pursuant to this section at a regular or
special meeting.
(c) The city or county lead agency shall grant any reasonable request for an extension of time that is
made by the governing body of a public water system preparing the water assessment, provided that
the request for an extension of time is made within 90 days after the date on which the governing body
of the public water system received the request to prepare a water assessment. If the governing body of
the public water system fails to request and receive an extension of time, or fails to submit the water
assessment notwithstanding the 30-day extension, the city or county lead agency may seek a writ of
mandamus to compel the governing body of the public water system to comply with the requirements
of Part 2.10 of Division 6 (commencing with section 10910) of the Water Code relating to the submission
of the water assessment.
(d) If a water-demand project has been the subject of a water assessment, no additional water
assessment shall be required for subsequent water-demand projects that were included in such larger
water-demand project if all of the following criteria are met:
(1) The entity completing the water assessment had concluded that its water supplies are sufficient to
meet the projected water demand associated with the larger water-demand project, in addition to the
existing and planned future uses, including, but not limited to, agricultural and industrial uses; and
(2) None of the following changes has occurred since the completion of the water assessment for the
larger water-demand project:
(A) Changes in the larger water-demand project that result in a substantial increase in water demand for
the water-demand project.
(B) Changes in the circumstances or conditions substantially affecting the ability of the public water
system or the water supplying city or county identified in the water assessment to provide a sufficient
supply of water for the water demand project.
(C) Significant new information becomes available which was not known and could not have been
known at the time when the entity had reached the conclusion in subdivision (d)(1).
(e) The city or county lead agency shall include the water assessment, and any water acquisition plan in
the EIR, negative declaration, or mitigated negative declaration, or any supplement thereto, prepared
for the water-demand project, and may include an evaluation of the water assessment and water
acquisition plan information within such environmental document. The city or county lead agency shall
determine, based on the entire record, whether projected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 118 of 221
demands of the project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. If a city or county lead agency
determines that water supplies will not be sufficient, the city or county lead agency shall include that
determination in its findings for the water-demand project.
(f) The degree of certainty regarding the availability of water supplies will vary depending on the
stage of project approval. A lead agency should have greater confidence in the availability of water
supplies for a specific project than might be required for a conceptual plan (i.e. general plan, specific
plan). An analysis of water supply in an environmental document may incorporate by reference
information in a water supply assessment, urban water management plan, or other publicly available
sources. The analysis shall include the following:
(1) Sufficient information regarding the project’s proposed water demand and proposed water
supplies to permit the lead agency to evaluate the pros and cons of supplying the amount of water
that the project will need.
(2) An analysis of the reasonably foreseeable environmental impacts of supplying water throughout
all phases of the project.
(3) An analysis of circumstances affecting the likelihood of the water’s availability, as well as the
degree of uncertainty involved. Relevant factors may include but are not limited to, drought, salt-
water intrusion, regulatory or contractual curtailments, and other reasonably foreseeable demands
on the water supply.
(4) If the lead agency cannot determine that a particular water supply will be available, it shall
conduct an analysis of alternative sources, including at least in general terms the environmental
consequences of using those alternative sources, or alternatives to the project that could be served
with available water.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21151.9, Public
Resources Code; and Sections 10910-10915, Water Code; Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible
Growth v. City of Rancho Cordova (2007) 40 Cal. 4th 412.
Article 11. Types of EIRs
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
§ 15168. Program EIR.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 119 of 221
(a) General. A program EIR is an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be
characterized as one large project and are related either:
(1) Geographically,
(2) As logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions,
(3) In connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria to govern the
conduct of a continuing program, or
(4) As individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and
having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.
(b) Advantages. Use of a program EIR can provide the following advantages. The program EIR can:
(1) Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be
practical in an EIR on an individual action,
(2) Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case-by-case analysis,
(3) Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations,
(4) Allow the lead agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program wide mitigation measures at
an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts,
(5) Allow reduction in paperwork.
(c) Use With Later Activities. Subsequent Later activities in the program must be examined in the light of
the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared.
(1) If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the program EIR, a new initial study
would need to be prepared leading to either an EIR or a negative declaration. That later analysis may
tier from the program EIR as provided in Section 15152.
(2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no new effects could occur or no new mitigation
measures subsequent EIR would be required, the agency can approve the activity as being within the
scope of the project covered by the program EIR, and no new environmental document would be
required. Whether a later activity is within the scope of a program EIR is a factual question that the
lead agency determines based on substantial evidence in the record. Factors that an agency may
consider in making that determination include, but are not limited to, consistency of the later activity
with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building intensity, geographic area
analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure, as described in the program EIR.
(3) An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the program
EIR into subsequent actions later activities in the program.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 120 of 221
(4) Where the subsequent later activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a
written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to determine
whether the environmental effects of the operation were covered in within the scope of the program
EIR.
(5) A program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with subsequent later activities if it provides a
description of planned activities that would implement the program and deals with the effects of the
program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a good and detailed project description
and analysis of the program, many subsequent later activities could be found to be within the scope of
the project described in the program EIR, and no further environmental documents would be required.
(d) Use With Subsequent EIRS and Negative Declarations. A program EIR can be used to simplify the task
of preparing environmental documents on later parts of activities in the program. The program EIR can:
(1) Provide the basis in an initial study for determining whether the later activity may have any
significant effects.
(2) Be incorporated by reference to deal with regional influences, secondary effects, cumulative impacts,
broad alternatives, and other factors that apply to the program as a whole.
(3) Focus an EIR on a subsequent project later activity to permit discussion solely of new effects which
had not been considered before.
(e) Notice With Later Activities. When a law other than CEQA requires public notice when the agency
later proposes to carry out or approve an activity within the program and to rely on the program EIR for
CEQA compliance, the notice for the activity shall include a statement that:
(1) This activity is within the scope of the program approved earlier, and
(2) The program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21003, Public
Resources Code; Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego
Redevelopment Agency (2005) 134 Cal. App. 4th 598; Santa Teresa Citizen Action Group v. City of San
Jose (2003) 114 Cal. App. 4th 689; County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973), 32 Cal. App. 3d 795 (1973).
Article 12. Special Situations
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 121 of 221
§ 15182. Residential Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan.
(a) General. Certain residential, commercial and mixed-use projects that are consistent with a specific
plan adopted pursuant to Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8 of the Government Code are exempt
from CEQA, as described in subdivisions (b) and (c) of this section.
(b) Projects Proximate to Transit.
(1) Eligibility. A residential or mixed-use project, or a project with a floor area ratio of at least 0.75 on
commercially-zoned property, including any required subdivision or zoning approvals, is exempt if the
project satisfies the following criteria:
(A) It is located within a transit priority area as defined in Public Resources Code section 21099(a)(7);
(B) It is consistent with a specific plan for which an environmental impact report was certified; and
(C) It is consistent with the general use designation, density, building intensity, and applicable policies
specified for the project area in either a sustainable communities strategy or an alternative planning
strategy for which the State Air Resources Board has accepted the determination that the sustainable
communities strategy or the alternative planning strategy would achieve the applicable greenhouse
gas emissions reduction targets.
(2) Limitation. Additional environmental review shall not be required for a project described in this
subdivision unless one of the events in section 15162 occurs with respect to that project.
(3) Statute of Limitations. A challenge to a project described in this subdivision is subject to the
statute of limitations periods described in section 15112.
(c) Exemption Residential Projects Implementing Specific Plans.
(1) Eligibility. Where a public agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, no EIR
or negative declaration need be prepared for a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in
conformity to that specific plan is exempt from CEQA if the project meets the requirements of this
section.
(b) Scope. Residential projects covered by this section include but are not limited to land subdivisions,
zoning changes, and residential planned unit developments.
(c)(2) Limitation. This section is subject to the limitation that i If after the adoption of the specific plan,
an event described in Section 15162 should occurs, this the exemption in this subdivision shall not
apply until the city or county which adopted the specific plan completes a subsequent EIR or a
supplement to an EIR on the specific plan. The exemption provided by this section shall again be
available to residential projects after the lead agency has filed a Notice of Determination on the specific
plan as reconsidered by the subsequent EIR or supplement to the EIR.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 122 of 221
(3) Statute of Limitations. A court action challenging the approval of a project under this subdivision
for failure to prepare a supplemental EIR shall be commenced within 30 days after the lead agency's
decision to carry out or approve the project in accordance with the specific plan.
(d) Fees. The lead agency has authority to charge fees to applicants for projects which benefit from this
section. The fees shall be calculated in the aggregate to defray but not to exceed the cost of developing
and adopting the specific plan including the cost of preparing the EIR.
(e) Statute of Limitations. A court action challenging the approval of a project under this section for
failure to pre-pare a supplemental EIR shall be commenced within 30 days after the lead agency's
decision to carry out or approve the project in accordance with the specific plan.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21155.4, Public
Resources Code; Sections 65453 65456 and 65457, Government Code; Concerned Dublin Citizens v. City
of Dublin (2013) 214 Cal. App. 4th 1301.
Article 14. Projects Also Subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
§ 15222. Preparation of Joint Documents.
If a lead agency finds that an EIS or finding of no significant impact for a project would not be prepared
by the federal agency by the time when the lead agency will need to consider an EIR or negative
declaration, the lead agency should try to prepare a combined EIR-EIS or negative declaration-finding of
no significant impact. To avoid the need for the federal agency to prepare a separate document for the
same project, the lead agency must involve the federal agency in the preparation of the joint document.
The lead agency may also enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the federal agency to
ensure that both federal and state requirements are met. This involvement is necessary because
federal law generally prohibits a federal agency from using an EIR prepared by a state agency unless the
federal agency was involved in the preparation of the document.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21083.5 and 21083.7,
Public Resources Code; Section 102(2)(D) of NEPA, 43 U.S.C.A. 4322 (2)(D); 40 C.F.R. Part 1506.2.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 123 of 221
Article 15. Litigation
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
New Section 15234. Remand.
(a) Courts may fashion equitable remedies in CEQA litigation. If a court determines that a public
agency has not complied with CEQA, and that noncompliance was a prejudicial abuse of discretion,
the court shall issue a peremptory writ of mandate requiring the agency to do one or more of the
following:
(1) void the project approval, in whole or in part;
(2) suspend any project activities that preclude consideration and implementation of
mitigation measures and alternatives necessary to comply with CEQA; or
(3) take specific action necessary to bring the agency’s consideration of the project into
compliance with CEQA.
(b) Following a determination described in subdivision (a), an agency or project proponent may only
proceed with those portions of the challenged determinations, findings, or decisions for the project or
those project activities that the court finds:
(1) are severable;
(2) will not prejudice the agency’s compliance with CEQA as described in the court’s
peremptory writ of mandate; and
(3) complied with CEQA.
(c) An agency may also proceed with a project, or individual project activities, during the remand
period where the court has exercised its equitable discretion to permit project activities to proceed
during that period.
(d) As to those portions of an environmental document that a court finds to comply with CEQA,
additional environmental review shall only be required as required by the court consistent with
principles of res judicata. In general, the agency need not expand the scope of analysis on remand
beyond that specified by the court.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21005, 21168.9;
Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (2013) 57 Cal. 4th 439;
Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee (2012) 210 Cal. App. 4th 260; Golden Gate Land Holdings, LLC v.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 124 of 221
East Bay Regional Park Dist. (2013) 215 Cal. App. 4th 353; POET, LLC v. State Air Resources Board
(2013) 218 Cal. App. 4th 681; Silverado Modjeska Recreation and Parks Dist. v. County of Orange
(2011) 197 Cal. App. 4th 282.
Article 18. Statutory Exemptions
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
§ 15269. Emergency Projects.
The following emergency projects are exempt from the requirements of CEQA.
(a) Projects to maintain, repair, restore, demolish, or replace property or facilities damaged or destroyed
as a result of a disaster in a disaster stricken area in which a state of emergency has been proclaimed by
the Governor pursuant to the California Emergency Services Act, commencing with Section 8550 of the
Government Code. This includes projects that will remove, destroy, or significantly alter an historical
resource when that resource represents an imminent threat to the public of bodily harm or of damage
to adjacent property or when the project has received a determination by the State Office of Historic
Preservation pursuant to Section 5028(b) of Public Resources Code.
(b) Emergency repairs to publicly or privately owned service facilities necessary to maintain service
essential to the public health, safety or welfare. Emergency repairs include those that require a
reasonable amount of planning to address an anticipated emergency.
(c) Specific actions necessary to prevent or mitigate an emergency. This does not include long-term
projects undertaken for the purpose of preventing or mitigating a situation that has a low probability of
occurrence in the short-term, but this exclusion does not apply (i) if the anticipated period of time to
conduct an environmental review of such a long-term project would create a risk to public health,
safety or welfare, or (ii) if activities (such as fire or catastrophic risk mitigation or modifications to
improve facility integrity) are proposed for existing facilities in response to an emergency at a similar
existing facility.
(d) Projects undertaken, carried out, or approved by a public agency to maintain, repair, or restore an
existing highway damaged by fire, flood, storm, earthquake, land subsidence, gradual earth movement,
or landslide, provided that the project is within the existing right of way of that highway and is initiated
within one year of the damage occurring. This exemption does not apply to highways designated as
official state scenic highways, nor any project undertaken, carried out, or approved by a public agency to
expand or widen a highway damaged by fire, flood, storm, earthquake, land subsidence, gradual earth
movement, or landslide.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 125 of 221
(e) Seismic work on highways and bridges pursuant to Section180.2 of the Streets and Highways Code,
Section 180 et seq.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 21080(b)(2), (3), and
(4), 21080.33 and 21172, Public Resources Code; CalBeach Advocates v. City of Solana Beach (2002)
103 Cal. App. 4th 529; Castaic Lake Water Agency v. City of Santa Clarita (1995) 41 Cal.App.4th 1257;
and Western Municipal Water District of Riverside County v. Superior Court of San Bernardino County
(1987) 187 Cal.App.3d 1104.
Article 19. Categorical Exemptions
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
§ 15301. Existing Facilities.
Class 1 consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration
of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features,
involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use beyond that existing at the time of the
lead agency's determination. The types of "existing facilities" itemized below are not intended to be all-
inclusive of the types of projects which might fall within Class 1. The key consideration is whether the
project involves negligible or no expansion of an existing use.
Examples include but are not limited to:
(a) Interior or exterior alterations involving such things as interior partitions, plumbing, and electrical
conveyances;
(b) Existing facilities of both investor and publicly-owned utilities used to provide electric power, natural
gas, sewerage, or other public utility services;
(c) Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities
(this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety, and other alterations such as the addition
of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycle-share facilities and bicycle
lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar
alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes).
(d) Restoration or rehabilitation of deteriorated or damaged structures, facilities, or mechanical
equipment to meet current standards of public health and safety, unless it is determined that the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 126 of 221
damage was substantial and resulted from an environmental hazard such as earthquake, landslide, or
flood;
(e) Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than:
(1) 50 percent of the floor area of the structures before the addition, or 2,500 square feet, whichever is
less; or
(2) 10,000 square feet if:
(A) The project is in an area where all public services and facilities are available to allow for maximum
development permissible in the General Plan and
(B) The area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive.
(f) Addition of safety or health protection devices for use during construction of or in conjunction with
existing structures, facilities, or mechanical equipment, or topographical features including navigational
devices;
(g) New copy on existing on and off-premise signs;
(h) Maintenance of existing landscaping, native growth, and water supply reservoirs (excluding the use
of pesticides, as defined in Section 12753, Division 7, Chapter 2, Food and Agricultural Code);
(i) Maintenance of fish screens, fish ladders, wildlife habitat areas, artificial wildlife waterway devices,
streamflows, springs and waterholes, and stream channels (clearing of debris) to protect fish and
wildlife resources;
(j) Fish stocking by the California Department of Fish and Game;
(k) Division of existing multiple family or single-family residences into common-interest ownership and
subdivision of existing commercial or industrial buildings, where no physical changes occur which are
not otherwise exempt;
(l) Demolition and removal of individual small structures listed in this subdivision;
(1) One single-family residence. In urbanized areas, up to three single-family residences may be
demolished under this exemption.
(2) A duplex or similar multifamily residential structure. In urbanized areas, this exemption applies to
duplexes and similar structures where not more than six dwelling units will be demolished.
(3) A store, motel, office, restaurant, and similar small commercial structure if designed for an occupant
load of 30 persons or less. In urbanized areas, the exemption also applies to the demolition of up to
three such commercial buildings on sites zoned for such use.
(4) Accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 127 of 221
(m) Minor repairs and alterations to existing dams and appurtenant structures under the supervision of
the Department of Water Resources.
(n) Conversion of a single family residence to office use.
(o) Installation, in an existing facility occupied by a medical waste generator, of a steam sterilization unit
for the treatment of medical waste generated by that facility provided that the unit is installed and
operated in accordance with the Medical Waste Management Act (Section 117600, et seq., of the Health
and Safety Code) and accepts no offsite waste.
(p) Use of a single-family residence as a small family day care home, as defined in Section 1596.78 of the
Health and Safety Code.
AUTHORITY:
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21084, Public
Resources Code; North County Advocates v. City of Carlsbad (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 94; Communities
for a Better Environment v. South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. (2010) 48 Cal.4th 310; Bloom v
McGurk (1994) 26 Cal.App.4th 1307.
.
Title 14. Natural Resources
Division 6. California Natural Resources Agency
Chapter 3. Guidelines for the Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
Article 20. Definitions
§ 15357.Discretionary Project.
“Discretionary project” means a project which requires the exercise of judgment or deliberation when
the public agency or body decides to approve or disapprove a particular activity, as distinguished from
situations where the public agency or body merely has to determine whether there has been conformity
with applicable statutes, ordinances, or regulations, or other fixed standards. The key question is
whether the public agency can use its subjective judgment to decide whether and how to carry out or
approve a project. A timber harvesting plan submitted to the State Forester for approval under the
requirements of the Z'berg-Nejedly Forest Practice Act of 1973 (Pub. Res. Code Sections 4511 et seq.)
constitutes a discretionary project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 21065(c).
AUTHORITY:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 128 of 221
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section 21080(a), Public
Resources Code; Johnson v. State of California (1968) 69 Cal. 2d 782; People v. Department of Housing
and Community Development (1975) 45 Cal. App. 3d 185; Day v. City of Glendale (1975) 51 Cal. App. 3d
817; N.R.D.C. v. Arcata National Corp. (1976) 59 Cal. App. 3d 959; Friends of Westwood, Inc. v. City of
Los Angeles (1987) 191 Cal. App. 3d 259; Mountain Lion Foundation v. Fish & Game Comm. (1997) 16
Cal. 4th 105; Friends of Juana Briones House v. City of Palo Alto (2010) 190 Cal. App. 4th 286; San
Diego Navy Broadway Complex Coalition v. City of San Diego (2010) 185 Cal. App. 4th 924.
§ 15370. Mitigation.
“Mitigation” includes:
(a)Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action.
(b)Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation.
(c)Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the impacted environment.
(d)Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during
the life of the action.
(e)Compensating for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments,
including through permanent protection of such resources in the form of conservation easements.
Note: Authority cited: Section 21083, Public Resources Code.
Reference: Sections 21002,21002.1, 21081 and 21100(c), Public Resources Code; Masonite Corporation
v. County of Mendocino (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 230.
Appendix G
Environmental Checklist Form
NOTE: The following is a sample form and that may be tailored to satisfy individual agencies’ needs and
project circumstances. It may be used to meet the requirements for an initial study when the criteria set
forth in CEQA Guidelines have been met. Substantial evidence of potential impacts that are not listed on
this form must also be considered. The sample questions in this form are intended to encourage
thoughtful assessment of impacts, and do not necessarily represent thresholds of significance.
1.Project title: _________________________________________________________________
2.Lead agency name and address:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 129 of 221
3. Contact person and phone number: _______________________________________________
4. Project location: _______________________________________________________________
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
6. General plan designation: _______________________
7. Zoning: ____________________
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases
of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach
additional sheets if necessary.)
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project
area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, has
consultation begun is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination
of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________
NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents
to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and
reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section
2108321080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred
Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System
administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c)
contains provisions specific to confidentiality.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 130 of 221
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following
pages.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Geology /Soils
Hydrology / Water Quality
Noise
Recreation
Utilities/Service Systems
Agriculture and Forestry
Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Land Use / Planning
Population / Housing
Transportation/Traffic
Wildfire
Air Quality
Energy
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed
to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately
analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be
addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 131 of 221
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that
are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the
information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately
supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is
based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to
pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as
project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must
indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant.
"Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there
are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of
mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The
lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than
significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion
should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects
were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe
the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which
they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts
(e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where
appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted
should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should
normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever
format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 132 of 221
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
SAMPLE QUESTIONS
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099, W would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c) In non-urbanized areas, sSubstantially
degrade the existing visual character or
quality of public views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are those that
are experienced from publicly accessible
vantage point). If the project is in an
urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts
to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land
Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 133 of 221
in Forest Protocols adopted by the California
Air Resources Board. Would the project:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 134 of 221
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or causerezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors)?
c d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d e) Create objectionable Result in other
emissions (such as those leading to odors or
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 135 of 221
dust) adversely affecting a substantial
number of people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state
or federally protected wetlands as defined
by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 136 of 221
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant
to as defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
c d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
VI. ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to Directly or
indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss,
injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 137 of 221
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 138 of 221
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would
the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
VIII IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 139 of 221
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has not
been adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or working
in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
h g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
b) Substantially deplete decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of
the basin there would be a net deficit in
aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells
would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses
for which permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious
surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site;
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 140 of 221
(ii) substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or offsite;
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation
of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management
plan?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 141 of 221
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on-
or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction
over the project (including, but not limited
to the general plan, specific plan, local
coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 142 of 221
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
XIII. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or g Generation of
a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the
vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or g Generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within the vicinity of
a private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 143 of 221
XIV II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would
the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any of the public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XVI. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 144 of 221
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable program plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities? taking into account all modes of
transportation including mass transit and
non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system,
including but not limited to intersections,
streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)(1)? Conflict with an
applicable congestion management
program, including, but not limited to level
of service standards and travel demand
measures, or other standards established by
the county congestion management agency
for designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels
or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
ed) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such
facilities?
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 145 of 221
a)Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public
Resources Code section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that
is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place,
or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
ii) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 146 of 221
XIXVIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, or
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
b d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years from
existing entitlements and resources, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
c e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
d f) Generate solid waste in excess of State
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise
impair the attainment of solid waste
reduction goals? Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs?
e g) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XX. WILDFIRE -- If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would
the project:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 147 of 221
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
XXIX. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plantor animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 148 of 221
Appendix M
Appendix M: Performance Standards for Infill Projects Eligible for Streamlined Review
I. Introduction
Section 15183.3 provides a streamlined review process for infill projects that satisfy specified
performance standards. This appendix contains those performance standards. The lead agency’s
determination that the project satisfies the performance standards shall be supported with substantial
evidence, which should be documented on the Infill Checklist in Appendix N. Section II defines terms
used in this Appendix. Performance standards that apply to all project types are set forth in Section III.
Section IV contains performance standards that apply to particular project types (i.e., residential,
commercial/retail, office building, transit stations, and schools).
II. Definitions
The following definitions apply to the terms used in this Appendix.
“High-quality transit corridor” means an existing corridor with fixed route bus service with service
intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. For the purposes of this Appendix, an
“existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor” may include a planned and funded stop that is
included in an adopted regional transportation improvement program.
Unless more specifically defined by an air district, city or county, “high-volume roadway” means
freeways, highways, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per
day.
“Low vehicle travel area” means a traffic analysis zone that exhibits a below average existing level of
travel as determined using a regional travel demand model. For residential projects, travel refers to
either home-based or household vehicle miles traveled per capita. For commercial and retail projects,
travel refers to non-work attraction trip length; however, where such data are not available, commercial
projects reference either home-based or household vehicle miles traveled per capita. For office projects,
travel refers to commute attraction vehicle miles traveled per employee; however, where such data are
not available, office projects reference either home-based or household vehicle miles traveled per
capita.
“Major Transit Stop” means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by
either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with frequencies
of service intervals of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. For
the purposes of this Appendix, an “existing major transit stop” may include a planned and funded stop
that is included in an adopted regional transportation improvement program.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 149 of 221
“Office building” generally refers to centers for governmental or professional services; however, the
lead agency shall have discretion in determining whether a project is “commercial” or “office building”
for the purposes of this Appendix based on local zoning codes.
“Significant sources of air pollution” include airports, marine ports, rail yards and distribution centers
that receive more than 100 heavy-duty truck visits per day, as well as stationary sources that are
designated major by the Clean Air Act.
A “Traffic Analysis Zone” is an analytical unit used by a travel demand model to estimate vehicle travel
within a region.
III. Performance Standards Related to Project Design
To be eligible for streamlining pursuant to Section 15183.3, a project must implement all of the
following:
Renewable Energy. All non-residential projects shall include on-site renewable power generation, such
as solar photovoltaic, solar thermal and wind power generation, or clean back-up power supplies, where
feasible. Residential projects are also encouraged to include such on-site renewable power generation.
Soil and Water Remediation. If the project site is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code, the project shall document how it has remediated the site, if
remediation is completed. Alternatively, the project shall implement the recommendations provided in
a preliminary endangerment assessment or comparable document that identifies remediation
appropriate for the site.
Residential Units Near High-Volume Roadways and Stationary Sources. If a project includes residential
units located within 500 feet, or other distance determined to be appropriate by the local agency or air
district based on local conditions, of a high volume roadway or other significant sources of air pollution,
the project shall comply with any policies and standards identified in the local general plan, specific plan,
zoning code or community risk reduction plan for the protection of public health from such sources of
air pollution. If the local government has not adopted such plans or policies, the project shall include
measures, such as enhanced air filtration and project design, that the lead agency finds, based on
substantial evidence, will promote the protection of public health from sources of air pollution. Those
measure may include, among others, the recommendations of the California Air Resources Board, air
districts, and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association.
IV. Additional Performance Standards by Project Type
In addition to the project features described above in Section III, specific eligibility requirements are
provided below by project type.
Several of the performance standards below refer to “low vehicle travel areas”. Such areas can be
illustrated on maps based on data developed by the regional Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
using its regional travel demand model.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 150 of 221
Several of the performance standards below refer to distance to transit. Distance should be calculated
so that at least 75 percent of the surface area of the project site is within the specified distance.
A. Residential
To be eligible for streamlining pursuant to Section 15183.3, a project must satisfy one of the following:
Projects achieving below average regional per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT). A residential
project is eligible if it is located in a “low vehicle travel area” within the region.
Projects located within % ½ mile of an Existing Major Transit Stop or High Quality Transit Corridor. A
residential project is eligible if it is located within Yz ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an
existing stop along a high quality transit corridor.
Low-Income Housing. A residential or mixed-use project consisting of 300 or fewer residential units all
of which are affordable to low income households is eligible if the developer of the development project
provides sufficient legal commitments to the lead agency to ensure the continued availability and use of
the housing units for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety
Code, for a period of at least 30 years, at monthly housing costs, as determined pursuant to Section
50053 of the Health and Safety Code.
B. Commercial/Retail
To be eligible for streamlining pursuant to Section 15183.3, a project must satisfy one of the following:
Regional Location. A commercial project with no single-building floor-plate greater than 50,000 square
feet is eligible if it locates in a “low vehicle travel area.”
Proximity to Households. A project with no single-building floor-plate greater than 50,000 square feet
located within one-half mile of 1800 households is eligible.
C. Office Building
To be eligible for streamlining pursuant to Section 15183.3, a project must satisfy one of the following:
Regional Location. Office buildings, both commercial and public, are eligible if they locate in a low
vehicle travel area.
Proximity to a Major Transit Stop. Office buildings, both commercial and public, within % ½ mile of an
existing major transit stop, or X ¼ mile of an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor, are
eligible.
D. Transit
Transit stations, as defined in Section 15183.3(e)(1), are eligible.
E. Schools
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 151 of 221
Elementary schools within one mile of fifty percent of the projected student population are eligible.
Middle schools and high schools within two miles of fifty percent of the projected student population
are eligible. Alternatively, any school within % ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop
along a high quality transit corridor is eligible.
Additionally, in order to be eligible, all schools shall provide parking and storage for bicycles and
scooters and shall comply with the requirements in Sections 17213, 17213.1 and 17213.2 of the
California Education Code.
F. Small Walkable Community Projects
Small walkable community projects, as defined in Section 15183.3, subdivision (e)(6), that implement
the project features described in Section III above are eligible.
G. Mixed-Use Projects
Where a project includes some combination of residential, commercial and retail, office building, transit
station, and/or schools, the performance standards in this Section that apply to the predominant use
shall govern the entire project.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21094.5.5, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections
21094.5 and 21094.5.5, Public Resources Code.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 152 of 221
Appendix N: Infill Environmental Checklist Form
NOTE: This sample form is intended to assist lead agencies in assessing infill projects according to the procedures provided in Section 21094.5
of the Public Resources Code. Lead agencies may customize this form as appropriate, provided that the content satisfies the requirements in
Section 15183.3 of the CEQA Guidelines.
1. Project title: _________________________________________________________________
2. Lead agency name and address:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________
3. Contact person and phone number: _______________________________________________
4. Project location: ______________________________________________________________
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________
6. General plan designation: _______________________ 7. Zoning: ____________________
8. Prior Environmental Document(s) Analyzing the Effects of the Infill Project (including State Clearinghouse Number if
assigned):_______________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
9. Location of Prior Environmental Document(s) Analyzing the Effects of the Infill Project:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________
10. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary,
support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
11. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings, including any prior uses of the project site, or, if vacant,
describe the urban uses that exist on at least 75% of the project’s perimeter:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
12. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
13) Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation
pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the
determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 153 of 221
Note: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to
discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and
reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.)
Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public
Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California
Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to
confidentiality.
SATISFACTION OF APPENDIX M PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
Provide the information demonstrating that the infill project satisfies the performance standards in Appendix M below. For mixed-use projects,
the predominant use will determine which performance standards apply to the entire project.
1. Does the non-residential infill project include a renewable energy feature? If so, describe below. If not, explain below why it is not feasible to
do so.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
2. If the project site is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, either provide documentation of
remediation or describe the recommendations provided in a preliminary endangerment assessment or comparable document that will be
implemented as part of the project.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
3. If the infill project includes residential units located within 500 feet, or such distance that the local agency or local air district has determined
is appropriate based on local conditions, a high volume roadway or other significant source of air pollution, as defined in Appendix M, describe
the measures that the project will implement to protect public health. Such measures may include policies and standards identified in the local
general plan, specific plans, zoning code or community risk reduction plan, or measures recommended in a health risk assessment, to promote
the protection of public health. Identify the policies or standards, or refer to the site specific analysis, below. (Attach additional sheets if
necessary.)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
4. For residential projects, the project satisfies which of the following?
Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M. (Attach VMT map.)
Located within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor. (Attach map illustrating
proximity to transit.)
Consists of 300 or fewer units that are each affordable to low income households. (Attach evidence of legal commitment to ensure the
continued availability and use of the housing units for lower income households, as defined in Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code,
for a period of at least 30 years, at monthly housing costs, as determined pursuant to Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 154 of 221
5.For commercial projects with a single building floor-plate below 50,000 square feet, the project satisfies which of the following?
Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M. (Attach VMT map.)
The project is within one-half mile of 1800 dwelling units. (Attach map illustrating proximity to households.)
6.For office building projects, the project satisfies which of the following?
Located within a low vehicle travel area, as defined in Appendix M. (Attach VMT map.)
Located within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or within ¼ of a stop along a high quality transit corridor. (Attach map illustrating
proximity to transit.)
7.For school projects, the project does all of the following:
The project complies with the requirements in Sections 17213, 17213.1 and 17213.2 of the California Education Code.
The project is an elementary school and is within one mile of 50% of the student population, or is a middle school or high school and is
within two miles of 50% of the student population. Alternatively, the school is within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop
along a high quality transit corridor. (Attach map and methodology.)
The project provides parking and storage for bicycles and scooters.
8.For small walkable community projects, the project must be a residential project that has a density of at least eight units to the acre or a
commercial project with a floor area ratio of at least 0.5, or both.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The infill project could potentially result in one or more of the following environmental effects.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Geology / Soils
Hydrology / Water Quality
Noise
Recreation
Utilities/Service Systems
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Cultural Resources
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Land Use / Planning
Population / Housing
Transportation/Traffic
Wildfire
Air Quality
Energy
Hazards & Hazardous Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 155 of 221
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed infill project WOULD NOT have any significant effects on the environment that either have not already been analyzed
in a prior EIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed, or that uniformly applicable development policies would not substantially
mitigate. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21094.5, CEQA does not apply to such effects. A Notice of Determination (Section 15094)
will be filed.
I find that the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described
in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. With respect to those effects
that are subject to CEQA, I find that such effects WOULD NOT be significant and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit
Priority Project a SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, will be prepared.
I find that the proposed infill project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described
in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that although those effects
could be significant, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the infill project have been made by or agreed to by the
project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, or if the project is a Transit Priority Project a SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, will be prepared.
I find that the proposed infill project would have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than
described in the prior EIR, and that no uniformly applicable development policies would substantially mitigate such effects. I find that those
effects WOULD be significant, and an infill ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required to analyze those effects that are subject to CEQA.
Signature Date
EVALUATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF INFILL PROJECTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a
lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault
rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative as well as project-level,
indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3) For the purposes of this checklist, “prior EIR” means the environmental impact report certified for a planning level decision, as
supplemented by any subsequent or supplemental environmental impact reports, negative declarations, or addenda to those
documents. “Planning level decision” means the enactment or amendment of a general plan, community plan, specific plan, or zoning
code. (Section 15183.3(e).)
4) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur as a result of an infill project, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether that impact has already been analyzed in a prior EIR. If the effect of the infill project is not more
significant than what has already been analyzed, that effect of the infill project is not subject to CEQA. The brief explanation
accompanying this determination should include page and section references to the portions of the prior EIR containing the analysis of
that effect. The brief explanation shall also indicate whether the prior EIR included any mitigation measures to substantially lessen that
effect and whether those measures have been incorporated into the infill project.
5) If the infill project would cause a significant adverse effect that either is specific to the project or project site and was not analyzed in a
prior EIR, or is more significant than what was analyzed in a prior EIR, the lead agency must determine whether uniformly applicable
development policies or standards that have been adopted by the lead agency, or city or county, would substantially mitigate that
effect. If so, the checklist shall explain how the infill project’s implementation of the uniformly applicable development policies will
substantially mitigate that effect. That effect of the infill project is not subject to CEQA if the lead agency makes a finding, based upon
substantial evidence, that the development policies or standards will substantially mitigate that effect.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 156 of 221
6) If all effects of an infill project were either analyzed in a prior EIR or are substantially mitigated by uniformly applicable development
policies or standards, CEQA does not apply to the project, and the lead agency shall file a Notice of Determination.
7) Effects of an infill project that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or that uniformly applicable development policies or
standards do not substantially mitigate, are subject to CEQA. With respect to those effects of the infill project that are subject to
CEQA, the checklist shall indicate whether those effects are significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. If
there are one or more " Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an infill EIR is required. The infill EIR should be
limited to analysis of those effects determined to be significant. (Sections 15128, 15183.3(d).)
8) "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures will reduce an effect of an
infill project that is subject to CEQA from " Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the
mitigation measures, and briefly explain how those measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. If the effects of an infill
project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant with mitigation incorporated, the lead agency may prepare a Mitigated
Negative Declaration. If all of the effects of the infill project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant, the lead agency may
prepare a Negative Declaration.
9) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address
the questions from this checklist that are relevant to an infill project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
10) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
Issues:
Significant Impact
Less Than
Significant or Less
than Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated No Impact
Analyzed in the
Prior EIR
Substantially
Mitigated by
Uniformly
Applicable
Development
Policies
I. AESTHETICS. Except as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 21099, Wwould the project,:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
c) SIn non-urbanized area, substantially degrade
the existing visual character or quality of public
views of the site and its surroundings? (Public
views are those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 157 of 221
agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and
Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the
California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture
and farmland. In determining whether impacts to
forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies
may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land,
including the Forest and Range Assessment
Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement
methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted
by the California Air Resources Board. Would the
project:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 158 of 221
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526),
or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as
defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of
forest land to non-forest use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the
significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management district or air pollution
control district may be relied upon to make the
following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
c d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations?
d e) Create objectionable Result in other
emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
Would the project:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 159 of 221
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly
or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special
status species in local or regional plans, policies,
or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,
but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 160 of 221
V.CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined
pursuant to in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in thesignificance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a uniquepaleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
c d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
VI.ENERGY. Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or
unnecessary consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or operation?
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan
for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
VII.GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to Directly or
indirectly cause potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or
off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 161 of 221
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994),
creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life
or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supportingthe use of septic tanks or alternative waste water
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geological feature?
VIII.GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the
project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a significant
impact on the environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the
emissions of greenhouse gases?
VIII IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous
or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 162 of 221
e) For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
or excessive noise for people residing or workingin the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the
project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interferewith an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or
death involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
IX.HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Wouldthe project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality?
b) Substantially deplete decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the
basin there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater
table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses or
planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern
of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river or through the
addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner
which would:
(i) result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site;
(ii) substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result
in flooding on- or offsite;
(iii) create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 163 of 221
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
(iv) impede or redirect flood flows?
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 164 of 221
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through
the alteration of the course of a stream or river,
or substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area
structures which would impede or redirect
flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding,
including flooding as a result of the failure of a
levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but
not limited to the general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 165 of 221
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan?
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or
other land use plan?
XIII. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or g Generation of a
substantial temporary or permanent increase
in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or g Generation of
excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase
in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
e c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise
levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 166 of 221
XIV II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for example, by
proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads
or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES.
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered governmental facilities,
need for new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times
or other performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
XVI. RECREATION.
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 167 of 221
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
XVII. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project
a) Conflict with an applicable program, plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of
addressing the circulation system, including
transit, roadways, bicycle lanes and pedestrian facilities paths? taking into account all modes
of transportation including mass transit and
non-motorized travel and relevant components
of the circulation system, including but not
limited to intersections, streets, highways and
freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and
mass transit?
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel
demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,
including either an increase in traffic levels or
a change in location that results in substantial
safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the
performance or safety of such facilities?
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES.
a) Would the project cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of a tribal
cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature,
place, cultural landscape that is geographically
defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe, and
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 168 of 221
that is:
(i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in the
local register of historical resources as defined
in Public Resources. Code Section 5020.1(k), or
(ii) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 169 of 221
XIX.UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements
of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
b) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water, or
wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction or relocationof which could cause significant environmental
effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new
storm water drainage facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
b d) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably foreseeable
future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years from existing entitlements
and resources, or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
c e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
d f) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity of
local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the
attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Be
served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid
waste disposal needs?
e g) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
XX.WILDFIRE – If located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as very
high fire hazard severity zones, would the
project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby
expose project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 170 of 221
uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment?
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to
substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and
the effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Authority: Public Resources Code 21083, 21094.5.5
Reference: Public Resources Code Sections 21094.5 and 21094.5.5
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 171 of 221
ON EVALUATING TRANSPORTATION
IMPACTS IN CEQA
TECHNICAL ADVISORY
December 2018
EXHIBIT 6
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 172 of 221
Contents
A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1
B. Background ....................................................................................................................................... 2
C. Technical Considerations in Assessing Vehicle Miles Traveled ......................................................... 4
1. Recommendations Regarding Methodology ................................................................................ 4
D. General Principles to Guide Consideration of VMT .......................................................................... 7
E. Recommendations Regarding Significance Thresholds .................................................................... 8
1. Screening Thresholds for Land Use Projects ............................................................................... 12
2. Recommended Numeric Thresholds for Residential, Office, and Retail Projects ....................... 15
3. Recommendations Regarding Land Use Plans ............................................................................ 18
4. Other Considerations .................................................................................................................. 19
F. Considering the Effects of Transportation Projects on Vehicle Travel ........................................... 19
1. Recommended Significance Threshold for Transportation Projects .......................................... 22
2. Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects ............................................................. 23
G. Analyzing Other Impacts Related to Transportation ...................................................................... 25
H. VMT Mitigation and Alternatives .................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 1. Considerations About Which VMT to Count ....................................................................... 29
Appendix 2. Induced Travel: Mechanisms, Research, and Additional Assessment Approaches ............ 32
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 173 of 221
A. Introduction
This technical advisory is one in a series of advisories provided by the Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research (OPR) as a service to professional planners, land use officials, and CEQA practitioners. OPR
issues technical assistance on issues that broadly affect the practice of land use planning and the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.). (Gov. Code, §
65040, subds. (g), (l), (m).) The purpose of this document is to provide advice and recommendations,
which agencies and other entities may use at their discretion. This document does not alter lead agency
discretion in preparing environmental documents subject to CEQA. This document should not be
construed as legal advice.
Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg, 2013), which was codified in Public Resources Code section 21099, required
changes to the guidelines implementing CEQA (CEQA Guidelines) (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Div. 6, Ch. 3,
§ 15000 et seq.) regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. As one appellate court recently
explained: “During the last 10 years, the Legislature has charted a course of long-term sustainability
based on denser infill development, reduced reliance on individual vehicles and improved mass transit,
all with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Section 21099 is part of that strategy . . . .”
(Covina Residents for Responsible Development v. City of Covina (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 712, 729.)
Pursuant to Section 21099, the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must
“promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation
networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Id., subd. (b)(1); see generally, adopted CEQA Guidelines, §
15064.3, subd. (b) [Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts].) To that end, in developing the
criteria, OPR has proposed, and the California Natural Resources Agency (Agency) has certified and
adopted, changes to the CEQA Guidelines that identify vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most
appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impacts. With the California Natural Resources
Agency’s certification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as
measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant
environmental effect under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(3).)
This advisory contains technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of
significance, and mitigation measures. Again, OPR provides this Technical Advisory as a resource for the
public to use at their discretion. OPR is not enforcing or attempting to enforce any part of the
recommendations contained herein. (Gov. Code, § 65035 [“It is not the intent of the Legislature to vest
in the Office of Planning and Research any direct operating or regulatory powers over land use, public
works, or other state, regional, or local projects or programs.”].)
This December 2018 technical advisory is an update to the advisory it published in April 2018. OPR will
continue to monitor implementation of these new provisions and may update or supplement this
advisory in response to new information and advancements in modeling and methods.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 174 of 221
B. Background
VMT and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction. Senate Bill 32 (Pavley, 2016) requires California to
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and Executive Order B-
16-12 provides a target of 80 percent below 1990 emissions levels for the transportation sector by 2050.
The transportation sector has three major means of reducing GHG emissions: increasing vehicle
efficiency, reducing fuel carbon content, and reducing the amount of vehicle travel. The California Air
Resources Board (CARB) has provided a path forward for achieving these emissions reductions from the
transportation sector in its 2016 Mobile Source Strategy. CARB determined that it will not be possible to
achieve the State’s 2030 and post-2030 emissions goals without reducing VMT growth. Further, in its
2018 Progress Report on California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, CARB found
that despite the State meeting its 2020 climate goals, “emissions from statewide passenger vehicle
travel per capita [have been] increasing and going in the wrong direction,” and “California cannot meet
its [long-term] climate goals without curbing growth in single-occupancy vehicle activity.”1 CARB also
found that “[w]ith emissions from the transportation sector continuing to rise despite increases in fuel
efficiency and decreases in the carbon content of fuel, California will not achieve the necessary
greenhouse gas emissions reductions to meet mandates for 2030 and beyond without significant
changes to how communities and transportation systems are planned, funded, and built.”2
Thus, to achieve the State’s long-term climate goals, California needs to reduce per capita VMT. This can
occur under CEQA through VMT mitigation. Half of California’s GHG emissions come from the
transportation sector3, therefore, reducing VMT is an effective climate strategy, which can also result in
co-benefits.4 Furthermore, without early VMT mitigation, the state may follow a path that meets GHG
targets in the early years, but finds itself poorly positioned to meet more stringent targets later. For
example, in absence of VMT analysis and mitigation in CEQA, lead agencies might rely upon verifiable
offsets for GHG mitigation, ignoring the longer-term climate change impacts resulting from land use
development and infrastructure investment decisions. As stated in CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan:
“California’s future climate strategy will require increased focus on integrated land use planning
to support livable, transit-connected communities, and conservation of agricultural and other
lands. Accommodating population and economic growth through travel- and energy-efficient
land use provides GHG-efficient growth, reducing GHGs from both transportation and building
energy use. GHGs can be further reduced at the project level through implementing energy-
efficient construction and travel demand management approaches.”5 (Id. at p. 102.)
1 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2018) 2018 Progress Report on California’s Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act, pp. 4, 5, available at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018-11/Final2018Report_SB150_112618_02_Report.pdf.
2 Id., p. 28.
3 See https://ca50million.ca.gov/transportation/
4 Fang et al. (2017) Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Only the Beginning: A Literature Review of the
Co-Benefits of Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled.
5 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 102,
available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 175 of 221
In light of this, the 2017 Scoping Plan describes and quantifies VMT reductions needed to achieve our
long-term GHG emissions reduction goals, and specifically points to the need for statewide deployment
of the VMT metric in CEQA:
“Employing VMT as the metric of transportation impact statewide will help to ensure GHG
reductions planned under SB 375 will be achieved through on-the-ground development, and will
also play an important role in creating the additional GHG reductions needed beyond SB 375
across the State. Implementation of this change will rely, in part, on local land use decisions to
reduce GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector, both at the project level, and
in long-term plans (including general plans, climate action plans, specific plans, and
transportation plans) and supporting sustainable community strategies developed under SB
375.”6
VMT and Other Impacts to Health and Environment. VMT mitigation also creates substantial benefits
(sometimes characterized as “co-benefits” to GHG reduction) in both in the near-term and the long-
term. Beyond GHG emissions, increases in VMT also impact human health and the natural environment.
Human health is impacted as increases in vehicle travel lead to more vehicle crashes, poorer air quality,
increases in chronic diseases associated with reduced physical activity, and worse mental health.
Increases in vehicle travel also negatively affect other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, other
motorists, and many transit users. The natural environment is impacted as higher VMT leads to more
collisions with wildlife and fragments habitat. Additionally, development that leads to more vehicle
travel also tends to consume more energy, water, and open space (including farmland and sensitive
habitat). This increase in impermeable surfaces raises the flood risk and pollutant transport into
waterways.7
VMT and Economic Growth. While it was previously believed that VMT growth was a necessary
component of economic growth, data from the past two decades shows that economic growth is
possible without a concomitant increase in VMT. (Figure 1.) Recent research shows that requiring
development projects to mitigate LOS may actually reduce accessibility to destinations and impede
economic growth.8,9
6 Id. at p. 76.
7 Fang et al. (2017) Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Only the Beginning: A Literature Review of the
Co-Benefits of Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled, available at https://ncst.ucdavis.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2017/03/NCST-VMT-Co-Benefits-White-Paper_Fang_March-2017.pdf.
8 Haynes et al. (Sept. 2015) Congested Development: A Study of Traffic Delays, Access, and Economic
Activity in Metropolitan Los Angeles, available at http://www.its.ucla.edu/wp-
content/uploads/sites/6/2015/11/Haynes_Congested-Development_1-Oct-2015_final.pdf.
9 Osman et al. (Mar. 2016) Not So Fast: A Study of Traffic Delays, Access, and Economic Activity in the
San Francisco Bay Area, available at http://www.its.ucla.edu/wp-
content/uploads/sites/6/2016/08/Taylor-Not-so-Fast-04-01-2016_final.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 176 of 221
Figure 1. Kooshian and Winkelman (2011) VMT and Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 1960-2010.
C. Technical Considerations in Assessing Vehicle Miles Traveled
Many practitioners are familiar with accounting for VMT in connection with long-range planning, or as
part of the CEQA analysis of a project’s greenhouse gas emissions or energy impacts. This document
provides technical information on how to assess VMT as part of a transportation impacts analysis under
CEQA. Appendix 1 provides a description of which VMT to count and options on how to count it.
Appendix 2 provides information on induced travel resulting from roadway capacity projects, including
the mechanisms giving rise to induced travel, the research quantifying it, and information on additional
approaches for assessing it.
1. Recommendations Regarding Methodology
Proposed Section 15064.3 explains that a “lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle
miles traveled . . . .” CEQA generally defers to lead agencies on the choice of methodology to analyze
impacts. (Santa Monica Baykeeper v. City of Malibu (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1538, 1546; see Laurel
Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 409 [“the issue is
not whether the studies are irrefutable or whether they could have been better” … rather, the “relevant
issue is only whether the studies are sufficiently credible to be considered” as part of the lead agency’s
overall evaluation].) This section provides suggestions to lead agencies regarding methodologies to
analyze VMT associated with a project.
Vehicle Types. Proposed Section 15064.3, subdivision (a), states, “For the purposes of this section,
‘vehicle miles traveled’ refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a
project.” Here, the term “automobile” refers to on-road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light
trucks. Heavy-duty truck VMT could be included for modeling convenience and ease of calculation (for
example, where models or data provide combined auto and heavy truck VMT). For an apples-to-apples
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 177 of 221
comparison, vehicle types considered should be consistent across project assessment, significance
thresholds, and mitigation.
Residential and Office Projects. Tour- and trip-based approaches10 offer the best methods for assessing
VMT from residential/office projects and for comparing those assessments to VMT thresholds. These
approaches also offer the most straightforward methods for assessing VMT reductions from mitigation
measures for residential/office projects. When available, tour-based assessment is ideal because it
captures travel behavior more comprehensively. But where tour-based tools or data are not available
for all components of an analysis, a trip-based assessment of VMT serves as a reasonable proxy.
Models and methodologies used to calculate thresholds, estimate project VMT, and estimate VMT
reduction due to mitigation should be comparable. For example:
• A tour-based assessment of project VMT should be compared to a tour-based threshold, or a
trip-based assessment to a trip-based VMT threshold.
• Where a travel demand model is used to determine thresholds, the same model should also be
used to provide trip lengths as part of assessing project VMT.
• Where only trip-based estimates of VMT reduction from mitigation are available, a trip-based
threshold should be used, and project VMT should be assessed in a trip-based manner.
When a trip-based method is used to analyze a residential project, the focus can be on home-based
trips. Similarly, when a trip-based method is used to analyze an office project, the focus can be on
home-based work trips.
When tour-based models are used to analyze an office project, either employee work tour VMT or VMT
from all employee tours may be attributed to the project. This is because workplace location influences
overall travel. For consistency, the significance threshold should be based on the same metric: either
employee work tour VMT or VMT from all employee tours.
For office projects that feature a customer component, such as a government office that serves the
public, a lead agency can analyze the customer VMT component of the project using the methodology
for retail development (see below).
Retail Projects. Generally, lead agencies should analyze the effects of a retail project by assessing the
change in total VMT11 because retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations. A
retail project might lead to increases or decreases in VMT, depending on previously existing retail travel
patterns.
10 See Appendix 1, Considerations About Which VMT to Count, for a description of these approaches.
11 See Appendix 1, Considerations About Which VMT to Count, “Assessing Change in Total VMT” section,
for a description of this approach.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 178 of 221
Considerations for All Projects. Lead agencies should not truncate any VMT analysis because of
jurisdictional or other boundaries, for example, by failing to count the portion of a trip that falls outside
the jurisdiction or by discounting the VMT from a trip that crosses a jurisdictional boundary. CEQA
requires environmental analyses to reflect a “good faith effort at full disclosure.” (CEQA Guidelines, §
15151.) Thus, where methodologies exist that can estimate the full extent of vehicle travel from a
project, the lead agency should apply them to do so. Where those VMT effects will grow over time,
analyses should consider both a project’s short-term and long-term effects on VMT.
Combining land uses for VMT analysis is not recommended. Different land uses generate different
amounts of VMT, so the outcome of such an analysis could depend more on the mix of uses than on
their travel efficiency. As a result, it could be difficult or impossible for a lead agency to connect a
significance threshold with an environmental policy objective (such as a target set by law), inhibiting the
CEQA imperative of identifying a project’s significant impacts and providing mitigation where feasible.
Combining land uses for a VMT analysis could streamline certain mixes of uses in a manner disconnected
from policy objectives or environmental outcomes. Instead, OPR recommends analyzing each use
separately, or simply focusing analysis on the dominant use, and comparing each result to the
appropriate threshold. Recommendations for methods of analysis and thresholds are provided below.
In the analysis of each use, a mixed-use project should take credit for internal capture.
Any project that includes in its geographic bounds a portion of an existing or planned Transit Priority
Area (i.e., the project is within a ½ mile of an existing or planned major transit stop or an existing stop
along a high quality transit corridor) may employ VMT as its primary metric of transportation impact for
the entire project. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subds. (a)(7), (b)(1).)
Cumulative Impacts. A project’s cumulative impacts are based on an assessment of whether the
“incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21083, subd. (b)(2); see CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(1).)
When using an absolute VMT metric, i.e., total VMT (as recommended below for retail and
transportation projects), analyzing the combined impacts for a cumulative impacts analysis may be
appropriate. However, metrics such as VMT per capita or VMT per employee, i.e., metrics framed in
terms of efficiency (as recommended below for use on residential and office projects), cannot be
summed because they employ a denominator. A project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold
that is aligned with long-term environmental goals and relevant plans would have no cumulative impact
distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would
imply a less than significant cumulative impact, and vice versa. This is similar to the analysis typically
conducted for greenhouse gas emissions, air quality impacts, and impacts that utilize plan compliance as
a threshold of significance. (See Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62
Cal.4th 204, 219, 223; CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(3).)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 179 of 221
D. General Principles to Guide Consideration of VMT
SB 743 directs OPR to establish specific “criteria for determining the significance of transportation
impacts of projects[.]” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1).) In establishing this criterion, OPR
was guided by the general principles contained within CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and applicable case
law.
To assist in the determination of significance, many lead agencies rely on “thresholds of significance.”
The CEQA Guidelines define a “threshold of significance” to mean “an identifiable quantitative,
qualitative12 or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which
means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with
which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.” (CEQA Guidelines, §
15064.7, subd. (a) (emphasis added).) Lead agencies have discretion to develop and adopt their own, or
rely on thresholds recommended by other agencies, “provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt
such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.” (Id. at subd. (c); Save Cuyama Valley v. County of
Santa Barbara (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1059, 1068.) Substantial evidence means “enough relevant
information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be made to
support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.” (Id. at § 15384 (emphasis
added); Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1099,
1108-1109.)
Additionally, the analysis leading to the determination of significance need not be perfect. The CEQA
Guidelines describe the standard for adequacy of environmental analyses:
An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers
with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes
account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of
a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed
in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make
an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among
the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness,
and a good faith effort at full disclosure.
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15151 (emphasis added).)
These general principles guide OPR’s recommendations regarding thresholds of significance for VMT set
forth below.
12 Generally, qualitative analyses should only be conducted when methods do not exist for undertaking a
quantitative analysis.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 180 of 221
E.Recommendations Regarding Significance Thresholds
As noted above, lead agencies have the discretion to set or apply their own thresholds of significance.
(Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 218-223 [lead
agency had discretion to use compliance with AB 32’s emissions goals as a significance threshold]; Save
Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th at p. 1068.) However, Section 21099
of the Public Resources Code states that the criteria for determining the significance of transportation
impacts must promote: (1) reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; (2) development of multimodal
transportation networks; and (3) a diversity of land uses. It further directed OPR to prepare and develop
criteria for determining significance. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1).) This section provides
OPR’s suggested thresholds, as well as considerations for lead agencies that choose to adopt their own
thresholds.
The VMT metric can support the three statutory goals: “the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the
development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Pub. Resources
Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1), emphasis added.) However, in order for it to promote and support all three,
lead agencies should select a significance threshold that aligns with state law on all three. State law
concerning the development of multimodal transportation networks and diversity of land uses requires
planning for and prioritizing increases in complete streets and infill development, but does not mandate
a particular depth of implementation that could translate into a particular threshold of significance.
Meanwhile, the State has clear quantitative targets for GHG emissions reduction set forth in law and
based on scientific consensus, and the depth of VMT reduction needed to achieve those targets has
been quantified. Tying VMT thresholds to GHG reduction also supports the two other statutory goals.
Therefore, to ensure adequate analysis of transportation impacts, OPR recommends using quantitative
VMT thresholds linked to GHG reduction targets when methods exist to do so.
Various legislative mandates and state policies establish quantitative greenhouse gas emissions
reduction targets. For example:
•Assembly Bill 32 (2006) requires statewide GHG emissions reductions to 1990 levels by 2020 and
continued reductions beyond 2020.
•Senate Bill 32 (2016) requires at least a 40 percent reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels
by 2030.
•Pursuant to Senate Bill 375 (2008), the California Air Resources Board GHG emissions reduction
targets for metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to achieve based on land use patterns
and transportation systems specified in Regional Transportation Plans and Sustainable
Community Strategies (RTP/SCS). Current targets for the State’s largest MPOs call for a 19
percent reduction in GHG emissions from cars and light trucks from 2005 emissions levels by
2035.
•Executive Order B-30-15 (2015) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990
levels by 2030.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 181 of 221
• Executive Order S-3-05 (2005) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990
levels by 2050.
• Executive Order B-16-12 (2012) specifies a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below
1990 levels by 2050 specifically for transportation.
• Executive Order B-55-18 (2018) established an additional statewide goal of achieving carbon
neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and maintaining net negative emissions
thereafter. It states, “The California Air Resources Board shall work with relevant state agencies
to develop a framework for implementation and accounting that tracks progress toward this
goal.”
• Senate Bill 391 requires the California Transportation Plan to support 80 percent reduction in
GHGs below 1990 levels by 2050.
• The California Air Resources Board Mobile Source Strategy (2016) describes California’s strategy
for containing air pollutant emissions from vehicles, and quantifies VMT growth compatible with
achieving state targets.
• The California Air Resources Board’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update: The Strategy for
Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target describes California’s strategy for containing
GHG emissions from vehicles, and quantifies VMT growth compatible with achieving state
targets.
Considering these various targets, the California Supreme Court observed:
Meeting our statewide reduction goals does not preclude all new development. Rather,
the Scoping Plan … assumes continued growth and depends on increased efficiency and
conservation in land use and transportation from all Californians.
(Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, supra, 62 Cal.4th at p. 220.) Indeed,
the Court noted that when a lead agency uses consistency with climate goals as a way to determine
significance, particularly for long-term projects, the lead agency must consider the project’s effect on
meeting long-term reduction goals. (Ibid.) And more recently, the Supreme Court stated that “CEQA
requires public agencies . . . to ensure that such analysis stay in step with evolving scientific knowledge
and state regulatory schemes.” (Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of
Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, 504.)
Meeting the targets described above will require substantial reductions in existing VMT per capita to
curb GHG emissions and other pollutants. But targets for overall GHG emissions reduction do not
translate directly into VMT thresholds for individual projects for many reasons, including:
• Some, but not all, of the emissions reductions needed to achieve those targets could be
accomplished by other measures, including increased vehicle efficiency and decreased fuel
carbon content. The CARB’s First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan explains:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 182 of 221
“Achieving California’s long-term criteria pollutant and GHG emissions goals will require four
strategies to be employed: (1) improve vehicle efficiency and develop zero emission
technologies, (2) reduce the carbon content of fuels and provide market support to get these
lower-carbon fuels into the marketplace, (3) plan and build communities to reduce vehicular
GHG emissions and provide more transportation options, and (4) improve the efficiency and
throughput of existing transportation systems.”13 CARB’s 2018 Progress Report on California’s
Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act states on page 28 that “California cannot
meet its climate goals without curbing growth in single-occupancy vehicle activity.” In other
words, vehicle efficiency and better fuels are necessary, but insufficient, to address the GHG
emissions from the transportation system. Land use patterns and transportation options also
will need to change to support reductions in vehicle travel/VMT.
• New land use projects alone will not sufficiently reduce per-capita VMT to achieve those targets,
nor are they expected to be the sole source of VMT reduction.
• Interactions between land use projects, and also between land use and transportation projects,
existing and future, together affect VMT.
• Because location within the region is the most important determinant of VMT, in some cases,
streamlining CEQA review of projects in travel efficient locations may be the most effective
means of reducing VMT.
• When assessing climate impacts of some types of land use projects, use of an efficiency metric
(e.g., per capita, per employee) may provide a better measure of impact than an absolute
numeric threshold. (Center for Biological Diversity, supra.)
Public Resources Code section 21099 directs OPR to propose criteria for determining the significance of
transportation impacts. In this Technical Advisory, OPR provides its recommendations to assist lead
agencies in selecting a significance threshold that may be appropriate for their particular projects. While
OPR’s Technical Advisory is not binding on public agencies, CEQA allows lead agencies to “consider
thresholds of significance . . . recommended by other public agencies, provided the decision to adopt
those thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.7, subd. (c).) Based
on OPR’s extensive review of the applicable research, and in light of an assessment by the California Air
Resources Board quantifying the need for VMT reduction in order to meet the State’s long-term climate
goals, OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is fifteen percent below that of
existing development may be a reasonable threshold.
Fifteen percent reductions in VMT are achievable at the project level in a variety of place types.14
Moreover, a fifteen percent reduction is consistent with SB 743’s direction to OPR to select a threshold
that will help the State achieve its climate goals. As described above, section 21099 states that the
13 California Air Resources Board (May 2014) First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 46
(emphasis added).
14 CAPCOA (2010) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, p. 55, available at
http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 183 of 221
criteria for determining significance must “promote the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.” In its
document California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship
to State Climate Goals15, CARB assesses VMT reduction per capita consistent with its evidence-based
modeling scenario that would achieve State climate goals of 40 percent GHG emissions reduction from
1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent GHG emissions reduction levels from 1990 by 2050. Applying
California Department of Finance population forecasts, CARB finds per-capita light-duty vehicle travel
would need to be approximately 16.8 percent lower than existing, and overall per-capita vehicle travel
would need to be approximately 14.3 percent lower than existing levels under that scenario. Below
these levels, a project could be considered low VMT and would, on that metric, be consistent with 2017
Scoping Plan Update assumptions that achieve climate state climate goals.
CARB finds per capita vehicle travel would need to be kept below what today’s policies and plans would
achieve.
CARB’s assessment is based on data in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update and 2016 Mobile Source Strategy.
In those documents, CARB previously examined the relationship between VMT and the state’s GHG
emissions reduction targets. The Scoping Plan finds:
“While the State can do more to accelerate and incentivize these local decisions, local actions
that reduce VMT are also necessary to meet transportation sector-specific goals and achieve the
2030 target under SB 32. Through developing the Scoping Plan, CARB staff is more convinced
than ever that, in addition to achieving GHG reductions from cleaner fuels and vehicles,
California must also reduce VMT. Stronger SB 375 GHG reduction targets will enable the State to
make significant progress toward needed reductions, but alone will not provide the VMT growth
reductions needed; there is a gap between what SB 375 can provide and what is needed to meet
the State’s 2030 and 2050 goals.”16
Note that, at present, consistency with RTP/SCSs does not necessarily lead to a less-than-significant VMT
impact.17 As the Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update states,
VMT reductions are necessary to achieve the 2030 target and must be part of any strategy
evaluated in this Plan. Stronger SB 375 GHG reduction targets will enable the State to make
significant progress toward this goal, but alone will not provide all of the VMT growth reductions
that will be needed. There is a gap between what SB 375 can provide and what is needed to
meet the State’s 2030 and 2050 goals.”18
15 California Air Resources Board (Jan. 2019) California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified
VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals, available at
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/carb-2017-scoping-plan-identified-vmt-reductions-and-
relationship-state-climate.
16 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 101.
17 California Air Resources Board (Feb. 2018) Updated Final Staff Report: Proposed Update to the SB 375
Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets, Figure 3, p. 35, available at
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375_target_update_final_staff_report_feb2018.pdf.
18 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 75.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 184 of 221
Also, in order to capture the full effects of induced travel resulting from roadway capacity projects, an
RTP/SCS would need to include an assessment of land use effects of those projects, and the effects of
those land uses on VMT. (See section titled “Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects”
below.) RTP/SCSs typically model VMT using a collaboratively-developed land use “vision” for the
region’s land use, rather than studying the effects on land use of the proposed transportation
investments.
In summary, achieving 15 percent lower per capita (residential) or per employee (office) VMT than
existing development is both generally achievable and is supported by evidence that connects this level
of reduction to the State’s emissions goals.
1. Screening Thresholds for Land Use Projects
Many agencies use “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to
cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. (See e.g., CEQA Guidelines, §§
15063(c)(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.) As explained below, this technical advisory suggests that lead
agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of
affordable housing.
Screening Threshold for Small Projects
Many local agencies have developed screening thresholds to indicate when detailed analysis is needed.
Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of
VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that
generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day19 generally may be assumed to cause a less-than-
significant transportation impact.
Map-Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects
Residential and office projects that locate in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features
(i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with
VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are
19 CEQA provides a categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures
of up to 10,000 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to
allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area.
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15301, subd. (e)(2).) Typical project types for which trip generation increases
relatively linearly with building footprint (i.e., general office building, single tenant office building, office
park, and business park) generate or attract an additional 110-124 trips per 10,000 square feet.
Therefore, absent substantial evidence otherwise, it is reasonable to conclude that the addition of 110
or fewer trips could be considered not to lead to a significant impact.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 185 of 221
currently below threshold VMT (see recommendations below). Because new development in such
locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential
and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.
Figure 2. Example map of household VMT that could be used to
delineate areas eligible to receive streamlining for VMT analysis.
(Source: City of San José, Department of Transportation, draft output of
City Transportation Model.)
Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Stations
Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should
presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that
are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop20 or an existing stop
20 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit
station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more
major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and
afternoon peak commute periods.”).
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 186 of 221
along a high quality transit corridor21 will have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. This presumption
would not apply, however, if project-specific or location-specific information indicates that the project
will still generate significant levels of VMT. For example, the presumption might not be appropriate if
the project:
● Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75
● Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than
required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking)
● Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead
agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization)
● Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units
A project or plan near transit which replaces affordable residential units22 with a smaller number of
moderate- or high-income residential units may increase overall VMT because the increase in VMT of
displaced residents could overwhelm the improvements in travel efficiency enjoyed by new residents.23
If any of these exceptions to the presumption might apply, the lead agency should conduct a detailed
VMT analysis to determine whether the project would exceed VMT thresholds (see below).
Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development
Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening
commutes and reducing VMT.24,25 Further, “… low-wage workers in particular would be more likely to
choose a residential location close to their workplace, if one is available.”26 In areas where existing jobs-
housing match is closer to optimal, low income housing nevertheless generates less VMT than market-
21 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a
corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak
commute hours.”).
22 Including naturally-occurring affordable residential units.
23 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, Chapter 4,
pp. 159-160, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf.
24 Karner and Benner (2016) The convergence of social equity and environmental sustainability: Jobs-
housing fit and commute distance (“[P]olicies that advance a more equitable distribution of jobs and
housing by linking the affordability of locally available housing with local wage levels are likely to be
associated with reduced commuting distances”).
25 Karner and Benner (2015) Low-wage jobs-housing fit: identifying locations of affordable housing
shortages.
26 Karner and Benner (2015) Low-wage jobs-housing fit: identifying locations of affordable housing
shortages.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 187 of 221
rate housing.27,28 Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a
basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Evidence supports a
presumption of less than significant impact for a 100 percent affordable residential development (or the
residential component of a mixed-use development) in infill locations. Lead agencies may develop their
own presumption of less than significant impact for residential projects (or residential portions of mixed
use projects) containing a particular amount of affordable housing, based on local circumstances and
evidence. Furthermore, a project which includes any affordable residential units may factor the effect
of the affordability on VMT into the assessment of VMT generated by those units.
2.Recommended Numeric Thresholds for Residential, Office, and Retail
Projects
Recommended threshold for residential projects: A proposed project exceeding a level of 15
percent below existing VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing
VMT per capita may be measured as regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita. Proposed
development referencing a threshold based on city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per
capita) should not cumulatively exceed the number of units specified in the SCS for that city, and
should be consistent with the SCS.
Residential development that would generate vehicle travel that is 15 or more percent below the
existing residential VMT per capita, measured against the region or city, may indicate a less-than-
significant transportation impact. In MPO areas, development measured against city VMT per capita
(rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the population or number of units
specified in the SCS for that city because greater-than-planned amounts of development in areas above
the region-based threshold would undermine the VMT containment needed to achieve regional targets
under SB 375.
For residential projects in unincorporated county areas, the local agency can compare a residential
project’s VMT to (1) the region’s VMT per capita, or (2) the aggregate population-weighted VMT per
capita of all cities in the region. In MPO areas, development in unincorporated areas measured against
aggregate city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the
population or number of units specified in the SCS for that city because greater-than-planned amounts
of development in areas above the regional threshold would undermine achievement of regional targets
under SB 375.
27 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, available
at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf.
28 CAPCOA (2010) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, pp. 176-178, available at
http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 188 of 221
These thresholds can be applied to either household (i.e., tour-based) VMT or home-based (i.e., trip-
based) VMT assessments.29 It is critical, however, that the agency be consistent in its VMT measurement
approach throughout the analysis to maintain an “apples-to-apples” comparison. For example, if the
agency uses a home-based VMT for the threshold, it should also be use home-based VMT for calculating
project VMT and VMT reduction due to mitigation measures.
Because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips,30
estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and
without the project) is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts.
By adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving retail destination proximity,
local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. Thus, lead agencies generally
may presume such development creates a less-than-significant transportation impact. Regional-serving
retail development, on the other hand, which can lead to substitution of longer trips for shorter ones,
may tend to have a significant impact. Where such development decreases VMT, lead agencies should
consider the impact to be less-than-significant.
Many cities and counties define local-serving and regional-serving retail in their zoning codes. Lead
agencies may refer to those local definitions when available, but should also consider any project-
29 See Appendix 1 for a description of these approaches.
30 Lovejoy, et al. (2013) Measuring the impacts of local land-use policies on vehicle miles of travel:
The case of the first big-box store in Davis, California, The Journal of Transport and Land Use.
Recommended threshold for retail projects: A net increase in total VMT may indicate a significant
transportation impact.
Office projects that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing VMT per
employee for the region may indicate a significant transportation impact. In cases where the region is
substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be
appropriate to refer to a smaller geography, such as the county, that includes the area over which nearly
all workers would be expected to live.
Office VMT screening maps can be developed using tour-based data, considering either total employee
VMT or employee work tour VMT. Similarly, tour-based analysis of office project VMT could consider
either total employee VMT or employee work tour VMT. Where tour-based information is unavailable
for threshold determination, project assessment, or assessment of mitigation, home-based work trip
VMT should be used throughout all steps of the analysis to maintain an “apples-to-apples” comparison.
Recommended threshold for office projects: A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent
below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 189 of 221
specific information, such as market studies or economic impacts analyses that might bear on
customers’ travel behavior. Because lead agencies will best understand their own communities and the
likely travel behaviors of future project users, they are likely in the best position to decide when a
project will likely be local-serving. Generally, however, retail development including stores larger than
50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving, and so lead agencies should undertake an
analysis to determine whether the project might increase or decrease VMT.
Mixed-Use Projects
Lead agencies can evaluate each component of a mixed-use project independently and apply the
significance threshold for each project type included (e.g., residential and retail). Alternatively, a lead
agency may consider only the project’s dominant use. In the analysis of each use, a project should take
credit for internal capture. Combining different land uses and applying one threshold to those land uses
may result in an inaccurate impact assessment.
Other Project Types
Of land use projects, residential, office, and retail projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT.
For that reason, OPR recommends the quantified thresholds described above for purposes of analysis
and mitigation. Lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more
specific thresholds, which may include other land use types. In developing thresholds for other project
types, or thresholds different from those recommended here, lead agencies should consider the
purposes described in section 21099 of the Public Resources Code and regulations in the CEQA
Guidelines on the development of thresholds of significance (e.g., CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.7).
Strategies and projects that decrease local VMT but increase total VMT should be avoided. Agencies
should consider whether their actions encourage development in a less travel-efficient location by
limiting development in travel-efficient locations.
Redevelopment Projects
Where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall
decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact. If the project
leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds described above should apply.
As described above, a project or plan near transit which replaces affordable31 residential units with a
smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units may increase overall VMT, because
31 Including naturally-occurring affordable residential units.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 190 of 221
displaced residents’ VMT may increase.32 A lead agency should analyze VMT for such a project even if it
otherwise would have been presumed less than significant. The assessment should incorporate an
estimate of the aggregate VMT increase experienced by displaced residents. That additional VMT
should be included in the numerator of the VMT per capita assessed for the project.
If a residential or office project leads to a net increase in VMT, then the project’s VMT per capita
(residential) or per employee (office) should be compared to thresholds recommended above. Per
capita and per employee VMT are efficiency metrics, and, as such, apply only to the existing project
without regard to the VMT generated by the previously existing land use.
If the project leads to a net increase in provision of locally-serving retail, transportation impacts from
the retail portion of the development should be presumed to be less than significant. If the project
consists of regionally-serving retail, and increases overall VMT compared to with existing uses, then the
project would lead to a significant transportation impact.
RTP/SCS Consistency (All Land Use Projects)
Section 15125, subdivision (d), of the CEQA Guidelines provides that lead agencies should analyze
impacts resulting from inconsistencies with regional plans, including regional transportation plans. For
this reason, if a project is inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), the lead agency should evaluate whether that inconsistency indicates
a significant impact on transportation. For example, a development may be inconsistent with an
RTP/SCS if the development is outside the footprint of development or within an area specified as open
space as shown in the SCS.
3. Recommendations Regarding Land Use Plans
As with projects, agencies should analyze VMT outcomes of land use plans across the full area over
which the plan may substantively affect travel patterns, including beyond the boundary of the plan or
jurisdiction’s geography. And as with projects, VMT should be counted in full rather than split between
origin and destination. (Emissions inventories have sometimes spit cross-boundary trips in order to sum
to a regional total, but CEQA requires accounting for the full impact without truncation or discounting).
Analysis of specific plans may employ the same thresholds described above for projects. A general plan,
area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if proposed new
residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective thresholds
recommended above. Where the lead agency tiers from a general plan EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
sections 15152 and 15166, the lead agency generally focuses on the environmental impacts that are
specific to the later project and were not analyzed as significant impacts in the prior EIR. (Pub. Resources
Code, § 21068.5; Guidelines, § 15152, subd. (a).) Thus, in analyzing the later project, the lead agency
32 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, Chapter 4,
pp. 159-160, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 191 of 221
would focus on the VMT impacts that were not adequately addressed in the prior EIR. In the tiered
document, the lead agency should continue to apply the thresholds recommended above.
Thresholds for plans in non-MPO areas may be determined on a case-by-case basis.
4. Other Considerations
Rural Projects Outside of MPOs
In rural areas of non-MPO counties (i.e., areas not near established or incorporated cities or towns),
fewer options may be available for reducing VMT, and significance thresholds may be best determined
on a case-by-case basis. Note, however, that clustered small towns and small town main streets may
have substantial VMT benefits compared to isolated rural development, similar to the transit oriented
development described above.
Impacts to Transit
Because criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote “the
development of multimodal transportation networks” pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21099,
subd. (b)(1), lead agencies should consider project impacts to transit systems and bicycle and pedestrian
networks. For example, a project that blocks access to a transit stop or blocks a transit route itself may
interfere with transit functions. Lead agencies should consult with transit agencies as early as possible in
the development process, particularly for projects that are located within one half mile of transit stops.
When evaluating impacts to multimodal transportation networks, lead agencies generally should not
treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. An infill development may add riders to
transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds
destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle
flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.
Increased demand throughout a region may, however, cause a cumulative impact by requiring new or
additional transit infrastructure. Such impacts may be adequately addressed through a fee program that
fairly allocates the cost of improvements not just to projects that happen to locate near transit, but
rather across a region to all projects that impose burdens on the entire transportation system, since
transit can broadly improve the function of the transportation system.
F. Considering the Effects of Transportation Projects on Vehicle Travel
Many transportation projects change travel patterns. A transportation project which leads to additional
vehicle travel on the roadway network, commonly referred to as “induced vehicle travel,” would need to
quantify the amount of additional vehicle travel in order to assess air quality impacts, greenhouse gas
emissions impacts, energy impacts, and noise impacts. Transportation projects also are required to
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 192 of 221
examine induced growth impacts under CEQA. (See generally, Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21065 [defining
“project” under CEQA as an activity as causing either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical
change], 21065.3 [defining “project-specific effect” to mean all direct or indirect environmental effects],
21100, subd. (b) [required contents of an EIR].) For any project that increases vehicle travel, explicit
assessment and quantitative reporting of the amount of additional vehicle travel should not be omitted
from the document; such information may be useful and necessary for a full understanding of a project’s
environmental impacts. (See Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000, 21001, 21001.1, 21002, 21002.1
[discussing the policies of CEQA].) A lead agency that uses the VMT metric to assess the transportation
impacts of a transportation project may simply report that change in VMT as the impact. When the lead
agency uses another metric to analyze the transportation impacts of a roadway project, changes in
amount of vehicle travel added to the roadway network should still be analyzed and reported.33
While CEQA does not require perfection, it is important to make a reasonably accurate estimate of
transportation projects’ effects on vehicle travel in order to make reasonably accurate estimates of GHG
emissions, air quality emissions, energy impacts, and noise impacts. (See, e.g., California Clean Energy
Com. v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 210 [EIR failed to consider project’s
transportation energy impacts]; Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th
256, 266.) Appendix 2 describes in detail the causes of induced vehicle travel, the robust empirical
evidence of induced vehicle travel, and how models and research can be used in conjunction to
quantitatively assess induced vehicle travel with reasonable accuracy.
If a project would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel, the lead agency
should conduct an analysis assessing the amount of vehicle travel the project will induce. Project types
that would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel generally include:
• Addition of through lanes on existing or new highways, including general purpose lanes, HOV
lanes, peak period lanes, auxiliary lanes, or lanes through grade-separated interchanges
Projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and
therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis, include:
• 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,
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 as median barriers and guardrails
33 See, e.g., California Department of Transportation (2006) Guidance for Preparers of Growth-related,
Indirect Impact Analyses, available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/Growth-
related_IndirectImpactAnalysis/GRI_guidance06May_files/gri_guidance.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 193 of 221
• 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 one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety
• 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
• Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially
improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit
• 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
• Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles
• Reduction in number of through lanes
• Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a
lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles
• Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal
Priority (TSP) features
• Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs
and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow
• Timing of signals to optimize 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 new transit service
• Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way operation with no net increase in 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 vehicle capacity
• Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within
existing public rights-of-way
• Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve non-
motorized travel
• Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure
• Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do
not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 194 of 221
1. Recommended Significance Threshold for Transportation Projects
As noted in Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines, lead agencies for roadway capacity projects have
discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requirements, to choose which metric to use to evaluate
transportation impacts. This section recommends considerations for evaluating impacts using vehicle
miles traveled. Lead agencies have discretion to choose a threshold of significance for transportation
projects as they do for other types of projects. As explained above, Public Resources Code section
21099, subdivision (b)(1), provides that criteria for determining the significance of transportation
impacts must promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal
transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. (Id.; see generally, adopted CEQA Guidelines, §
15064.3, subd. (b) [Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts].) With those goals in mind, OPR
prepared and the Agency adopted an appropriate transportation metric.
Whether adopting a threshold of significance, or evaluating transportation impacts on a case-by-case
basis, a lead agency should ensure that the analysis addresses:
• Direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the transportation project (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064,
subds. (d), (h))
• Near-term and long-term effects of the transportation project (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063,
subd. (a)(1), 15126.2, subd. (a))
• The transportation project’s consistency with state greenhouse gas reduction goals (Pub.
Resources Code, § 21099)34
• The impact of the transportation project on the development of multimodal transportation
networks (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099)
• The impact of the transportation project on the development of a diversity of land uses (Pub.
Resources Code, § 21099)
The CARB Scoping Plan and the CARB Mobile Source Strategy delineate VMT levels required to achieve
legally mandated GHG emissions reduction targets. A lead agency should develop a project-level
threshold based on those VMT levels, and may apply the following approach:
1. Propose a fair-share allocation of those budgets to their jurisdiction (e.g., by population);
34 The California Air Resources Board has ascertained the limits of VMT growth compatible with
California containing greenhouse gas emissions to levels research shows would allow for climate
stabilization. (See The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030
Greenhouse Gas Target (p. 78, p. 101); Mobile Source Strategy (p. 37).) CARB’s Updated Final Staff
Report on Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets illustrates that
the current Regional Transportation Plans and Sustainable Communities Strategies will fall short of
achieving the necessary on-road transportation-related GHG emissions reductions called for in the 2017
Scoping Plan (Figure 3, p. 35). Accordingly, OPR recommends not basing GHG emissions or
transportation impact analysis for a transportation project solely on consistency with an RTP/SCS.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 195 of 221
2. Determine the amount of VMT growth likely to result from background population growth, and
subtract that from their “budget”;
3. Allocate their jurisdiction’s share between their various VMT-increasing transportation projects,
using whatever criteria the lead agency prefers.
2. Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects
CEQA requires analysis of a project’s potential growth-inducing impacts. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21100,
subd. (b)(5); CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.2, subd. (d).) Many agencies are familiar with the analysis of
growth inducing impacts associated with water, sewer, and other infrastructure. This technical advisory
addresses growth that may be expected from roadway expansion projects.
Because a roadway expansion project can induce substantial VMT, incorporating quantitative estimates
of induced VMT is critical to calculating both transportation and other impacts of these projects.
Induced travel also has the potential to reduce or eliminate congestion relief benefits. An accurate
estimate of induced travel is needed to accurately weigh costs and benefits of a highway capacity
expansion project.
The effect of a transportation project on vehicle travel should be estimated using the “change in total
VMT” method described in Appendix 1. This means that an assessment of total VMT without the project
and an assessment with the project should be made; the difference between the two is the amount of
VMT attributable to the project. The assessment should cover the full area in which driving patterns are
expected to change. As with other types of projects, the VMT estimation should not be truncated at a
modeling or jurisdictional boundary for convenience of analysis when travel behavior is substantially
affected beyond that boundary.
Transit and Active Transportation Projects
Transit and active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and therefore are presumed to cause a
less-than-significant impact on transportation. This presumption may apply to all passenger rail projects,
bus and bus rapid transit projects, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. Streamlining
transit and active transportation projects aligns with each of the three statutory goals contained in SB
743 by reducing GHG emissions, increasing multimodal transportation networks, and facilitating mixed
use development.
Roadway Projects
Reducing roadway capacity (for example, by removing or repurposing motor vehicle travel lanes) will
generally reduce VMT and therefore is presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on
transportation. Generally, no transportation analysis is needed for such projects.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 196 of 221
Building new roadways, adding roadway capacity in congested areas, or adding roadway capacity to
areas where congestion is expected in the future, typically induces additional vehicle travel. For the
types of projects previously indicated as likely to lead to additional vehicle travel, an estimate should be
made of the change in vehicle travel resulting from the project.
For projects that increase roadway capacity, lead agencies can evaluate induced travel quantitatively by
applying the results of existing studies that examine the magnitude of the increase of VMT resulting
from a given increase in lane miles. These studies estimate the percent change in VMT for every percent
change in miles to the roadway system (i.e., “elasticity”).35 Given that lead agencies have discretion in
choosing their methodology, and the studies on induced travel reveal a range of elasticities, lead
agencies may appropriately apply professional judgment in studying the transportation effects of a
particular project. The most recent major study, estimates an elasticity of 1.0, meaning that every
percent change in lane miles results in a one percent increase in VMT.36
To estimate VMT impacts 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 percent change in total lane miles that will result from the project.
3. Determine the total existing VMT over that same area.
4. Multiply the percent increase in lane miles by the existing VMT, and then multiply that by the
elasticity from the induced travel literature:
[% increase in lane miles] x [existing VMT] x [elasticity] = [VMT resulting from the project]
A National Center for Sustainable Transportation tool can be used to apply this method:
https://ncst.ucdavis.edu/research/tools
This method would not be suitable for rural (non-MPO) locations in the state which are neither
congested nor projected to become congested. It also may not be suitable for a new road that provides
new connectivity across a barrier (e.g., a bridge across a river) if it would be expected to substantially
35 See U.C. Davis, Institute for Transportation Studies (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely
to Relieve Traffic Congestion; Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced
Travel on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy
Brief, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf.
36 See Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US cities,
available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 197 of 221
shorten existing trips. If it is likely to be substantial, the trips-shortening effect should be examined
explicitly.
The effects of roadway capacity on vehicle travel can also be applied at a programmatic level. For
example, in a regional planning process the lead agency can use that program-level analysis to
streamline later project-level analysis. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15168.) A program-level analysis of VMT
should include effects of the program on land use patterns, and the VMT that results from those land
use effects. In order for a program-level document to adequately analyze potential induced demand
from a project or program of roadway capacity expansion, lead agencies cannot assume a fixed land use
pattern (i.e., a land use pattern that does not vary in response to the provision of roadway capacity). A
proper analysis should account for land use investment and development pattern changes that react in a
reasonable manner to changes in accessibility created by transportation infrastructure investments
(whether at the project or program level).
Mitigation and Alternatives
Induced VMT has the potential to reduce or eliminate congestion relief benefits, increase VMT, and
increase other environmental impacts that result from vehicle travel.37 If those effects are significant,
the lead agency will need to consider mitigation or alternatives. In the context of increased travel that is
induced by capacity increases, appropriate mitigation and alternatives that a lead agency might consider
include the following:
• Tolling new lanes to encourage carpools and fund transit improvements
• Converting existing general purpose lanes to HOV or HOT lanes
• Implementing or funding off-site travel demand management
• Implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) strategies to improve passenger
throughput on existing lanes
Tolling and other management strategies can have the additional benefit of preventing congestion and
maintaining free-flow conditions, conferring substantial benefits to road users as discussed above.
G. Analyzing Other Impacts Related to Transportation
While requiring a change in the methodology of assessing transportation impacts, Public Resources
Code section 21099 notes that this change “does not relieve a public agency of the requirement to
analyze a project’s potentially significant transportation impacts related to air quality, noise, safety, or
any other impact associated with transportation.” OPR expects that lead agencies will continue to
37 See National Center for Sustainable Transportation (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely
to Relieve Traffic Congestion, available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/researchreports/reports/2015/10-12-2015-
NCST_Brief_InducedTravel_CS6_v3.pdf; see Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road
Congestion: Evidence from US cities, available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 198 of 221
address mobile source emissions in the air quality and noise sections of an environmental document and
the corresponding studies that support the analysis in those sections. Lead agencies should continue to
address environmental impacts of a proposed project pursuant to CEQA’s requirements, using a format
that is appropriate for their particular project.
Because safety concerns result from many different factors, they are best addressed at a programmatic
level (i.e., in a general plan or regional transportation plan) in cooperation with local governments,
metropolitan planning organizations, and, where the state highway system is involved, the California
Department of Transportation. In most cases, such an analysis would not be appropriate on a project-
by-project basis. Increases in traffic volumes at a particular location resulting from a project typically
cannot be estimated with sufficient accuracy or precision to provide useful information for an analysis of
safety concerns. Moreover, an array of factors affect travel demand (e.g., strength of the local economy,
price of gasoline), causing substantial additional uncertainty. Appendix B of OPR’s General Plan
Guidelines summarizes research which could be used to guide a programmatic analysis under CEQA.
Lead agencies should note that automobile congestion or delay does not constitute a significant
environmental impact (Pub. Resources Code, §21099(b)(2)), and safety should not be used as a proxy for
road capacity.
H. VMT Mitigation and Alternatives
When a lead agency identifies a significant impact, it must identify feasible mitigation measures that
could avoid or substantially reduce that impact. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002.1, subd. (a).)
Additionally, CEQA requires that an environmental impact report identify feasible alternatives that could
avoid or substantially reduce a project’s significant environmental impacts.
Indeed, the California Court of Appeal recently held that a long-term regional transportation plan was
deficient for failing to discuss an alternative which could significantly reduce total vehicle miles traveled.
In Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments, et al. (2017) 17
Cal.App.5th 413, the court found that omission “inexplicable” given the lead agency’s “acknowledgment
in its Climate Action Strategy that the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from on-road
transportation will not succeed if the amount of driving, or vehicle miles traveled, is not significantly
reduced.” (Cleveland National Forest Foundation, supra, 17 Cal.App.5th at p. 436.) Additionally, the
court noted that the project alternatives focused primarily on congestion relief even though “the
[regional] transportation plan is a long-term and congestion relief is not necessarily an effective long-
term strategy.” (Id. at p. 437.) The court concluded its discussion of the alternatives analysis by stating:
“Given the acknowledged long-term drawbacks of congestion relief alternatives, there is not substantial
evidence to support the EIR’s exclusion of an alternative focused primarily on significantly reducing
vehicle trips.” (Ibid.)
Several examples of potential mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce VMT are described below.
However, the selection of particular mitigation measures and alternatives are left to the discretion of
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 199 of 221
the lead agency, and mitigation measures may vary, depending on the proposed project and significant
impacts, if any. Further, OPR expects that agencies will continue to innovate and find new ways to
reduce vehicular travel.
Potential measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled include, but are not limited to:
• Improve or increase access to transit.
• Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycare.
• Incorporate affordable housing into the project.
• Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle network.
• Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
• Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service.
• Provide traffic calming.
• Provide bicycle parking.
• Limit or eliminate parking supply.
• Unbundle parking costs.
• Provide parking cash-out programs.
• Implement roadway pricing.
• Implement or provide access to a commute reduction program.
• Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs.
• Provide transit passes.
• Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ride-
matching services.
• Providing telework options.
• Providing incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single-occupancy
vehicle.
• Providing on-site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools,
secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms.
• Providing employee transportation coordinators at employment sites.
• Providing a guaranteed ride home service to users of non-auto modes.
Notably, because VMT is largely a regional impact, regional VMT-reduction programs may be an
appropriate form of mitigation. In lieu fees have been found to be valid mitigation where there is both a
commitment to pay fees and evidence that mitigation will actually occur. (Save Our Peninsula
Committee v. Monterey County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 140-141; Gentry v. City of
Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359; Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221
Cal.App.3d 692, 727–728.) Fee programs are particularly useful to address cumulative impacts. (CEQA
Guidelines, § 15130, subd. (a)(3) [a “project’s incremental contribution is less than cumulatively
considerable if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or
measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact”].) The mitigation program must undergo CEQA
evaluation, either on the program as a whole, or the in-lieu fees or other mitigation must be evaluated
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 200 of 221
on a project-specific basis. (California Native Plant Society v. County of El Dorado (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th
1026.) That CEQA evaluation could be part of a larger program, such as a regional transportation plan,
analyzed in a Program EIR. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15168.)
Examples of project alternatives that may reduce vehicle miles traveled include, but are not limited to:
• Locate the project in an area of the region that already exhibits low VMT.
• Locate the project near transit.
• Increase project density.
• Increase the mix of uses within the project or within the project’s surroundings.
• Increase connectivity and/or intersection density on the project site.
• Deploy management strategies (e.g., pricing, vehicle occupancy requirements) on roadways or
roadway lanes.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 201 of 221
Appendix 1. Considerations About Which VMT to Count
Consistent with the obligation to make a good faith effort to disclose the environmental consequences
of a project, lead agencies have discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate
project impacts.38 A lead agency can evaluate a project’s effect on VMT in numerous ways. The purpose
of this document is to provide technical considerations in determining which methodology may be most
useful for various project types.
Background on Estimating Vehicle Miles Traveled
Before discussing specific methodological recommendations, this section provides a brief overview of
modeling and counting VMT, including some key terminology.
Here is an illustrative example of some methods of estimating vehicle miles traveled. Consider the
following hypothetical travel day (all by automobile):
1. Residence to Coffee Shop
2. Coffee Shop to Work
3. Work to Sandwich Shop
4. Sandwich Shop to Work
5. Work to Residence
6. Residence to Store
7. Store to Residence
Trip-based assessment of a project’s effect on travel behavior counts VMT from individual trips to and
from the project. It is the most basic, and traditionally the most common, method of counting VMT. A
trip-based VMT assessment of the residence in the above example would consider segments 1, 5, 6 and
7. For residential projects, the sum of home-based trips is called home-based VMT.
A tour-based assessment counts the entire home-back-to-home tour that includes the project. A tour-
based VMT assessment of the residence in the above example would consider segments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5
in one tour, and 6 and 7 in a second tour. A tour-based assessment of the workplace would include
segments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Together, all tours comprise household VMT.
38 The California Supreme Court has explained that when an agency has prepared an environmental
impact report:
[T]he issue is not whether the [lead agency’s] studies are irrefutable or whether they
could have been better. The relevant issue is only whether the studies are sufficiently
credible to be considered as part of the total evidence that supports the [lead agency’s]
finding[.]
(Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 409;
see also Eureka Citizens for Responsible Gov’t v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357, 372.)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 202 of 221
Both trip- and tour-based assessments can be used as measures of transportation efficiency, using
denominators such as per capita, per employee, or per person-trip.
Trip- and Tour-based Assessment of VMT
As illustrated above, a tour-based assessment of VMT is a more complete characterization of a project’s
effect on VMT. In many cases, a project affects travel behavior beyond the first destination. The location
and characteristics of the home and workplace will often be the main drivers of VMT. For example, a
residential or office development located near high quality transit will likely lead to some commute trips
utilizing transit, affecting mode choice on the rest of the tour.
Characteristics of an office project can also affect an employee’s VMT beyond the work tour. For
example, a workplace located at the urban periphery, far from transit, can require an employee to own
a car, which in turn affects the entirety of an employee’s travel behavior and VMT. For this reason, when
estimating the effect of an office development on VMT, it may be appropriate to consider total
employee VMT if data and tools, such as tour-based models, are available. This is consistent with CEQA’s
requirement to evaluate both direct and indirect effects of a project. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15064,
subd. (d)(2).)
Assessing Change in Total VMT
A third method, estimating the change in total VMT with and without the project, can evaluate whether
a project is likely to divert existing trips, and what the effect of those diversions will be on total VMT.
This method answers the question, “What is the net effect of the project on area VMT?” As an
illustration, assessing the total change in VMT for a grocery store built in a food desert that diverts trips
from more distant stores could reveal a net VMT reduction. The analysis should address the full area
over which the project affects travel behavior, even if the effect on travel behavior crosses political
boundaries.
Using Models to Estimate VMT
Travel demand models, sketch models, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to
calculate and estimate VMT (see Appendix F of the preliminary discussion draft). To the extent possible,
lead agencies should choose models that have sensitivity to features of the project that affect VMT.
Those tools and resources can also assist in establishing thresholds of significance and estimating VMT
reduction attributable to mitigation measures and project alternatives. When using models and tools for
those various purposes, agencies should use comparable data and methods, in order to set up an
“apples-to-apples” comparison between thresholds, VMT estimates, and VMT mitigation estimates.
Models can work together. For example, agencies can use travel demand models or survey data to
estimate existing trip lengths and input those into sketch models such as CalEEMod to achieve more
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 203 of 221
accurate results. Whenever possible, agencies should input localized trip lengths into a sketch model to
tailor the analysis to the project location. However, in doing so, agencies should be careful to avoid
double counting if the sketch model includes other inputs or toggles that are proxies for trip length (e.g.,
distance to city center). Generally, if an agency changes any sketch model defaults, it should record and
report those changes for transparency of analysis. Again, trip length data should come from the same
source as data used to calculate thresholds to be sure of an “apples-to-apples” comparison.
Additional background information regarding travel demand models is available in the California
Transportation Commission’s “2010 Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines,” beginning at page 35.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 204 of 221
Appendix 2. Induced Travel: Mechanisms, Research, and Additional Assessment Approaches
Induced travel occurs where roadway capacity is expanded in an area of present or projected future
congestion. The effect typically manifests over several years. Lower travel times make the modified
facility more attractive to travelers, resulting in the following trip-making changes:
● Longer trips. The ability to travel a long distance in a shorter time increases the attractiveness of
destinations that are farther away, increasing trip length and vehicle travel.
● Changes in mode choice. When transportation investments are devoted to reducing automobile
travel time, travelers tend to shift toward automobile use from other modes, which increases
vehicle travel.
● Route changes. Faster travel times on a route attract more drivers to that route from other
routes, which can increase or decrease vehicle travel depending on whether it shortens or
lengthens trips.
● Newly generated trips. Increasing travel speeds can induce additional trips, which increases
vehicle travel. For example, an individual who previously telecommuted or purchased goods on
the internet might choose to accomplish those tasks via automobile trips as a result of increased
speeds.
● Land Use Changes. Faster travel times along a corridor lead to land development farther along
that corridor; that new development generates and attracts longer trips, which increases vehicle
travel. Over several years, this induced growth component of induced vehicle travel can be
substantial, making it critical to include in analyses.
Each of these effects has implications for the total amount of vehicle travel. These effects operate over
different time scales. For example, changes in mode choice might occur immediately, while land use
changes typically take a few years or longer. CEQA requires lead agencies to analyze both short-term
and long-term effects.
Evidence of Induced Vehicle Travel. A large number of peer reviewed studies39 have demonstrated a
causal link between highway capacity increases and VMT increases. Many provide quantitative
estimates of the magnitude of the induced VMT phenomenon. Collectively, they provide high quality
evidence of the existence and magnitude of the induced travel effect.
39 See, e.g., Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on
Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy Brief,
available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf;
National Center for Sustainable Transportation (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely to
Relieve Traffic Congestion, available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/research/researchreports/reports/2015/10-12-2015-
NCST_Brief_InducedTravel_CS6_v3.pdf.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 205 of 221
Most of these studies express the amount of induced vehicle travel as an “elasticity,” which is a
multiplier that describes the additional vehicle travel resulting from an additional lane mile of roadway
capacity added. For example, an elasticity of 0.6 would signify an 0.6 percent increase in vehicle travel
for every 1.0 percent increase in lane miles. Many of these studies distinguish “short run elasticity”
(increase in vehicle travel in the first few years) from “long run elasticity” (increase in vehicle travel
beyond the first few years). Long run elasticity is larger than short run elasticity, because as time passes,
more of the components of induced vehicle travel materialize. Generally, short run elasticity can be
thought of as excluding the effects of land use change, while long run elasticity includes them. Most
studies find a long run elasticity between 0.6 and just over 1.0,40 meaning that every increase in lanes
miles of one percent leads to an increase in vehicle travel of 0.6 to 1.0 percent. The most recent major
study finds the elasticity of vehicle travel by lanes miles added to be 1.03; in other words, each percent
increase in lane miles results in a 1.03 percent increase in vehicle travel.41 (An elasticity greater than 1.0
can occur because new lanes induce vehicle travel that spills beyond the project location.) In CEQA
analysis, the long-run elasticity should be used, as it captures the full effect of the project rather than
just the early-stage effect.
Quantifying Induced Vehicle Travel Using Models. Lead agencies can generally achieve the most accurate
assessment of induced vehicle travel resulting from roadway capacity increasing projects by applying
elasticities from the academic literature, because those estimates include vehicle travel resulting from
induced land use. If a lead agency chooses to use a travel demand model, additional analysis would be
needed to account for induced land use. This section describes some approaches to undertaking that
additional analysis.
Proper use of a travel demand model can capture the following components of induced VMT:
• Trip length (generally increases VMT)
• Mode shift (generally shifts from other modes toward automobile use, increasing VMT)
• Route changes (can act to increase or decrease VMT)
• Newly generated trips (generally increases VMT)
o Note that not all travel demand models have sensitivity to this factor, so an off-model
estimate may be necessary if this effect could be substantial.
However, estimating long-run induced VMT also requires an estimate of the project’s effects on land
use. This component of the analysis is important because it has the potential to be a large component of
40 See Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on Passenger
Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy Brief, p. 2, available at
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf.
41 Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US cities,
available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 206 of 221
the overall induced travel effect. Options for estimating and incorporating the VMT effects that are
caused by the subsequent land use changes include:
1. Employ an expert panel. An expert panel could assess changes to land use development that
would likely result from the project. This assessment could then be analyzed by the travel
demand model to assess effects on vehicle travel. Induced vehicle travel assessed via this
approach should be verified using elasticities found in the academic literature.
2. Adjust model results to align with the empirical research. If the travel demand model analysis is
performed without incorporating projected land use changes resulting from the project, the
assessed vehicle travel should be adjusted upward to account for those land use changes. The
assessed VMT after adjustment should fall within the range found in the academic literature.
3. Employ a land use model, running it iteratively with a travel demand model. A land use model
can be used to estimate the land use effects of a roadway capacity increase, and the traffic
patterns that result from the land use change can then be fed back into the travel demand
model. The land use model and travel demand model can be iterated to produce an accurate
result.
A project which provides new connectivity across a barrier, such as a new bridge across a river, may
provide a shortened path between existing origins and destinations, thereby shortening existing trips. In
rare cases, this trip-shortening effect might be substantial enough to reduce the amount of vehicle
travel resulting from the project below the range found in the elasticities in the academic literature, or
even lead a net reduction in vehicle travel overall. In such cases, the trip-shortening effect could be
examined explicitly.
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.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 207 of 221
Exhibit 7
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures
(On file in the Office of the City Clerk)
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 208 of 221
N:\Projects\2019_Projects\0341_Carlsbad SB 743 Implementation\GIS\MXD\Carlsbad Layer_TAZ Layering_cleaned_v3.mxd2012 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Capita by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ)Comparison to City-Wide Average
Carlsbad City Limit
Rail Alignment
2012 VMT/capita compared to City Average 2.52907capita
85% of average or less
85% - 100% of average
Above 100% (above average)
Minimal development (<20 households) defaults to Census Tract value
Note that the VMT/capita presented here was developed by Fehr & Peers using a script to analyze SANDAG model outputs. SANDAG applies their own script which may produce different results. Furthermore, these numbers are based on the ABM1 model version and should be updated as SANDAG releases model updates.
EXHIBIT 8
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 209 of 221
N:\Projects\2019_Projects\0341_Carlsbad SB 743 Implementation\GIS\MXD\Carlsbad Layer_TAZ Layering_cleaned_v3.mxd2012 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Employee by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ)Comparison to City-Wide Average&DUOVEDG&LW\/LPLWRail Alignment2012 VMT/HPSOR\HH compared to CityAverage 907HPSOR\HH RIDYHUDJHRUOHVV RIDYHUDJH $ERYH DERYHDYHUDJH 0LQLPDOGHYHORSPHQW HPSOR\HHV GHIDXOWVWR&HQVXV7UDFWYDOXH1RWHWKDWWKH907HPSOR\HHSUHVHQWHGKHUHZDVGHYHORSHGE\)HKU 3HHUVXVLQJDVFULSWWRDQDO\]H6$1'$*PRGHORXWSXWV6$1'$*DSSOLHVWKHLURZQVFULSWZKLFKPD\SURGXFHGLIIHUHQWUHVXOWV)XUWKHUPRUHWKHVHQXPEHUVDUHEDVHGRQWKH$%0PRGHOYHUVLRQDQGVKRXOGEHXSGDWHGDV6$1'$*UHOHDVHVPRGHOXSGDWHVEXHIBIT 9June 16, 2020Item #7 Page 210 of 221
EXHIBIT 10
PUBIC COMMENTS
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 6:31 PM
To: Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Kyle Lancaster <Kyle.Lancaster@carlsbadca.gov>; Don Neu <Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: RE: Public comments on Carlsbad's draft vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines - Parks
Master Plan Update - Draft Local Coastal Program Amendment
Jason:
Thanks, but your comments are a bit incomplete/unclear.
What is the definition of “Local Public Facility” or “Local” and “Public Facility”, and what are the
objective data/measurements/criteria are used to determine if the definition(s) applies/apply to a
particular situation. Is Local based on a fixed or sliding VMT metric based on the land use type?
Then from a land use classified as a Local Public Facility, what are the objective/data screening criteria
and how does the screen objectively work? I am trying to understand the definitions, the objective
measurements used and the accounting of the process.
Maybe the best way to show people is to use two different City Parks (one which the Guidelines say
there is no VMT or is “Local”; and the other where the Guidelines say there is sufficient VMT to NOT BE
“Local”) to show where the objective “Local” definition ‘line’ is. I would suggest this is a good way to
most clearly show how the Guidelines will measure VMT and be used. What do you think? Getting rid
of the ‘black box’ and showing specific examples of how the guidelines work to categorize is very
helpful, and allow decision makers to understand and feel comfortable with the guidelines.
Thanks,
Lance
From: Jason Geldert [mailto:Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov]
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 5:29 PM
To: Lance Schulte
Cc: Kyle Lancaster; Don Neu
Subject: RE: Public comments on Carlsbad's draft vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines - Parks
Master Plan Update - Draft Local Coastal Program Amendment
Hi Lance,
The screening criteria applies to any public facility that can be considered locally serving. We are not
claiming that “all” parks are locally serving. Application of this screening criteria, as with any others,
shall be determined on a project basis and is subject to justification. Any public facility not considered
to be locally serving is subject to a detailed VMT analysis Our guidelines will be updated to reflect this
clarification.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 211 of 221
Jason
Jason Geldert, P.E.
City Engineer
Land Development Engineering
www.carlsbadca.gov
760-814-0229 mobile
Facebook | Twitter | You Tube | Flickr | Pinterest | Enews
From: Lance Schulte <meyers-schulte@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:42 PM
To: Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Kyle Lancaster <Kyle.Lancaster@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: RE: Public comments on Carlsbad's draft vehicle miles traveled analysis guidelines - Parks
Master Plan Update - Draft Local Coastal Program Amendment
Jason:
Thanks. I sent a corrected version of my original email, that fixed typos/sentence fragments. Please use
that and this email in your Commission communications.
I think I tried to express concerns in that email, but what does “local” mean in terms of VMT thresholds
of significance and screening criteria? Is any “local” use exempt or given some VMT assumption? Is a
particular use like Park, automatically exempted or provided reduced VMT requirements because it is
classified as “Local” even though it is not “Local” with respect to the particular locational
requirements/standards/typology for the that use?
For a Park use typology that use should be within a 10-minute walk, or at the very least be within the
SAME Quadrant as from where the Park Demand [in-lieu-fee, mitigation etc.] was generated to be
consistent with its typology. Would a Park, like Veterans Park (even though it is a Park) that is not
providing VMT as a typical “Local” Park should be required to extensive VMT analysis and mitigation, or
be relocated to reduce VMT? This would be justified since it is located much farther way from the park
Demand [it is outside the Quadrant is supposed to be located within], and it much farther away [beyond
10-minute walking distance from most of the all the neighborhoods the park was supposed to serve and
from almost all the neighborhoods that paid for that park]. Are other non-Local parks that require VMT
and parking lots serve their intended users similarly be required to provide VMT mitigation or better
locations to reduce VMT?
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 212 of 221
Is one to assume the VMT analysis would assign how many people per acre of park land the park is
supposed to serve, what the average usage (visits per day or week) per each park user, where the users
are actually located that are assigned to that park (for Veterans Park 75% of the assigned usage is to
Quadrants outside of the NW Quadrant and the populations in those Quadrants are many miles away)
or the Park service area based on the population surrounding the particular Park. A determination as to
what areas are within a 10-minute walk or equivalent biking distance so as to define the
walkable/bikable service area of the site, the population within that walkable/bikable service area is the
non-VMT population served by that use and site. All other user demand to that use/site is then
vehicular, and VMT is based on distances/trips/ from the use/site and the amount and location of the
population that the use/site is intended to serve. For a Veterans Park, that is a very high VMT and given
Veterans park is supposed to me the ‘forever’ needs of the SW, SE and NE Quadrants, this VMT impact
will be a ‘forever’ and growing VMT and parking lot demand impact.
There could be some minor adjustment to VMT to account for some Transit access, but for a city like
Carlsbad this is very small and almost imperceptible. Transit mode share would requiring determining
the permanency of transit service and stops, the practically from the user’s perspective of actually using
transit serve/stops, the days/hours of permanent transit service, and the transit stop locations and
transit routes – what populations are served by those stops (within 15-minute walk of ) and if those
populations are the users of the use/site Transit mode share is thus typically minimal, except for some
intense commuting situations.
It is intuitively obvious that larger Community Parks do not serve large populations by walking/biking so
are vehicle centric and VMT heavy. The Veterans Park example is this Community Park situation on
Steroids. Except for a very few people, Veterans Park will only be accessible and useable via relatively
long (for a City Park) vehicle trips and an extensive consumption of parkland for vehicle parking that
defeats the purpose of parkland The intellectual heart of VMT is to reward redistribution of land use so
as to be accessible by walking/biking/transit; and to discourage/punish land use consideration that
forces VMT and parking lots to even allow a land use be used by the populations that land use was
intended to serve. With Parks, there is also the social equity issues of effectively excluding access to
critical populations the Park use is most intended to serve – children, elderly, and busy parents. For
parents the hassle of having to drive to and find parking to access a park creates time and accessibility
barriers to the parents use of the park, and for their children. These barriers are counter to good
park/traffic/city planning.
I included Kyle in this email as land use and its distribution is the driver for VMT, and sound land use
planning is critical in creating healthy neighborhoods.
I hope that helps you understand my concern. If not let me know when we can talk. It is a lot easier to
talk over some of these issues v. emails. The comments I provided are what I hear from my neighbors. I
also considered these user concerns in my planning practice, particularly in my work with SANDAG and
SCAG.
Thanks,
Lance
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 213 of 221
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 214 of 221
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 215 of 221
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 216 of 221
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 217 of 221
Hi Steve,
We will replace your previous comments with the latest. Responses to your questions are below in blue
text.
Jason
Jason Geldert, P.E.
City Engineer
Land Development Engineering
www.carlsbadca.gov
760-814-0229 mobile
Facebook | Twitter | You Tube | Flickr | Pinterest | Enews
From: Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 5:16 PM
To: Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: RE: VMT Comments
Hi Jason,
Given my re-reading of the screening/threshold flow chart (Figure 3-1) and Section 3.2.7, I would like to
replace my original public comment with the following—particularly if there is a hard submission
deadline today for such comments. If I am still misinterpreting something, I welcome your feedback:
I have concerns that Section 3.2.7 of the Draft Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Guidelines dated
4/20/2020 (appended below) indicates that no developments—no matter how large or small—will be
subject to VMT analysis or traffic mitigation requirements, if they are located in a VMT-efficient traffic
analysis zone (TAZ). VMT-efficient TAZs are those areas of the city in which per capita or per employee
VMT is 85% or less than the city average for residential or commercial developments, respectively. For
example, major portions of the Village and Barrio areas are in VMT-efficient TAZs, so no residential
developments there would be subject to any VMT traffic analysis or mitigation requirements (see the
light blue areas of the map appended below).
The VMT Guidelines were updated since the TMC meeting on May 4th. The updated guidelines were
linked in the public comment and request for feedback notification. I will answer your
questions/comments based on the updated guidelines.
Questions:
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 218 of 221
1. Although the proposed “VMT-efficient zone” screening criterion generally follows guidance from the
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), I am wondering whether that guidance extends to all
developments regardless of size? Is there an opportunity to set an average daily trip (ADT) threshold
above which VMT analysis would be required even in VMT-efficient zones?
The “VMT-efficient zone” screening (also referred to as “map based screening”) was removed from the
updated guidelines. Any project that does not meet screening criteria (listed in section 3.2) and
produces 110 ADT or more is subject to analysis. Projects that produce 110 ADT to 2400 ADT may use
the city’s VMT analysis maps. Projects that produce more than 2400 ADT must perform a site specific
analysis (mode run). However, OPR’s Technical Advisory does not limit application of screening criteria
based on size (section 3.2 of the updated VMT guidelines). Both the City of San Diego and the County of
San Diego are proposing to use the screening criteria for any size project.
2. I am requesting that a clear discussion be provided on how potential vehicle impacts will be assessed
and how mitigation will be proposed and funded for projects in both VMT-efficient TAZs and other
TAZs—in the context of the proposed VMT guidelines, the Growth Management Plan-based
Transportation Impact Analysis/Level of Service guidelines, and a potential residential version of the
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program.
In regards to VMT efficiency for residential and office projects – this is the measure for an impact. A
project that has a VMT efficiency at or below 85% of the city average (for residential) or regional
average (for office) doe not have a significant transportation impact and therefore no mitigation is
necessary. Any projects that do have significant transportation impacts will fund their own mitigation in
the form of VMT reduction measures. LOS/congestion is not considered an environmental impact in
CEQA and is not analyzed as part of an environmental document. However, consistency with Growth
Management performance standards for transportation are still required for all projects.
3. What consequences would there be to the “per capita” and “per employee” VMT TAZ maps, if
regional data were included, as suggested by OPR, rather than just Carlsbad data. How many more or
less regions would be rated as “85% of average or less”? What are the VMT/capita and VMT/employee
regional averages?
The guidelines have been revised to conform to OPR’s recommendations for office project. The city is
following OPR recommendations by comparing “per capita” to city average and “per employee” to
regional average. OPR has provided substantial evidence to support their recommendations in the
Technical Advisory. City VMT per capita average = 22.52; Regional VMT per capita average = 20.75; City
VMT per employee average = 25.87; Regional VMT per employee = 26.25
. Finally, I think it would be best to establish a timeline for updating the TAZ maps with new VMT data,
as travel patterns change due to new development and/or behavior.
Maps are updated as SANDAG updates their model. This typically occurs every 4-years. The maps that
the city has are based on the most recent data. We anticipate new data and a map update by the end of
this year.
Section 3.2.7 of the “Draft Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines” (dated 4/20/2020):
Projects Located in Efficient VMT Areas: Developments located in certain areas of the City of
Carlsbad have been shown to generate VMT/capita or VMT/employee levels below 15% of city-
wide averages and are considered VMT efficient areas of the city. Typical land development
projects located in these areas would be considered to have a less than significant impact on
VMT regardless of project size.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 219 of 221
From the “2012 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Capita by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) - Comparison to
City-Wide Average” map:
Best regards,
Steve Linke
Carlsbad, CA
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 220 of 221
1
Jason Geldert
From:Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 4:39 PM
To:Jason Geldert
Subject:VMT guidelines
Here are my concerns/comments about the proposed Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Guidelines (May 22, 2020
draft):
1. VMT‐efficient residential zones are defined as those with “85% or less than the citywide average VMT/capita,” as
shown by the light blue regions on the residential VMT Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) map. Effectively, any residential
project proposed in those zones, including much of the Village, Barrio and surrounding areas, will be exempt from
having to fund any VMT‐based mobility mitigation, if it is predicted to generate less than 2,400 average daily trips (ADT).
And that includes projects up to 240 single‐family homes, 400 apartments, or 600 retirement units.
The VMT‐efficient zone approach may help produce the intended consequence of increasing density in areas that are
already relatively dense, and where people already use their cars less. However, I am concerned that it may have the
unintended consequence of increasing residential density without sufficiently funding improvements in transit and other
travel modes, and without a corresponding increase in employment and commercial development to prevent the new
residents from having to drive a lot, resulting in parking and congestion problems.
For reference, because Carlsbad’s citywide average VMT/capita is higher than the regional one, there would be less
exempt areas and more mitigation required citywide for residential development, if the regional number was used
instead—or if a different approach is used.
2. Similarly, VMT‐efficient commercial zones are defined as those with “85% or less than the regional average
VMT/employee,” as shown by the light blue regions on the commercial VMT TAZ map, and any projects predicted to
generate less than 2,400 ADT would be exempt from having to fund any VMT‐based mobility mitigation. This threshold
was changed from the citywide average to the regional average after the Traffic and Mobility Commission had already
reviewed the document, which resulted in more VMT‐efficient zones that are exempt from mitigation and a generalized
reduction in the amount of mitigation required citywide for commercial development.
3. Given the potential limitations on getting VMT‐based mobility mitigation funding, I think it would be useful to refer to
the existence of the Growth Management Plan (GMP)‐based mobility requirements within the VMT guidelines, including
level of service (LOS). And I think there should be an overarching guide that harmonizes the CEQA/VMT, GMP/LOS, and
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program screening criteria, thresholds, mitigation measures, etc.
4. The TAZ maps should be updated with the newest data whenever possible, and staff has suggested that SANDAG will
likely update their data every four years. I think the TAZ map update process should be described in the VMT Guidelines.
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
June 16, 2020 Item #7 Page 221 of 221
All Receive -Agenda Item # rJ
For the Information of the: t7~UNCIL Date A V-CC ~
CM ""ACM_ CM (3)..::::::
June 16, 2020
To:
From:
Via:
Council Memorandum
Honorable Mayor Hall and Members of the City Council
Gary Barberio, Deputy City Manager, Community Services
Jeff Murphy, Community Development Director
Jason Geldert, City Engineer
Geoff Patnoe, Assistant City Manage@
{cityof
Carlsbad
Re: Additional Materials Related to Staff Report Item No. 7 -Vehicle Miles
Traveled as a Significance Threshold Pursuant to Senate.Bill 743 and the
California Environmental Quality Act
In preparation of the above referenced item, the process included a period for the solicitation .
of public comments and input. One of the comments received by the city was to be included in
the staff report; however, part of the correspondence was inadvertently cut off and not
included in the docketed staff report.
The communication in its entirety is now included as Attachment A to this memo.
Attachment: A. Public comment email from Diane Nygaard.
cc: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Celia Brewer, City Attorney
Ron Kemp, Deputy City Attorney
Community Services Branch
Community Development Department
1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 t
Jason Geldert
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Diane,
Jason Geldert
Wednesday, June 3, 2020 11 :38 AM
Diane Nygaard
Jennifer Horodyski
RE: VMT Comments
Thank you for the comments and they will help us prepare.
Sincerely,
Jason
l_ City of
Carlsbad
Jason Geldert, P.E.
City Engineer
Land Development Engineering
www.carlsbadca.gov
760-814-0229 mobile
Connect .l ith us
Facebook I Twitter I You Tube I Flickr I Pinterest I Enews
From: Diane Nygaard <dnygaard3@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 11:28 AM
To: Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Jennifer Horodyski <Jennifer.Horodyski@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Re: VMT Comments
Hi Jason
Attachment A
I don't need you to respond-you are soliciting public comments. Those comments should help you improve what you
have prepared. Do a staff report and presentation that provides better transparency and do some follow up to make
sure gpoing forward you have accurate,current information.
Diane
On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 8:20 AM Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov> wrote:
Good Morning Diane,
Would you like me to respond to your questions or are these for the public forum/hearing? I think you would like me
to respond, but I was not sure.
Jason
\... City of
Carlsbad
Jason Geldert, P.E.
City Engineer
Land Development Engineering
www.carlsbadca.gov
760-814-0229 mobile
Connect with us
Facebook I Twitter I You Tube I Flickr I Pinterest I Enews
From: Diane Nygaard <dnygaard3@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 6:59 AM
To: Jason Geldert <Jason.Geldert@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: VMT Comments
Mr Geldert
We appreciate the complexity of addressing this issue-and that we all share the same goal to end up with a VMT
methodology that will actually reduce GHG.
2
However. the devil is always in the details so it is important for the public and the decision makers to understand the
rationale behind some of these choices.
Our comments:
-Please discuss if other methods were considered and rejected, and why.
-Why use city VMT as the basis for residential trips but regional for office trips? There should be a clear justification
stated for why the threshold was proposed, especially since a different basis would be used for different land uses.
-According to the map of VMT by TAZ about 1/3 of the city has insufficient data to calculate a reliable number so
census tract will be used instead of the TAZ number. What are the VMT numbers for each TAZ and for those areas that
will be based on census tracts?
-The blue areas on the map are already efficient. Please clarify what analysis/actions large projects in those areas will
be requred to take to ensure they are consistent with their assumed efficiency.
-The SAN DAG " Not so brief guide ... " and their allowed reductions in ADT for pass-by and mixed use projects
historically had very little calibration for north county/ suburban cities like Carlsbad. What assurances can you provide
about the accuracy of this for Carlsbad?
Since these reductions are used to make a project exempt there will be great incentive for developers to maximize
these.
-What will you do to encourage SAN DAG to make this information more current-8 years is really excessive.
-The screening criteria will exempt roadway capacity projects if they provide" substantial improved conditions for
pedestrian, bicycle and, if appropriate, transit." Roadway capacity projects usually lead to increased VMT so this
exemption needs more clarity-and should require very specific justification ..
-Similarly the screening criteria exempts projects near transit-but further detail should be provided. The example of
excess parking is a key concern but even that is not quantified. The General Plan has policies about "right sizing"
parking so excess parking should be rejected on that basis, regardless of VMT impacts. But if parking is a factor in
considering a project exempt it is even more important that parking standards are not encouraging more auto use.
3
-Table 1 in Appendix C identifies anticipated VMT reductions for various mitigation measures. Several of these have a
huge range of potential reductions. For example, telecommuting varies from a low of .07 % in CAPCOA to a high of 44%
using SAN DAG models. This is a huge amount of discretion-and leaves this critical decision subject to wide
inconsistency with no real way to verify achievement. What can be done to make projected reductions
from mitigation more credible?
-In many cases real mitigation will require a major change in behavior. That change can be facilitated by making it easy
for people to make informed choices. That will require much better integration of land use and transportation
planning. The city is currently updating their Housing Element. They also need to re-look at the Circulation/Mobility
Element.
-It is our understanding that the city will still be requiring LOS analysis to determine transportation impact fees. This
fee structure should be expanded to address the full range of transportation choices-not just roadways for cars.
-It appears that this new CEQA transportation threshold may still result in a substantial number of projects using
"overriding considerations. " We are past the point where any project can be allowed to. increase GHG and have any
chance to achieve the global reductions needed to avoid climate catastrophe. The guidelines needs to specifically
address under what circumstances anyone will be allowed to exceed the proposed new thresholds. "Overriding
considerations" require a good faith effort to address the impacts. Every project is able to achieve the target -it just
comes down to costs. The decision makers need to have sufficient information to determine that the public cost of
allowing excess GHG is warranted.
Diane Nygaard
On behalf of Preserve Calavera
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
4
Tamm Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:.
Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com >
Friday, June 12, 2020 4:24 PM
City Clerk
For the Information o t e:
COUNCIL
Date CA ✓cc ✓
CM_ACM ~M(3)✓
Subject: Correspondence for 6/16/2020 City Council Item #7 (Adoption of VMT thresholds and
screening criteria)
Mayor and Council:
Based on the Traffic and Mobility Commission (T&MC)'s "Communications Plan" adopted by the City Council, our
meeting minutes should be included when items for which we have provided a recommendation are presented to the
City Council. Accordingly, I have appended below the text of the approved minutes for the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Analysis Guidelines item from our 5/4/2020 meeting, as modified and approved at our 6/1/2020 meeting.
Consistent with the T&MC minutes, I want to raise as a potential discussion item the fact that developments in the VMT-
efficient zones (the light blue zones on the "TAZ" maps) will effectively be exempt from VMT-based funding of traffic
mitigation, if they are predicted to generate 2,400 average daily trips {ADT) or less. Such developments can include, for
example, residential projects up to 240 single-family homes, 400 apartments, or 600 retirement units in the VMT-
efficient residential zones that comprise much of the Village, Barrio, and surrounding areas. There may be concerns
aboutinadequate funding of non-vehicle-based mobility infrastructure (e.g., transit) to compensate for the increased
population that will be expected to use it and not generate a lot of new vehicle miles.
Please note these guidelines have undergone changes since T&MC review, including the change to the commercial VMT
threshold from using the citywide to the regional average, as cited in the staff report. As compared to the version
reviewed by the T&MC, developments in more zones will be exempt from funding VMT-based traffic mitigation (VMT-
efficient commercial zones), and there likely will be a modest reduction in the overall amount of mitigation required
citywide for commercial projects.
This VMT-efficient zone approach and threshold are consistent with state guidance. However, it is only guidance, and
the state allows the city to use its own discretion. For details, please see my one-page public comment, which is the very
last page of the staff report.
Finally, I believe the second bullet point at the bottom of Page 4 of the VMT Analysis Guidelines needs to be changed
from "residential project" to "commercial project." In addition, the language describing the threshold values of 110 and
2,400 ADT throughout the document should be reviewed to ensure there is clarity when a development is predicted to
generate exactly those values (e.g., "less than," "up to," "between," and the flow chart in Figure 3-1 that technically
includes "110 ADT' in two different decision paths).
Excerpt from the T&MC May 4, 2020 Meeting Minutes
7. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED THRESHOLDS AND SCREENING CRITERIA-(Staff Contact: Jason Geldert and
Jennifer Horodyski, Community and Economic Development)
Staff's Recommendation: Approve staff recom;,,,endations Engineering Manager Geldert is asking the T&MC to
recommend to City Council the adoption of a resolution to approve citywide the Vehicle Miles Traveled
thresholds and screening criteria pursuant to Senate Bill 743.
1
• Commissioner Linke stated that the City of Carlsbad is approaching build-out and asked what proportion
of development projects, remain to be done that could be subject to the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
guidelines.
• Engineering Manager Geldert answered that currently we have 2 or 3 projects that will have to evaluate
VMT, but did not have exact numbers. He estimated that quite a few projects are expected to be subject
to VMT analysis guidelines.
• Commissioner Linke asked about the following hypothetical scenario: In the area that is mostly the
Village and the Barrio (light blue area shown in the PowerPoint), per capita VMT is 85% or less than the
city average, so under the 2,400 ADT threshold, does that mean that anyone could build a residential
area up to 240 single-family homes, or 400 apartments, or a 600-unit retirement community, and not be
subject to the VMT analysis?
• Associate Engineer Horodyski explained that yes, according to the VMT guidelines, if the city average is
more than 15%, the area would not be subject to the VMT guidelines.
• Commissioner Linke is concerned that a developer could build a 600-unit apartment complex in one of
the light blue zones and be able to say that we are not generating vehicle miles out of the 600 units as
an example.
• Engineer Manager Geldert explained that he understands Commissioner Linke concerns and he agrees
that any project based on this example would generate VMT however, the metric that we are using is an
efficiency metric which means that is a VMT per person.
• Project Manager Cole stated the key here is the efficiency metric uses an existing apartment complex
that on average is generating 15 VMT per person and if another apartment complex is built nearby the
expectation is that it will be like the existing neighbors.
• Commissioner Linke expressed concern that, with the proposed thresholds, the city would not be able to
compel even relatively large developments to fund any mitigation measures like transit or other TDM
measures that could be used to encourage the new residents to not drive their cars.
• Commissioner Linke asked if there is anything that has been customized or is unique for the City of
Carlsbad.
• Associate Engineer Horodyski explained that City of Carlsbad has a couple of thresholds and screening
criteria that are unique, one is the threshold for Office projects and the other is the Industrial projects.
• Commissioner Linke inquired about harmonizing CEQA rules/TOM rules/ Growth Management Program
(GMP) rules/VMT and Level of Service (LOS).
• Associate Engineer Horodyski explained that staff will continue to require both analysis: one for CEQA
one for local Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) and will combine into one document. Engineering Manager
Geldert stated that as a result of harmonizing the documents staff will develop TIA guidelines,
addressing the rules and regulations cited above.
• Commissioner Perez inquired if the development of Robertson's Ranch will affect VMT.
• Director of Traffic Engineering Rue hr answered that for the analysis of this specific commercial project,
Robertson's Ranch, it is assumed that this development would decrease VMT.
• Commissioner Penseyres pointed out that one of the areas in the city under development is around Sage
Creek High School and how the VMT would impact the residential development in the area.
• Engineering Manager Geldert answered that when analyzing VMT and it is found above the threshold
there are mitigation measures that would be put in place.
Motion by Commissioner Linke, seconded by Commissioner Hunter to recommend to the City Council the
adoption of a resolution approving citywide Vehicle Miles Traveled Thresholds and Screening Criteria pursuant
to Senate Bill 743.
Motion carried: 7/0
Best regards,
Steve Linke
Carlsbad, CA
2
Tammy Cloud-McMinn
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Honorable Mayor and Council
Diane Nygaard <dnygaard3@gmail.com>
Tuesday, June 16, 2020 10:23 AM
Council Internet Email; City Clerk
VMT Analysis = # 7 on June 16, 2020 Agenda
All Receive -Agenda Item# 2
For the Information of the:
CITY COUNCIL
Date &'/J /.ecA ~c ~
CM ~CM _:-eeM (3) .,...,-
The change to VMT is a critical action by the state to help address GHG. Carlsbad has done a thorough job of evaluating
local impacts and coming up with an approach that is specific to Carlsbad. We support adoption but believe further
action is needed as part of its implementation to integrate this with the Climate Action and TDM plans.
Our concerns include the following:
-the threshold of 2,400 trips to require a project specific VMT analysis is very high-very few remaining projects in
Carlsbad will meet that threshold. Please consider a lower threshold and/or add some discretion so that other projects
could be asked to provide this additional information. It is easier to reduce the requirements over time if justified than
it is to raise. them after some projects have already slipped through.
-this is based on 2012 data from SAN DAG . It is not acceptable when so much is determined by these numbers that
SAN DAG cannot keep this more current. Please join the other cities in the region and ask SAN DAG to make this a higher
priority-and do a better job of keeping this current and validating data for the smaller cities.
-Provide the actual VMT numbers for each TAZ-rather than just above or below 15% of. city wide average. Staff have
those numbers and they should be shared with you and the public. Understanding the range of variability and how
these are distributed could help come up with more effective TDM and land use planning.
-Please do not treat local public facilities the same as local retail -and exempt them. Our public facilities can have large
implications for distribution of trips within the city -and our public agencies should be setting examples. Making them
exempt is poor public policy.
Diane Nygaard
On behalf of Preserve Calavera
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
1
BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION OF
SAN DllGO COUNTY
CHAIRMAN
Jeff O'Connor
HomeFed Corporation
VICE CHAIRMAN
Alex Plishner
Lennar
TREASURER / SECRETARY
John La Raia
H.G. Fenton Company
June 11, 2020
Mayor Matt Hall
All Receive -Agenda Item # _.!J
For the Information of the:
, CIJY, C?UNCIL
Datef.4.1..J,,f!CA_CC_
CM _ACM_ DCM (3} _
Councilmembers Bhat-Patel, Blackburn and Schumacher
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: Extension request for Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) implementation
Dear Mayor Hall and Councilmembers Bhat-Patel, Blackburn and
Schumacher,
The Building Industry Association of San Diego County requests that the
City of Carlsbad join the growing number of jurisdictions asking Governor
Gavin Newsom to delay the implementation of Vehicle Miles Traveled
(VMT) requirements established under Senate Bill 743 (Chapter 386).
SB 743 directs local governments to transition CEQA related traffic impact
analysis from Level of Service to Vehicle Miles traveled for development
PAST CHAIRMAN projects. Your City, as with all jurisdictions, was· tasked with crafting
Dave Hammar protocols necessary for compliance to meet the July 1, 2020 deadline.
Hunsaker & Associates San Diego
PRESIDENT & C.E.O.
Borre Winckel
AFFILIATES
California Building
industry Association
National Association
of Home Builders
However, it has become clear to a growing number of jurisdictions and
several state lawmakers that these new requirements will negatively
impact housing construction at a time of great economic uncertainty due
to the Covid crisis. Furthermore, the crisis has limited the interaction
between members of the regulated community and staff to fully evaluate
the proposed rules and their impacts. Here are two areas in your
proposed ordinance which present problems to our industry along with
suggested changes to the implementing language.
Project Screening
... projects that generate less than 110 ADT would be presumed to have
a fess than significant VMT impact. Projects that can demonstrate that
they would generate an ADT of fess than 110 would be screened out
from performing additional analysis.
The City may want to consider adding the word "net" to new trips to
cover redevelopment projects. Also, clarification on whether the 110
ADT is driveway trips and cumulative may be helpful.
Projects Located Near Transit
... project site boundaries are within one half mile of an existing or
planned major transit stop or a stop/transit center along a high-quality
transit corridor would normally be presumed to have a fess than
significant transportation impact.
Building Industry Association of San Diego County
9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110, San Diego, CA 92123-1407
P 858-450-1221 F 858-552-1445 www.biasandiego.org
The City may want to consider adding language to add more clarity such as "one half mile accessible by
walking ... "and "planned/funded transit stop". There are projects that may be one half mile to transit
but may not very accessible due to walking barriers such as a freeway or lack of sidewalks. Similarly,
unless funded it may be too optimistic to assume planned transit stops.
Multiple jurisdictions, along with the Southern california Association of Governments (SCAG), have called
upon the Governor to delay implementation until the economic consequences of this crisis are better
understood. A bipartisan delegation of State Legislators has also asked the Governor to hold off for now.
The additional time will give local governments the opportunity to craft implementing regulations that
minimize the impact on housing production and costs. The Covid situation has exacerbated the housing
crisis for many in the region and to rush through with new VMT requirements will only make matters
worse.
On behalf of the BIA's 700 member companies and all who are in housing need, we respectfully request
that the City of Carlsbad join with SCAG in calling on the Governor to delay VMT. We also ask that Carlsbad
urge SAN DAG and its fellow members to do the same.
Your favorable consideration is greatly appreciated.
Sincerely, ,,-
}~[..{ I t Ii /11,_ ....---.._
Mifhael Mcsweeney /
Sr. Public Policy Advisor L,,
BIA San Diego
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a Public Hearing at the
Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 3:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 16, 2020
to consider new transportation impact thresholds of significance and screening criteria and more
particularly described as:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
"VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFCANCE AND SCREENING CRITERIA FOR
PUPRPOSES OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT."
Whereas, on May 4, 2020, the City of Carlsbad Transportation and Mobility Commission voted 7-0 to
recommend approval of the transportation impact thresholds of significance and screening criteria.
Copies of the staff report will be available on and after June 12, 2020. If you have any questions, please
contact Jason Geldert in the Land Development Engineering Division at 760-814-0229 or
jason.geldert@carlsbadca.gov.
Per State of California Executive Order N-29-20, and in the interest of public health and safety, we are
temporarily taking actions to prevent and mitigate the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic by holding City
Council and other public meetings electronically or by teleconferencing. The meeting can be viewed
online at www.carlsbadca.gov or on the city's cable channel. The Carlsbad City Council welcomes your
participation. During the COVID-19 public health emergency, the city has provided two easy ways for
community members to provide comments during a City Council meeting:
Verbally
Sign up to provide verbal comments by phone by filling out an on line registration form by 2 p.m. the day
of the meeting. You will receive a confirmation message with instruction about how to call into the
meeting.
In writing
E-mail your comments to clerk@carlsbadca.gov. Emails received by 2 p.m. will be provided to the City
Council prior to the start of the meeting. Other comments will be included with the meeting record.
Emailed comments will not be read out loud during the meeting. Please indicate the agenda item
number in your email subject line.
If you challenge thresholds of significance and screening criteria in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive,
Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing.
PUBLISH: June 5, 2020
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
Jeff Murphy
Community Development Director
June 16, 2020
Adoption of Vehicle Miles Traveled thresholds and screening criteria
Background
•SB743 signed into law November 2013
•Level of service is no longer an impact under CEQA
•Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is the goal
2
Background
•Office of Planning & Research (OPR)
•Developed statewide policies/criteria per SB743
•Vehicles Miles Traveled measure most appropriate
•Reducing VMT is the new CEQA standard
3
Background
•Five years extensive public involvement and revisions
•OPR issued guidelines for developing VMT measures
•CA Natural Resources Agency modified state CEQA
guidelines in December 2018
•New standards effective July 1, 2020.
4
Background
•In May 2019, Regional Guidelines released
•“SB743 regional concept maps” also prepared
•Early 2020, Carlsbad-specific maps developed
•Drafting VMT guidelines initiated afterwards
5
Background
•CEQA is about transparency (identify and disclose)
•Two key elements in any CEQA document:
Thresholds of Significance
Screening Criteria
6
Background
•Cities can develop their own CEQA standards
•Thresholds must be based on substantial evidence
•OPR’s guidelines substantiated with extensive vetting
•City’s VMT guidelines follow OPR
7
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
Type of proje,ct
Residential
Office
Regional Retail
Industrial
Transportation
Proposed threshold ,of significance
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if t he project VMT per capit a
exceeds a level 15% below t he city average VMT per capita
A significant trnnsportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds a level 15% below the regional average VMT per
employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if the project results in a net
increase in VMT
A significant t ransportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds the average regional VMT per employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if the project creates a net
VMT increase in the affected area
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
Projects that generate less than 110 average daily trips
Residential, office or retai'I uses located w'ith'i n one-half mile of a major public trans'it stop or a stop
along a high-quality transit corridor
Locally serving retail uses
Residential projects made up of e11tirelly affordable housf ng
Redevelopment projects that result in a net overall decrease in VMT for the site
Locally serving p ublic-facilities (Differs from OPR recommendations)
All screening criteria listed in OPR's Technical Advisory for transportation projects (Exhibit 1)
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
•Flexibility in mitigation measures
•Measures need to fit project
•CA Air Pollution Control Officers Assoc (CAPCOA)
•SANDAG Mobility Management Guidebook
•SANDAG Reduction Calculator Tool
10
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
•VMT Analysis Maps created to show current VMT
in Traffic Analysis Zones
•Modeling based on SANDAG data
•Methodology consistent with OPR
11
20.27 VMT/Capita
23.28 VMT/Emp
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
12
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
I • I .-•
Office
Regional Retail
Industrial
Transportation
Proposed threshold ,of significance
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if t he project VMT per capit a
exceeds a level 15% below t he city average VMT per capita
A significant trnnsportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds a level 15% below the regional average VMT per
employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if the project results in a net
increase in VMT
A significant t ransportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds the average regional VMT per employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if the project creates a net
VMT increase in the affected area
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
I • I .-•
Office
Regional Retail
Industrial
Transportat ion
. Proposed thref of significance
A significant t ran ation impact occurs if t he project VMT per capit a
exceeds a level 15% below t he city average VMT per capita
A significant trnnsportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds a level 15% below the regional average VMT per
employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if t he project results in a net
increase in VMT
A significant t ransportation impact occurs 'if t he project VMT per
employee exceeds the average regional VMT per employee
A significant t ransportation impact occurs if t he project creates a net
VMT increase in the affected area
20.27 VMT/Capita
Carlsbad VMT Guidelines
20.27 -19.14 = 1.131.13/20.27 = 5.6%
Percentage of project VMT to mitigate:5.6 %
City average: 22.52 VMT/capita
Threshold = 19.14 VMT/capita
15
Other Measures
•VMT and TDM aim to reduce vehicle travel
•CAP and SB 743 share common goal to reduce
GHG
16
Recommendation
Hold a public hearing and adopt a resolution
approving citywide Vehicle Miles Traveled thresholds
and screening criteria pursuant to Senate Bill 743 and
CEQA.
17
•Jason Geldert, City Engineer
•Jennifer Horodyski, Associate Engineer
•Katy Cole, Fehr & Peers
•Erik Ruehr, VRPA Technologies
Adoption of Vehicle Miles Traveled thresholds and screening criteria
18
Q Cario»dC,.,LrM
-+-Ra1i'Jt71mem
2012 VMT/employN compared to
Region A"'aage (26.ZS VMT/employeeJ
0 as-.ol-r.11J•or~
D M1',.100...arawra~
0 """""'°"'""' -+-ftill ,'Jlgrmef'd:
2012 VMT/c.apita comp,ared to City
Aw,-ve (22.52 VMT/a,pita)
D IS"'-od-~otltKi
D M;i.0 10Clti,af~go
Q A.oow101:J11.~.-r~J