Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-30; City Council; ; Authorization of an Agreement with Fehr & Peers for Transportation Planning and Engineering Design Services for Various Transportation Initiatives and request to carry $2This item was returned to staff to be continued at a date certain of Sept. 13, 2022. 1. AGREEMENT WITH FEHR & PEERS FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES AND REQUEST TO CARRY FORWARD $276,399 FROM FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 TO FY 2022-23 -Adoption of a resolution authorizing execution of a professional services agreement with Fehr & Peers to provide engineering and environmental services for the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan, Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study, and Veh icle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program and approval of a carryforward request to fund a portion of the agreement. (Staff contact: Nathan Schmidt, Public Works) CA Review _RMC_ Meeting Date: Aug. 30, 2022 To: Mayor and City Council From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt, Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager nathan.schmidt@carlsbadca.gov, 442-339-2734 Subject: Authorization of an Agreement with Fehr & Peers for Transportation Planning and Engineering Design Services for Various Transportation Initiatives and request to carry $276,399 in funding forward from Fiscal Year 2021-22 to FY 2022-23 Districts: All Recommended Action Adopt a resolution authorizing execution of a professional services agreement with Fehr & Peers, a California corporation, to provide engineering and environmental services for the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan, Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study and Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program for an amount not to exceed $383,315. The resolution also includes a request to carry $276,399 forward from the Transportation Department’s FY 2021-22 operating budget to its FY 2022-23 operating budget to fund a portion of the agreement. Executive Summary The City Council is being asked to authorize staff to execute a professional services agreement with a consultant to create the implementation plan for three interconnected initiatives needed to re-evaluate and identify the funding for future transportation improvements in the city: •The Sustainable Mobility Plan, intended to support all forms of transportation around the city while meeting the city’s climate action goals •A study of a multimodal transportation impact fee, a possible replacement to the city’s current traffic impact fee program •A vehicle miles traveled mitigation program Staff have selected the engineering consultants Fehr & Peers as the most qualified of the companies that bid on the project. The proposed agreement with Fehr & Peers is for $383,315. The agreement requires the City Council’s approval under Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.28.060(D)(5) because the value of the proposed agreement exceeds $100,000 per year. To fund a portion of the work to be done under this agreement, the portion focused on the Sustainable Mobility Plan and the vehicle miles traveled study, staff are proposing to carry $276,399 that was unspent in the fiscal year 2021-22 Transportation Department’s operating budget in the General Fund forward to its FY 2022-23 budget. That request requires the City Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 1 of 43 Council’s approval under City Council Policy No. 87 because the amount of the unspent General Fund money to be carried forward is greater than $100,000. Discussion Sustainable Mobility Plan The City Council adopted the Sustainable Mobility Plan in January 2021. The plan provides broad recommendations for reducing vehicle miles traveled in the city, mitigating the impacts of growth and development, and shifting how residents get around the city away from single- occupied private automobiles toward transportation modes that are more livable, cleaner and healthier. The plan builds upon important prior planning work in the city, including: • The General Plan’s Mobility Element • Bicycle and pedestrian master plans • Village & Barrio Master Plan • Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategy • Climate Action Plan • Establishing the Transportation Demand Ordinance Traffic impact fee The city’s current traffic impact fee is assessed on developers based on the impact their projects will have on city streets. It was designed to fund needed circulation improvements within the city. The genesis of the program was the city’s General Plan, which requires that the city ensure the provision of adequate circulation infrastructure to serve its projected population. One of the objectives listed in General Plan Mobility Element Policy 3-P.5 states the city should, “[r]equire developers to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with this Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impact associated with their development.” Implementation plan for Sustainable Mobility Plan The first task in this process is to develop a strategic implementation plan for the Sustainable Mobility Plan. This implementation plan will focus on devising realistic funding strategies for the design and construction of recommended mobility projects. It will build upon the project prioritization process established in the original Sustainable Mobility Plan and serve as a blueprint for a phased implementation of the multimodal improvement projects identified in the plan. (Multimodal refers to efforts to make it easier for people to get around by all forms of travel, not just cars.) This detailed plan will include an engineering feasibility analysis of top-priority projects and programs, covering the preliminary cost estimates, conceptual improvement plans, roadway cross sections and identification of funding sources. One program to be considered for funding is an all-electric flexible fleet on-demand rideshare program. Multimodal transportation impact fee The next task would be to develop a multimodal transportation impact fee program which would replace the city’s current traffic impact fee program. This study would provide a mechanism to modernize the city’s current fee program to collect funds for the construction of the improvements identified and prioritized in the Sustainable Mobility Plan and Capital Improvement Program. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 2 of 43 This first program concept to be studied is a traditional impact fee program in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act, which authorizes a city to impose fees on specific development projects to defray the cost of new or additional public facilities needed to serve those developments. Developers would pay a fee based on the impact their projects would have on the city’s transportation infrastructure. The proceeds would be used for projects intended to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The methodology used to determine the amount individual fees and the efforts to reduce vehicle miles traveled would be consistent with Senate Bill 743, which took effect in 2020, that changed the way local governments analyze transportation impacts from development projects and how they identify mitigation measures to reduce those impacts.1 That methodology will also need to align with the requirements in the county’s TransNet Extension Ordinance, which generates funding for regional transportation projects, for the city to remain eligible to receive its share of TransNet’s sales tax revenue. Vehicle miles traveled mitigation program The third task is to develop a mitigation program the city could use to reduce significant vehicle miles traveled impacts from new development projects to what is known as a less-than- significant impact. The city developed its Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines in 2020 to help in the analysis of the transportation impacts caused by development projects. This was consistent with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research advisories and California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15064.3 - Determining the Significance of Transportation Impacts. The city’s guidelines were last revised in September 2020. To provide additional options to help mitigate for project-related vehicle miles traveled impacts, the city is now planning to develop a mitigation fee program and/or an in-lieu fee program in which the developers of new projects would pay a fee based on the vehicle miles traveled their projects would generate. The proceeds of this fee program would be used to help alleviate or mitigate significant impacts from development projects. This mitigation fee program is anticipated to pay for relevant transportation demand management and vehicle miles traveled-reducing projects within the city. Future developments that trigger potentially significant vehicle miles traveled impacts under state environmental guidelines would fund these projects. Potential measures may include providing active transportation network improvements identified in the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan and other city-run programs to incentivize the use of alternative travel modes. 1 The previous practice of evaluating traffic transportation impacts used road congestion and delay or level of service. SB 743 requires the amount of driving and length of trips – as measured by vehicle miles traveled or VMT – to be used to assess transportation impacts on the environment when projects are reviewed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 3 of 43 Bidding, proposed agreement Staff posted a request for proposals for the project on June 13, 2022. On July 7, the city received three proposals. A selection panel of city staff evaluated and ranked the proposals based on best-value criteria, in keeping with Carlsbad Municipal Code sections 3.28.050(D)(2) – Procurement of goods, and 3.28.060 – Procurement of Professional Services The selection panel ranked Fehr & Peers as the most qualified and negotiated a scope of work with an associated fee not to exceed $383,315. The agreement will be in effect for two years from the effective date. The City Manager may amend the agreement to extend the term for up to two additional one-year periods. Budget carryforward request Staff are asking the City Council to approve a request to carry $276,399 in unspent funds in the Transportation Department’s FY 2021-22 operating budget in the General Fund to its FY 2022- 23 operating budget to pay for the studies on the Sustainable Mobility Plan’s implementation plan and the vehicle miles traveled fee. According to Council Policy No. 87, General Fund Surplus Policy, the city manager is authorized to approve the carrying forward of any unspent and unencumbered budget for a particular item equal to or less than $100,000, after certain requirements are met. Since this carryforward exceeds $100,000, City Council authorization is therefore required. Based on preliminary unaudited financial information, staff anticipate meeting these requirements, making the Transportation Department’s available balance at 2021-22 fiscal year end available for this purpose. (The remaining carryforward requests citywide will be brought to the City Council for consideration and approval at a future date.) Traffic and Mobility Commission Input Staff provided a presentation to the Traffic and Mobility Commission and sought input on the proposed scope of work for the request for proposals on Dec. 6, 2021. No vote was taken at this meeting, which was intended only to gather the commissioner’s feedback. The commissioners said they supported undertaking these studies to identify priorities and funding for multimodal transportation projects in the city. (Exhibit 2 are the approved minutes of this meeting.) Options Staff provide the following options for the City Council’s consideration: 1. Adopt a resolution authorizing execution of a professional services agreement with Fehr & Peers to provide engineering and environmental services for the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan, Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study, and Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program, for an amount not to exceed $383,315 and approving the request to carry $276,399 forward into the current fiscal year’s budget to help pay for this agreement Pros • Staff determined that the Fehr & Peers’ proposal provides the best value to the city • Sufficient funding is available for the agreement, including the grant funding from the Capital Improvement Program and General Fund. The project can be started and completed at the earliest opportunity Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 4 of 43 Cons • None identified 2. Do not adopt a resolution authorizing execution of an agreement with Fehr & Peers for the above-described services and do not approve the above-described carryforward. Pros • None identified Cons • Rejection of all proposals will delay the project • Future solicitation efforts would consume additional staff time and expenditures • Delay in starting the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan and Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee will result in delays to implement projects identified in the Sustainable Mobility Plan • The city will miss out on collecting some future traffic impact fee funds and vehicle miles traveled mitigation fees from private development projects Staff recommend Option 1. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 5 of 43 Fiscal Analysis Partial funding for the Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee portion of this project has been appropriated from Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6040, Traffic Impact Fee Study Update. The Transportation Department had sufficient available budget at the end of the 2021- 22 fiscal year to fund the studies. Staff are requesting the City Council approve carrying $276,399 forward into the current fiscal year’s budget to complete the funding for this work. The available funds and estimated costs for the project are summarized below: Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan, Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study and Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program Funding Summary Capital Improvement Program Project No. 6040 –Traffic Impact Fee Total appropriation to date $270,000 Total expenditures and encumbrances to date $11,217 Total available funding $258,783 Additional costs for Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study Professional services agreement $123,117 Staff engineering, administrative costs $13,800 Total estimated costs $136,917 Remaining balance – CIP Project No. 6040 $121,866 Additional costs for Sustainable Mobility Plan implementation plan and Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program studies Professional services agreement $260,199 Staff engineering and administrative $16,200 Total estimated costs $276,399 Additional appropriation needed - Carryforward request $276,399 TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS FOR ALL STUDIES $413,316 Next Steps Once the agreement is approved by the City Council and is fully executed, staff will issue a purchase order and a notice to Fehr & Peers to proceed with the engineering design and environmental services of the project. Staff anticipate the project will begin in September 2022 and be finished in the first quarter of 2024. Environmental Evaluation This action does not constitute a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act under Public Resources Code section 21065 in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and therefore does not require environmental review. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 6 of 43 Public Notification This item was noticed in keeping with the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act and it was available for public viewing and review at least 72 hours before the scheduled meeting date. Exhibits 1. City Council resolution 2. Minutes of the December 6, 2021, Traffic and Mobility Commission meeting Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 7 of 43 Exhibit 1 RESOLUTION NO. . A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH FEHR & PEERS, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, TO PROVIDE ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE STUDY, AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION PROGRAM AND APPROVAL OF A CARRYFORWARD REQUEST TO FUND A PORTION OF THE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the City Council has determined it necessary, desirable and in the public interest to prepare the Sustainable Mobility Plan, or SMP, Implementation Plan, update the city’s Traffic Impact Fee program with a Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee study, and develop a new Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT, mitigation program, Capital Improvement Program, or CIP, Project No. 6040, or Project, which would include the city undertaking transportation planning, engineering design and environmental assessment; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2022, staff received three proposals from consultants to provide services for the Project; and WHEREAS, subsequent to a review of the proposals based on best-value criteria consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Sections 3.28.050(D)(2) and 3.28.060, staff ranked Fehr & Peers, a California corporation, as the most qualified consultant for the Project; and WHEREAS, staff and Fehr & Peers negotiated the scope of work and associated fee in an amount not to exceed $383,315 to provide professional transportation planning, engineering design and environmental assessment services for the Project over an initial two-year term, with two additional one-year extensions as authorized by the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the Project is financed by the CIP and General Fund; and WHEREAS, per Council Policy No. 87, General Fund Surplus Policy, the City Council must authorize the carryforward of any unspent and unencumbered budget for a particular item in an amount greater than $100,000, after certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS, based on preliminary unaudited financial information, staff anticipate meeting these requirements, making Transportation Department’s available balance at 2021-22 fiscal year end available for this purpose; and Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 8 of 43 WHEREAS, staff request the City Council approve a carryforward request from fiscal year 2021- 22 for Transportation Department unspent operating funds within the General Fund to support the SMP and VMT studies in the amount of $276,399; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has determined that in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21065, the action to award a professional services agreement for engineering design services does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act in that it has no potential to cause either a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and therefore does not require environmental review. 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 Council approves a carryforward request from fiscal year 2021-22 Transportation Department unspent operating funds within the General Fund to support the SMP and VMT studies in CIP Project No. 6040 in the amount of $276,399. 3. That the Mayor is authorized and directed to execute the professional services agreement with Fehr & Peers, a California corporation, in an amount not to exceed $383,315 for the Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan, Multimodal Transportation Impact Fee Study and Vehicle Miles Traveled Mitigation Program, CIP Project No. 6040, which is attached hereto as Attachment A. 4. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to amend the Agreement to extend the term for two (2) additional one (1) year periods or parts thereof. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 9 of 43 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the __ day of ________, 2022, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: _____________________________________ MATT HALL, Mayor ______________________________________ FAVIOLA MEDINA, City Clerk Services Manager (SEAL) Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 10 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 1 AGREEMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN, MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE STUDY, AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED MITIGATION PROGRAM SERVICES FEHR & PEERS THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of the ______________ day of _________________________, 2022, by and between the City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation, ("City"), and Fehr & Peers, a California corporation, ("Contractor"). RECITALS A.City requires the professional services of a consultant that is experienced in transportation planning and engineering. B.Contractor has the necessary experience in providing professional services and advice related to transportation planning and engineering. C.Contractor has submitted a proposal to City under Request for Proposals No. RFP22-1865TRAN and has affirmed its willingness and ability to perform such work. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of these recitals and the mutual covenants contained herein, City and Contractor agree as follows: 1.SCOPE OF WORK City retains Contractor to perform, and Contractor agrees to render, those services (the "Services") that are defined in attached Exhibit "A", which is incorporated by this reference in accordance with this Agreement’s terms and conditions. 2.STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE While performing the Services, Contractor will exercise the reasonable professional care and skill customarily exercised by reputable members of Contractor's profession practicing in the Metropolitan Southern California Area and will use reasonable diligence and best judgment while exercising its professional skill and expertise. 3.TERM The term of this Agreement will be effective for a period of two (2) years from the date first above written. The City Manager may amend the Agreement to extend it for two (2) additional one (1) year periods or parts thereof. Extensions will be based upon a satisfactory review of Contractor's performance, City needs, and appropriation of funds by the City Council. The parties will prepare a written amendment indicating the effective date and length of the extended Agreement. 4.TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement. 5.COMPENSATION The total fee payable for the Services to be performed during the initial Agreement term shall not exceed three hundred eighty-three thousand three hundred fifteen dollars ($383,315). No other compensation for the Services will be allowed except for items covered by subsequent amendments to this Agreement. If the City elects to extend the Agreement, the amount shall not exceed two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) per Agreement year. The City reserves the right to withhold a ten percent (10%) retention until City has accepted the work and/or Services specified in Exhibit "A". DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Attachment A Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 11 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 2 Incremental payments, if applicable, should be made as outlined in attached Exhibit "A". 6. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR Contractor will perform the Services in Contractor's own way as an independent contractor and in pursuit of Contractor's independent calling, and not as an employee of City. Contractor will be under control of City only as to the result to be accomplished but will consult with City as necessary. The persons used by Contractor to provide services under this Agreement will not be considered employees of City for any purposes. The payment made to Contractor pursuant to the Agreement will be the full and complete compensation to which Contractor is entitled. City will not make any federal or state tax withholdings on behalf of Contractor or its agents, employees or subcontractors. City will not be required to pay any workers' compensation insurance or unemployment contributions on behalf of Contractor or its employees or subcontractors. Contractor agrees to indemnify City within thirty (30) days for any tax, retirement contribution, social security, overtime payment, unemployment payment or workers' compensation payment which City may be required to make on behalf of Contractor or any agent, employee, or subcontractor of Contractor for work done under this Agreement. At the City’s election, City may deduct the indemnification amount from any balance owing to Contractor. 7. SUBCONTRACTING Contractor will not subcontract any portion of the Services without prior written approval of City. If Contractor subcontracts any of the Services, Contractor will be fully responsible to City for the acts and omissions of Contractor's subcontractor and of the persons either directly or indirectly employed by the subcontractor, as Contractor is for the acts and omissions of persons directly employed by Contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement will create any contractual relationship between any subcontractor of Contractor and City. Contractor will be responsible for payment of subcontractors. Contractor will bind every subcontractor and every subcontractor of a subcontractor by the terms of this Agreement applicable to Contractor's work unless specifically noted to the contrary in the subcontract and approved in writing by City. 8. OTHER CONTRACTORS The City reserves the right to employ other Contractors in connection with the Services. 9. INDEMNIFICATION Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers from and against all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorneys’ fees arising out of the performance of the work described herein caused by any negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable. The parties expressly agree that any payment, attorney’s fee, costs or expense City incurs or makes to or on behalf of an injured employee under the City’s self-administered workers’ compensation is included as a loss, expense or cost for the purposes of this section, and that this section will survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. 10. INSURANCE Contractor will obtain and maintain for the duration of the Agreement and any and all amendments, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise out of or in connection with performance of the services by Contractor or Contractor’s agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. The insurance will be obtained from an DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 12 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 3 insurance carrier admitted and authorized to do business in the State of California. The insurance carrier is required to have a current Best's Key Rating of not less than "A-:VII"; OR with a surplus line insurer on the State of California’s List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers (LASLI) with a rating in the latest Best’s Key Rating Guide of at least “A:X”; OR an alien non-admitted insurer listed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) latest quarterly listings report. 10.1 Coverage and Limits. Contractor will maintain the types of coverage and minimum limits indicated below, unless the Risk Manager or City Manager approves a lower amount. These minimum amounts of coverage will not constitute any limitations or cap on Contractor's indemnification obligations under this Agreement. City, its officers, agents and employees make no representation that the limits of the insurance specified to be carried by Contractor pursuant to this Agreement are adequate to protect Contractor. If Contractor believes that any required insurance coverage is inadequate, Contractor will obtain such additional insurance coverage, as Contractor deems adequate, at Contractor's sole expense. The full limits available to the named insured shall also be available and applicable to the City as an additional insured. 10.1.1 Commercial General Liability (CGL) Insurance. Insurance written on an “occurrence” basis, including personal & advertising injury, with limits no less than $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. 10.1.2 Automobile Liability. (if the use of an automobile is involved for Contractor's work for City). $2,000,000 combined single-limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage. 10.1.3 Workers' Compensation and Employer's Liability. Workers' Compensation limits as required by the California Labor Code. Workers' Compensation will not be required if Contractor has no employees and provides, to City's satisfaction, a declaration stating this. 10.1.4 Professional Liability. Errors and omissions liability appropriate to Contractor’s profession with limits of not less than $1,000,000 per claim. Coverage must be maintained for a period of five years following the date of completion of the work. 10.2 Additional Provisions. Contractor will ensure that the policies of insurance required under this Agreement contain, or are endorsed to contain, the following provisions: 10.2.1 The City will be named as an additional insured on Commercial General Liability which shall provide primary coverage to the City. 10.2.2 Contractor will obtain occurrence coverage, excluding Professional Liability, which will be written as claims-made coverage. 10.2.3 This insurance will be in force during the life of the Agreement and any extensions of it and will not be canceled without thirty (30) days prior written notice to City sent by certified mail pursuant to the Notice provisions of this Agreement. 10.3 Providing Certificates of Insurance and Endorsements. Prior to City's execution of this Agreement, Contractor will furnish certificates of insurance and endorsements to City. DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 13 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 4 10.4 Failure to Maintain Coverage. If Contractor fails to maintain any of these insurance coverages, then City will have the option to declare Contractor in breach or may purchase replacement insurance or pay the premiums that are due on existing policies in order to maintain the required coverages. Contractor is responsible for any payments made by City to obtain or maintain insurance and City may collect these payments from Contractor or deduct the amount paid from any sums due Contractor under this Agreement. 10.5 Submission of Insurance Policies. City reserves the right to require, at any time, complete and certified copies of any or all required insurance policies and endorsements. 11. BUSINESS LICENSE Contractor will obtain and maintain a City of Carlsbad Business License for the term of the Agreement, as may be amended from time-to-time. 12. ACCOUNTING RECORDS Contractor will maintain complete and accurate records with respect to costs incurred under this Agreement. All records will be clearly identifiable. Contractor will allow a representative of City during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor will allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. 13. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS All work product produced by Contractor or its agents, employees, and subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement is the property of City. In the event this Agreement is terminated, all work product produced by Contractor or its agents, employees and subcontractors pursuant to this Agreement will be delivered at once to City. Contractor will have the right to make one (1) copy of the work product for Contractor’s records. 14. COPYRIGHTS Contractor agrees that all copyrights that arise from the services will be vested in City and Contractor relinquishes all claims to the copyrights in favor of City. 15. NOTICES The name of the persons who are authorized to give written notice or to receive written notice on behalf of City and on behalf of Contractor under this Agreement. For City For Contractor Name Nathan Schmidt Name Jason Pack Title Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Title Project Manager Department Public Works Address 101 Pacifica, Suite 300 City of Carlsbad Irvine, CA 92618 Address 1635 Faraday Ave Phone No. 949-308-6300 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Email j.pack@fehrandpeers.com Phone No. 442-339-2734 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 14 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 5 Each party will notify the other immediately of any changes of address that would require any notice or delivery to be directed to another address. 16. CONFLICT OF INTEREST Contractor shall file a Conflict of Interest Statement with the City Clerk in accordance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Conflict of Interest Code. The Contractor shall report investments or interests in all categories. Yes ☒ No ☐ 17. GENERAL COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS Contractor will keep fully informed of federal, state and local laws and ordinances and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by Contractor, or in any way affect the performance of the Services by Contractor. Contractor will at all times observe and comply with these laws, ordinances, and regulations and will be responsible for the compliance of Contractor's services with all applicable laws, ordinances and regulations. Contractor will be aware of the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and will comply with those requirements, including, but not limited to, verifying the eligibility for employment of all agents, employees, subcontractors and consultants whose services are required by this Agreement. 18. DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT PROHIBITED Contractor will comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations prohibiting discrimination and harassment. 19. DISPUTE RESOLUTION If a dispute should arise regarding the performance of the Services the following procedure will be used to resolve any questions of fact or interpretation not otherwise settled by agreement between the parties. Representatives of Contractor or City will reduce such questions, and their respective views, to writing. A copy of such documented dispute will be forwarded to both parties involved along with recommended methods of resolution, which would be of benefit to both parties. The representative receiving the letter will reply to the letter along with a recommended method of resolution within ten (10) business days. If the resolution thus obtained is unsatisfactory to the aggrieved party, a letter outlining the disputes will be forwarded to the City Manager. The City Manager will consider the facts and solutions recommended by each party and may then opt to direct a solution to the problem. In such cases, the action of the City Manager will be binding upon the parties involved, although nothing in this procedure will prohibit the parties from seeking remedies available to them at law. 20. TERMINATION In the event of the Contractor's failure to prosecute, deliver, or perform the Services, City may terminate this Agreement for nonperformance by notifying Contractor by certified mail of the termination. If City decides to abandon or indefinitely postpone the work or services contemplated by this Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement upon written notice to Contractor. Upon notification of termination, Contractor has five (5) business days to deliver any documents owned by City and all work in progress to City address contained in this Agreement. City will make a determination of fact based upon the work product delivered to City and of the percentage of work that Contractor has performed which is usable and of worth to City in having the Agreement completed. Based upon that finding City will determine the final payment of the Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 15 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 6 Either party upon tendering thirty (30) days written notice to the other party may terminate this Agreement. In this event and upon request of City, Contractor will assemble the work product and put it in order for proper filing and closing and deliver it to City. Contractor will be paid for work performed to the termination date; however, the total will not exceed the lump sum fee payable under this Agreement. City will make the final determination as to the portions of tasks completed and the compensation to be made. 21. COVENANTS AGAINST CONTINGENT FEES Contractor warrants that Contractor has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working for Contractor, to solicit or secure this Agreement, and that Contractor has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or any other consideration contingent upon, or resulting from, the award or making of this Agreement. For breach or violation of this warranty, City will have the right to annul this Agreement without liability, or, in its discretion, to deduct from the Agreement price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of the fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fees, gift, or contingent fee. 22. CLAIMS AND LAWSUITS By signing this Agreement, Contractor agrees that any Agreement claim submitted to City must be asserted as part of the Agreement process as set forth in this Agreement and not in anticipation of litigation or in conjunction with litigation. Contractor acknowledges that if a false claim is submitted to City, it may be considered fraud and Contractor may be subject to criminal prosecution. Contractor acknowledges that California Government Code sections 12650 et seq., the False Claims Act applies to this Agreement and, provides for civil penalties where a person knowingly submits a false claim to a public entity. These provisions include false claims made with deliberate ignorance of the false information or in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of information. If City seeks to recover penalties pursuant to the False Claims Act, it is entitled to recover its litigation costs, including attorney's fees. Contractor acknowledges that the filing of a false claim may subject Contractor to an administrative debarment proceeding as the result of which Contractor may be prevented to act as a Contractor on any public work or improvement for a period of up to five (5) years. Contractor acknowledges debarment by another jurisdiction is grounds for City to terminate this Agreement. 23. JURISDICTION AND VENUE Any action at law or in equity brought by either of the parties for the purpose of enforcing a right or rights provided for by this Agreement will be tried in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of San Diego, State of California, and the parties waive all provisions of law providing for a change of venue in these proceedings to any other county. 24. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS It is mutually understood and agreed that this Agreement will be binding upon City and Contractor and their respective successors. Neither this Agreement nor any part of it nor any monies due or to become due under it may be assigned by Contractor without the prior consent of City, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. 25. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated by it, along with the purchase order for this Agreement and its provisions, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter of it. In case of conflict, the terms of the Agreement supersede the purchase order. Neither this Agreement nor any of its provisions may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except in a writing signed by both parties. DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 16 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 7 26. AUTHORITY The individuals executing this Agreement and the instruments referenced in it on behalf of Contractor each represent and warrant that they have the legal power, right and actual authority to bind Contractor to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR CITY OF CARLSBAD, a municipal corporation of the State of California FEHR & PEERS, a California corporation By: By: (sign here) MATT HALL, Mayor Christopher Mitchell, President (print name/title) ATTEST: By: (sign here) for FAVIOLA MEDINA, City Clerk Services Manager (print name/title) If required by City, proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by contractor must be attached. If a corporation, Agreement must be signed by one corporate officer from each of the following two groups. Group A Group B Chairman, Secretary, President, or Assistant Secretary, Vice-President CFO or Assistant Treasurer Otherwise, the corporation must attach a resolution certified by the secretary or assistant secretary under corporate seal empowering the officer(s) signing to bind the corporation. APPROVED AS TO FORM: CINDIE K. McMAHON, City Attorney BY: _____________________________ Assistant City Attorney DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 17 of 43 PSA23-1900TRAN City Attorney Approved Version 6/12/18 8 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 18 of 43 18 Project Approach Scope of Services The Fehr & Peers team has reviewed and refined components of the scope of work outlined in the RFP. This refinement is described in the scope of work below, but key modifications are summarized in Table 1. : Innovation : Value Added TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF SCOPE SCOPE TASK (RFP)PROPOSED REFINEMENTS Task 1 - Project Management Merged with Task 2 and moved the Public Outreach Plan to Task 3. Value Added: For Bi-weekly meetings, a shared agenda will be kept updated with the agenda, meeting summary, and actions. Task 2 – Kick-Off Meeting Merged with Task 1 Task 3 – Public and Stakeholder Outreach Changed to Task 2. Added details regarding potential stakeholders along with key touchpoints and themes for each round of outreach. Task 4 – Existing Conditions Review Changed to Task 3. This task will set the foundation for prioritization and for determining if any proposed improvements would be mitigating an existing deficiency. Data analysis and GIS mapping subtasks were added in order to provide a more complete picture of existing conditions. Innovation: Incorporate origin/destination and safety data (Streetlight/Wejo) from cellphones and connected vehicles. Task 5 – Sustainable Mobility Plan Implementation Plan Changed to Task 4. Added detail on prioritization process, including the use of innovative data sources and a post-prioritization phasing strategy. Disclosed key assumptions. Value Added: Added more detailed (~30%) design concepts for complex elements of near-term projects. Innovation: Calibrate prioritization methodology with “criteria weighting” session. Task 6 - White Paper on Best Practice Research on Transportation Impact Fees and VMT Mitigation Programs Changed to Task 5. We will explore options for SB 743 programmatic mitigation (fees, exchanges, and banks), CEQA considerations for providing streamlining, and a summary of how agencies throughout California are tackling programmatic VMT mitigation and fee program updates. Innovation: Added a Fee Burden Comparison Memo to help decision makers understand fee levels in Carlsbad compares to other cities. Task 7 - Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Mitigation Program Changed to Task 6. We will provide the total citywide VMT mitigation associated with the fee program projects and the amount of VMT reduced per dollar paid as part of the fee program. DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 19 of 43 TABLE 1 – SUMMARY OF SCOPE Task 8 – Nexus Study Changed to Task 7. We have added detail describing key nexus items that will be considered, including a VMT-based nexus, MMLOS nexus, or any other type of nexus to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee and associated program consistent with AB 1600 requirements. Task 9 - Transportation Impact Fee and VMT Mitigation Fee Program, Ordinance and Fee Calculation Tool Changed to Task 8. Added detail related to what type of tool would be developed and how we can leverage existing tools that the City currently utilizes. Task 10 - Environmental Analysis (Draft and Final) Changed to Task 9. Our scope includes a simple and straightforward approach to CEQA review for the fee program. It meets the requirements to allow the fee program to be used for mitigation and is a cost and time sensitive approach. Value Added: Fehr & Peers is currently working with Carlsbad on the Housing Element Update EIR and will identify synergies and considerations related to CEQA evaluations for the two efforts. 19 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 20 of 43 20 TASK 1: PROJECT MANAGEMENT The primary project management tasks, aside from staffing, subconsultant management, and invoicing, will be the kick-off meeting and a series of bi-weekly check-in meetings. TASK 1.1: KICK-OFF MEETING The Fehr & Peers team will review appropriate background information, including the current TIF program, CIP project list, and other relevant information to assess the status of the current TIF program. We also plan to attend one hybrid kick-off meeting with Fehr & Peers staff attending in-person and our subconsultants attending virtually. We anticipate the kick-off meeting to cover key components of the project, and will include discussions with the City’s Communications Department to discuss key stakeholders and the outreach process. This task will inform the Public Outreach Plan (delivered in Task 2) and establish communications protocols between the Fehr & Peers team, the City, and the key stakeholders. TASK 1.2 BI-WEEKLY VIRTUAL MEETINGS Based on our proposed schedule we anticipate scheduling a series of approximately 34 bi- weekly (30 min) check-ins with the City. These meetings can be cancelled or lengthened as needed to adequately address the requirements of the project at any given time. A shared running agenda (using Teams or SharePoint) will be kept updated and used as a tool to add check-in agenda items, notes, and action items. Our team has utilized this approach on other projects in the region to keep everyone organized and up-to-speed. TASK 1 DELIVERABLES: • Meeting agendas, minutes, and materials TASK 2: PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH TASK 2.1: PUBLIC OUTREACH PLAN The Fehr & Peers team, with input provided by the City’s Project Manager and Communications Department during the kick-off meeting (Task 1), will develop a Public Outreach Plan for review and approval by the City. A key element of the outreach plan will be the stakeholder list that will identify when input from different stakeholder groups will be most critical and provide the greatest value. We anticipate that some stakeholders (such as advocacy groups) will be most concerned about the project list and prioritization; other stakeholders (like the BIA/ developers) will be most concerned about the fee program and should be engaged once the fee program and nexus study are underway so that concerns related to the level of fees can be identified and discussed. Once the outreach plan and general stakeholder list have been approved, we will work with City staff to identify and reach out to the specific individuals and organizations that will comprise the targeted stakeholder groups. TASK 2.2: MEETINGS WITH STAKEHOLDERS, COMMISSIONS, AND COUNCIL We anticipate the following touchpoints for our outreach to stakeholders, commissions, and City Council: Touchpoints for Stakeholders, Commissions and Council Stake- holders TMC PC CC Overall Process and Goals (Outreach Plan, Stakeholder List)X X X Preliminary Project List, Fee Program White Paper X X X Refined Project List with Preliminary Cost Estimates and Fees X X X Final Draft Fee Study and Implementation Plan (Adoption) - Final Fees, Concept Designs, Phasing Plan, and Cost Estimates X X X X TASK 2.3: OUTREACH SUMMARY MEMO All outreach materials and notes will be compiled into a detailed memorandum documenting the process and input received. This will be an important element in building support for adoption of the fee ordinance. TASK 2 DELIVERABLES: • Public Outreach Plan, Stakeholder List, Outreach Events, Meeting Materials, Outreach Summary Memo TASK 3: EXISTING CONDITIONS REVIEW Our familiarity with city infrastructure plans and DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 21 of 43 policies allows us to complete this task efficiently and offer additional analysis and innovations to support this and other tasks. TASK 3.1: DOCUMENT AND DATA REVIEW We will review the city programs, policies, documents, and studies listed in the RFP as well as the following additional resources relevant to the TIF program: • Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategy (developed by Fehr & Peers staff) • MMLOS Tool for the City (developed by Fehr & Peers staff) • Local Roadway Safety Plan (if available) • Pavement Management Program The goal of this effort will be to establish existing deficiencies on the system and to assist in refining the final project list that should be carried forward in the fee program update. It is critical to understand existing deficiencies to help establish the fee program. The fee program must only include projects/portions of projects that are needed to support growth and not to address existing deficiencies. This effort will also establish a baseline of potential factors to consider in the SMP re-prioritization process (Task 4.2). In addition to the plans/programs noted above, Fehr & Peers will work with the City to identify any available data that can be utilized in this effort. This could include recent traffic studies, collision analysis in the city, or any other relevant information. We also proposed to utilize origin and destination and vehicle-based traffic safety data from Streetlight and Wejo to supplement our understanding of existing conditions and for potential use in the SMP re-prioritization process (Task 4.2). TASK 3.2: GIS MAPPING We will compile available GIS data from the documents and sources listed above to create a series of maps that help us understand the relationship between existing conditions, mobility and safety trends, and adopted future plans. TASK 3.3: SLIDESHOW SUMMARY A slideshow summary of key findings will serve as the final product for this analysis and will be presented to City staff as part of a strategic discussion on how the findings will inform our next steps. TASK 3 DELIVERABLES: • Streetlight and Wejo Safety Data and Analysis, GIS Maps, Slideshow Summary TASK 4: SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The key to this task is to create an actionable strategy for implementing the Sustainable Mobility Plan (SMP). Specifically, we will finalize a vetted project list to be incorporated into the fee program, paired with concept plans for the top-ranked projects that provide a clear blueprint for implementation. TASK 4.1: REVIEW OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS As an extension of Task 3, the Fehr & Peers team will compare the current SMP project list to other relevant project lists, such as the CIP and current TIF, to identify synergies and opportunities for project coordination. This project comparison will be the first step in a project phasing plan, developed in detail in Task 4.4, by analyzing how elements of the SMP projects could overlap with the timelines of previously planned and ongoing projects. TASK 4.2: PRIORITIZE SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) RECOMMENDATIONS Project prioritization is an important first step in guiding the implementation of SMP projects. The assigned priority will reflect the project’s potential value to the community, independent of cost, which will be considered in the phasing plan along with other factors that influence the timing of the project. We will work with staff and stakeholders to develop a method for re-prioritizing of the SMP project list. This process may include some of the same factors used in the previous SMP prioritization process, but will add new criteria and weighting that emphasizes the importance of closing major gaps in the complete streets network (e.g., east-west routes) and overcoming major barriers such as I-5 and the LOSSAN corridor. We will also consider potential for synergies between SMP projects and other planned projects and programs (reviewed in Task 4.1), including the City’s pavement management plan, in order to maximize the return on infrastructure investments. Once the team has agreed on the new prioritization criteria, we will run the results on the full set of 21 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 22 of 43 22 SMP projects. (Note: Some projects may need to be excluded from the MTIF project list based on the outcome of the Nexus Study since the MTIF will specifically include project or portions of projects that support land use growth.) WHERE HAVE WE BEEN Carlsbad CATS 01 ElCaminoRealCannon R d Poinsettia Ln La CostaAv College B lFaraday A v PalomarAirportRd Alga Rd ElFuerte S tAlicanteRdMelro se DrAvenid a E n cinasCarlsbadVillageDr LevanteSt RanchoSanta FeRdHig hla nd Dr ChestnutA vPaseo D el Nort eMon r o e S t Ca lle BarcelonaAd am s S tJeffersonStVa l l e y S t BatiquitosDrPont iac D r T rie ste Dr C orintiaSt Marron Rd HillsideDr SunnyC reek R dSta t e S t Cadenc iaSt Gateway RdDo n na D r Ma d i s o n S t CalleAcervoSkyline RdOak Av Mi mosaDrOceanSt Carrillo WyArmadaDr Olivenhain RdOrion StLeg o la ndDr SanLuis LionsheadA vCelin d aDr Glasgow DrCamin o Junip ero Ani llo WyKelly DrSierra Mor ena Av Haymar Dr Harwic h Dr CaminoSerbalRanchoBravad o ElArb ol Dr SitioBayaRomeria St Cre st Dr LapisR dGr a n d P a c i f i c D r Twain AvOlympia Dr Camino Hills DrLokerAvWest Forest Av Navarra Dr Camino ArenaLas Olas Ct Acacia Av SaddleDrWalnut Av Sitio CalienteSiti o F r o n t e r a GarfieldSt Calle PalmitoTrail Easement Agua HediondaLagoon CARLSBAD PacificOcean 5 Buena VistaLagoon Batiquitos Lagoon MerkleReservoir OCEANSIDE VISTA ENCINITAS 2 3 1 4 65 7 8 15 14 109 1112 13"#" refers to disparate projects and does notcorrelate with any type of ranking #Prioritized Corridor Major Activity Attractors 16 FIGURE 1. PRIORITIZED CORRIDORS FOR LIVABLE STREETS PROJECTS 4 CITY OF CARLSBAD Active Transportation StrategyPrioritized Corridors from the Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategy, created by Fehr & Peers Criteria Weighting Working Session To finalize the prioritization methodology, we recommend holding a “criteria weighting” working session with the internal project team. This session will serve as an exercise with City staff to adjust the weights of the chosen criteria and to “ground truth” our methodology. During the workshop, Fehr & Peers staff would lead an interactive exercise during which we adjust the weights of the new criteria in real time to review the impact on the final project rankings. The goal would be to use the local understanding of City staff, the knowledge of political support, and other criteria that is difficult to quantify, to help calibrate the results of the methodology and help ensure the final list resonates with local leaders. Prioritization is only the first step in determining how and when projects will be implemented, and it is rarely practical to implement projects one-by-one in order of priority. A phasing plan will be included in the Implementation and Funding Strategy developed as part of Task 4.4 and will apply practical considerations to determine the timing of the prioritized projects, based on cost, funding availability, and synergies with other planned projects. TASK 4.3: PREPARE PLANNING LEVEL CONCEPTUAL PLANS AND COST ESTIMATES A key part of what will make the Implementation Plan actionable will be the project development as part of this task. The first step will be to develop Opinions of Probable Construction Costs (OPCC) for all the projects identified in Task 4.2, based on relevant project descriptions in the Sustainable Mobility Plan, that can be used within the nexus program. We will work with City staff to develop a contingency and potential escalation for use in the OPCC, anticipating the long-term schedule for implementation of many projects. We will develop conceptual level plans (15%) for up to 12 top-ranked projects that will further refine project design and cost estimates for positioning for near-term funding pursuits. The OPCC estimates will include quantities on a per mile or per intersection basis. For example, costs per mile may include such items as striping, new curb and gutter, new or widened sidewalk, repaving, bike lane enhancements such as raised or striped buffers, Class I bikeways, street lighting, retaining walls, storm water enhancements, and other relevant engineering items for inclusion in the cost estimates. Intersection level costs may include signal modifications, bridge structures, or safety enhancements such as protected intersections. Example of a 30% concept plan, created by Fehr & Peers The Fehr & Peers team will work with the city to identify a subset of the top-ranked projects from Task 4.2 that will move forward for conceptual DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 23 of 43 design plans. Based on the budget available, we anticipate this including up to 12 projects, depending on the complexity and extent of each project. Our approach for the concept plans could include a combination of sketch-level 15% design concepts as well as more detailed 20%-30% design concepts. For example, for projects that are low complexity, with mostly corridor-level improvements such as striped bike lanes, or that otherwise would require more project development outside of the scope of this project such as extensive public outreach, 15% design concepts would be appropriate. We have assumed a 15%-level concept would be no longer than two miles in length, include cross-sections with a plan view sketch (i.e., plan lines on an aerial), and include annotations that denote intersection treatment assumptions. For top-ranked projects that are higher complexity, more detailed (~30%) design concepts could be developed to help the city and the public better understand what the project will look like. We have assumed that these more detailed design concepts would include a focused area, such as a single intersection or a typical block, and would be laid out in CAD for ease of moving forward into subsequent design stages. We will work with the city to review the results of the project prioritization and to finalize the | Colma El Camino Real Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Plan Town of Colma | 51 | Local Vision | 52 WOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREENLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREEK ORTHODOX CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. EL CAMINO REALC STEL CAMINO REALALBERT M. TEGLIABLVDF STCOLMA BLVD F ST DRI V E W A Y T OWOO D L AW NMEM O R I A L P A R K DRIVEWAY TOWOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARKEl Camino Real Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement Plan Figure 1 See Inset for Bus Boarding Island with In-lane Stop Option Bus Boarding Island withIn-lane Stop Option LEGEND Sidewalk Landscape Existing Signal ProposedNew SignalProposed PedestrianHybrid Beacon (PHB)Existing Stop SignRemoved Bus Stop Proposed Bus Stop Existing Bus Stop to RemainOpportunity Area(e.g. GreenInfrastructure) Painted Truck Apron WOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREENLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREEK ORTHODOX CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. EL CAMINO REALC STEL CAMINO REALALBERT M. TEGLIABLVDF STCOLMA BLVD F ST DRI V E W A Y T OWOO D L AW N MEM O R I A L P A R K DRIVEWAY TOWOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARKEl Camino Real Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement PlanFigure 1 See Inset for Bus Boarding Island with In-lane Stop Option Bus Boarding Island withIn-lane Stop Option LEGEND Sidewalk Landscape Existing Signal ProposedNew SignalProposed PedestrianHybrid Beacon (PHB)Existing Stop SignRemoved Bus Stop Proposed Bus Stop Existing Bus Stop to RemainOpportunity Area(e.g. GreenInfrastructure) Painted Truck Apron WOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREENLAWNMEMORIAL PARK GREEK ORTHODOX CONCEPTUAL - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. ADDITIONALDETAILED ANALYSIS AND ENGINEERING DESIGN REQUIRED. EL CAMINO REALC STEL CAMINO REALALBERT M. TEGLIABLVDF STCOLMA BLVD F ST DRI V EW A Y T OWOO D L A W NMEMO R I A L P A R K DRIVEWAY TOWOODLAWNMEMORIAL PARKEl Camino Real Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvement PlanFigure 1 See Inset for Bus Boarding Island with In-lane Stop Option Bus Boarding Island withIn-lane Stop Option LEGEND Sidewalk Landscape Existing Signal ProposedNew SignalProposed PedestrianHybrid Beacon (PHB)Existing Stop SignRemoved Bus Stop Proposed Bus Stop Existing Bus Stop to RemainOpportunity Area(e.g. GreenInfrastructure) Painted Truck Apron Coordination with the San Mateo County’s Public Works Department about the improvements on El Camino Real is required during the PS&E phase HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALK High-visibility crosswalks are designed with lon-gitudinal marking and use high-visibility material instead of regular paint . They are more visible to approaching drivers than standard crosswalks, improving safety for pedestrians crossing the street . NO RIGHT TURN ON RED No right turn on red prohibits drivers from making a right turn when they have a red light . This helps reduce conflicts between right-turning vehicles and bicyclists or pedestrians moving through the intersection . No right turn on red is recommended from side streets onto El Camino Real at every signalized intersection throughout the corridor . SEPARATE BICYCLE SIGNAL PHASE Separate bicycle phases at a signalized intersection give people biking a green light while right-turning vehicles have a red arrow signal . By removing the conflict with right-turning vehicles, especially at locations with a high volume of right-turning vehicles, they make it safer for people to bicycle through an intersection . CURB EXTENSION Curb extensions widen the sidewalk or extend the landscaping at an intersection or mid-block crossing . They increase pedestrian safety by shortening the distance for pedestrians to cross the roadway, make pedestrians more visible to drivers, and reduce the speed of turning vehicles . BUS BOARDING ISLAND Bus boarding islands are platforms where pedestrians wait for and board the bus . They allow for the bikeway to be separate from the bus path of travel requiring buses to stop in the travel lane to pick up and drop off passengers . Bus-boarding islands eliminate potential conflicts between bicycles and buses at stops and maintain the continuity of a separated bikeway . They can improve transit service reliability and increase vehicle delay . SEPARATED BIKEWAY Separated bikeways physically separate bicyclists from vehicle traffic using grade separation, landscaping, physical barriers or flexible posts . They provide a safer and more comfortable bicycling experience . CONTINUOUS SIDEWALK Continuous sidewalks fill the gaps between existing sidewalks, increasing access and connectivity for people walking throughout the corridor . "Yes, please use the bus island design where ever possible! Seems like this would be better than mixing buses and people biking .""I love the idea of bus boarding islands! they're really needed all along the ECR and I think it would be great if Colma set the bar for the rest of the county" "Boarding islands are an extremely good idea! Please be sure to provide signs warning cyclists about potential mixing with pedestrians in these areas ." CORRIDOR CONCEPT DESIGN A full corridor design for Segment A and Segment B was developed and refined based on the preferences shared by the stakeholders and community, including through the third and final phase of outreach . Call-out boxes help describe the key design elements . Example of a 30% concept plan design, focused on a block or intersection, created by Fehr & Peers Arcadia AveE Vista WayE Vist a WayE Taylor St E Bobier Dr Monte Mar Rd Palomar Pl Warmlands Ave RECOMMENDATIONSE Vista Way North RECOMMENDATIONS E Vista Way South Add leading pedestrian intervals at WarmlandsAvenue. Stripe high visibility crosswalks and install sidewalk with curb ramps for pedestrian access. Improve lighting north of Warmlands Ave Consider exclusive pedestrian phase for east-west direction and add new high-visibility crosswalk on north leg. Advanced intersection warning signage for stopped trac ahead. Consider raised median to install signage. Installed 2018: Exclusive pedestrian phase Installed 2020: New sginal Corridor-level considerations:Extend bike lanes from south of Taylor Corridor-level considerations:More frequent bicycle lane legends so as not to be confused with a parking lane.Consider separated bike lanes Raised Median for access controland turn restrictions NORTHBOUND APPROACHING BOBIER Note: Conceptual, not for construction. Additional detailed analysis and engineering design required. Vista Local Road Safety Plan Example of a 15% concept plan, created by Fehr & Peers 23 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 24 of 43 24 approach for the number of concepts and level of detail. Concept plans will be presented and refined based on public engagement as described in Task 2. The revised top-ranked project concepts and related cost estimates, and final list of prioritized projects, will move forward into the nexus study. TASK 4.4 - DEVELOP DETAILED IMPLEMENTATION AND FUNDING STRATEGY The Fehr & Peers team will develop a detailed implementation strategy that will assist the City in delivering these SMP projects and will include two main elements: a funding strategy and a final phasing plan. Funding Strategy To ensure that there are appropriate financial resources available to complete the identified projects, we will analyze the City’s funding capacity and funding gaps. Specifically, we will review the total cost of the SMP projects, the maximum allowed fee that can be attributable to new development, and coordination with key stakeholders and the City to identify the likely fee amount that will be moved forward. We will also work with the City’s CIP group to get the highest priority projects programed within the City’s CIP efforts. For the gap between the City’s potential funding and the total cost of the recommended projects, the Fehr & Peers team will provide a strategy to assist with delivering the un-funded portions. The funding strategy for each SMP project will consider a variety of factors including estimated cost, improvement types, competitiveness for outside grant funding, and synergies with other projects and funding sources. For example, a lower cost project along a high-collision corridor with appropriate countermeasures may be a good candidate for the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding. For such a project, the strategy could be to use both the Fee Program and HSIP funding, with the Fee Program serving as the local contribution or to cover non-safety-related elements. Phasing Plan The phasing plan will be developed based on the prioritization, project cost, funding opportunities, design and construction complexity, and the timing of synergistic projects. The phasing plan will generally organize projects into near-, mid-, and long-term phases. For high-priority projects, we will look for opportunities for the City to deliver on low-cost elements of the project in the near- term, while the City procures funding for future phases of the project. For example, if a high-priority project that includes a combination of restriping (bike lanes, marked crosswalks) and civil-related improvements (curb extensions) coincides with a near-term resurfacing project, the project could be split into two phases. The first phase will be coordinated with the pavement management project, while the remaining elements could be split into a later phase and packaged into an ATP grant application using MTIF funding and the restriping portion of the resurfacing project as local match. This could also include executing a high-priority project as a “pilot project”, or installing the majority of a project using temporary, low-cost materials to evaluate and identify potential design modifications before proceeding with a future phase that includes a higher cost, more permanent, final design. TASK 4 DELIVERABLES: • Programing Matrix for Project delivery, Re-prioritized SMP Project List, Concept Plans/ Design/OPCC Estimates for Top Ranked Projects, and Implementation Funding Strategy Memo Example of a 30% concept plan, created by Fehr & Peers Carlsbad Capital Improvement Project ProcessCarlsbad Capital Improvement Project Process Transp ortation DivisionBrainstormsCIPProjects Uses PrioritizationWorkbook to Guide Project List InterviewsDepartmentsabout Their Proposed CIPProjects Submits RecommendedList to CIPTeam SubmitsProject List toCIP Team Checks in withOther Public Works Divisions about Their Proposed Project List Reviews OtherProposed Projects & Identifies Livable Street ImprovementsThat Can Be EasilyImplemented withinProject Confines Public Works Depar tmentSubmitsProject List to CIP Committee C IP Committee IdentifiesDuplicate/ConflictingProject F ina nce Departm entReviewsProject List toEnsure Adequate Funding Renews &Approves CIPProjects for Adoption byCity Council C ity Manager Legend Existing Process Informal Steps Currently Being Performed by Transportation Division Proposed Additions to Process/Formalize CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PROCESS ROADMAP TO LIVABLE STREETS Carlsbad CATS0328 CITY OF CARLSBAD Active Transportat ion Strategy The Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategy looked at the process for adopting a project into the CIP list, which we will leverage to implement the highest priority projects from the SMP DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 25 of 43 TASK 5: WHITE PAPER ON TIF AND VMT MITIGATION PROGRAMS TASK 5.1: WHITE PAPER AND FEE BURDEN MEMO The initial part of this task will be to develop the white paper on best practices that will discuss some basic considerations that other agencies have implemented, including testing whether the fee program is VMT increasing, neutral, or reducing; whether the program should consider a VMT-based nexus; whether the program should be based on a MMLOS nexus; or whether the program should be some type of a blended approach when establishing the nexus. Furthermore, the paper will explore potential options related to mandatory impact fees vs. optional impact fees. The white paper will also explore how the MTIF or a supplementary programmatic mitigation program may offer an option for project level mitigation. The programmatic mitigation options that will be explored are: • Fee Program: mandatory versus in-lieu or optional fees • VMT Exchange • VMT Bank As with all VMT mitigation, these programs require substantial evidence to demonstrate that the projects included in the programs would achieve the expected VMT reductions. Although implementation of these programs would require an upfront cost, they have several advantages over project site TDM strategies. • CEQA streamlining – These programs provide a funding mechanism for project mitigation, especially under cumulative conditions. • Greater VMT reduction potential – Since these programs coordinate citywide land use and transportation projects, they have the potential to result in greater VMT reduction potential than site-level TDM strategies applied on a project-by-project basis. Additionally, these programs expand the amount of feasible mitigation for reducing VMT impacts. • Legal defensibility – The VMT reduction programs can help build a case for a nexus between a VMT impact and funding for capital improvement programs. The white paper will describe VMT reduction options including capital/infrastructure projects and programmatic options that could be included in the various programmatic mitigation approaches. For each measure, an overview of the measure, expected citywide VMT reduction percentage, and other considerations will be provided. The Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA 2021) (GHG Handbook) will be used to estimate the VMT reduction for each measure that is sensitive to the Carlsbad context. The white paper will also provide a summary of programs that have been implemented or are in process within the State. Another important consideration that will be covered in the white paper is the regulatory approach/CEQA process for creating the fee/ mitigation program. There are various examples of how fee programs are used to provide mitigation for individual land use projects and, as noted in the RFP, for the program to qualify as CEQA mitigation, the discretionary action to adopt the program requires CEQA review. Note that if a fee program is mandatory, it should be considered as part of the project analysis, it is not technically mitigation because payment of the fees is required as part of the project action. The following provides a summary of regulatory approaches that the City may want to consider as part of this project (these will be covered thoroughly in the white paper): 1. Simple Environmental Approach (included in this scope) • Addendum to General Plan EIR: Demonstrate that the Fee Program is an implementation tool for the GP goals/policies. • Usefulness In Streamlining for Land Development Projects: Tiering from the General Plan EIR for VMT impact disclosure is NOT possible with this approach. However, if the fee program is fully funded, the VMT reduction associated with the fee payment (which can be provided as a VMT reduced per dollar paid) can be used in the land development project’s cumulative analysis to reduce the project’s VMT. If the fee program is not fully funded, the reduction associated with the program can’t be used to reduce a project’s VMT. Alternatively, the program can include funded and unfunded projects and only the VMT reduction associated with the funded 25 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 26 of 43 26 projects would be applied. The project would need to disclose it’s own impact findings. • Usefulness in Streamlining for the Roadway Projects Contained in the Fee Program: The total VMT induced by the fee program projects can be offset by the VMT reduced by the fee program projects. The remaining VMT reduction can then be used for mitigation toward land development projects. Note that this simple approach does not provide environmental coverage for the roadway projects in the program itself. However, OPR specifically exempts certain roadway improvement projects from VMT analysis if they are not vehicle capacity enhancing. Likewise there are usually CEQA exemptions that would likely apply to many of the traditional bike and pedestrian improvements. 2) Moderate Environmental Approach • Addendum to the General Plan EIR that includes a programmatic environmental evaluation for the Fee Program Projects: Complete the “simple environmental approach” and project programmatic environmental documentation for the fee program projects themselves. We expect that some of the components of the fee program projects already have coverage (for example through a different planning document) or the types of infrastructure identified would be categorically exempt. • Usefulness In Streamlining for Land Development Projects: Same as “simple environmental approach”. • Usefulness in Streamlining for the Roadway Projects Contained in the Fee Program: Same as “simple environmental approach” but with programmatic coverage for the fee program projects. 3) Robust Environmental Approach • Supplemental (or Focused) General Plan EIR: Do a general plan amendment to include policies associated with VMT and the roadway projects identified through the fee program analysis. Evaluate citywide VMT associated with future growth in the City and determine if there is a significant transportation based VMT impact. There is an option to either include the fee program projects in the General Plan or utilize the fee program as a mitigation measure to address citywide VMT impacts. If necessary, determine if the fee program (and other mitigation to the extent feasible) reduces the impact. Either way, disclose a significant and unavoidable impact that recognizes that the exact timing of the fee program projects is unknown. Note that only the fully funded component of the fee program can be used in the VMT analysis). • Usefulness In Streamlining for Land Development Projects: Tiering for VMT impacts would be available. If a project is consistent with the General Plan and paying the fee (and incorporating other VMT mitigation as identified in the General Plan Supplemental EIR), then the project can rely on the findings of the Supplemental EIR. No additional VMT analysis would be necessary for the project. • Usefulness in Streamlining for the Roadway Projects Contained in the Fee Program: The General Plan Supplemental EIR would evaluate the VMT induced and reduced by the fee program roadway projects. Additional VMT analysis would not be needed for the projects in the fee program (note that other environmental resource areas may need to be covered as part of the individual project assessment). The CEQA approaches described for a mandatory fee program are generally applicable to a voluntary program as well. We also propose to develop a Fee Burden Comparison Memo that will review the total fee burden on development in Carlsbad and compare it back to available fee burden placed on developments in other areas of Southern California (to assist in defining how competitive Carlsbad is for fee burden compared to other areas). This white paper will be discussed with the stakeholders and City staff to develop an initial approach to establishing the project nexus. TASK 5 DELIVERABLES: • Best Practices White Paper, Fee Burden Comparison Memo DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 27 of 43 TASK 6: VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM TASK 6.1: IDENTIFICATION OF VMT REDUCING STRATEGIES Fehr & Peers will identify the SMP projects that are VMT reducing. Since the SMP projects are primarily complete streets projects that incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities, we expect that the majority of the projects will result in VMT reduction citywide. Since this scope focuses on using the fee program for mitigation, VMT reducing programs and non-capital projects are not legally eligible for inclusion in the program. The types of projects that reduce VMT include low stress bicycle facilities (Class I, II and Class IV), transit station improvements, new roadway connections that will lead to a shorter path of travel, allocation of transit exclusive right-of-way, improved first/last mile connections, road diets/complete streets, and other roadway improvements that provide options for travel other than the personal automobile. TASK 6.2: VMT REDUCTION COST ANALYSIS The total VMT reduction associated with each SMP project will be calculated using the GHG Handbook and expanding the analysis presented in the white paper. In addition, any induced VMT created by capacity increasing SMP projects will be calculated. The VMT reduction will be used to offset any VMT increases by the SMP projects. The resulting VMT reduction will then be converted to a VMT reduction per dollar spent as part of the MTIF using the cost estimates prepared during Task 4. We will provide VMT per dollar spent for the MTIF fully funded projects and the whole program (funded and unfunded projects). The VMT reduction associated with the fully funded component of the MTIF can be used as VMT mitigation (or more accurately as part of a land development project’s VMT analysis) to reduce that project’s VMT. TASK 6 DELIVERABLES: • Total VMT reduction (or induced increase) for each SMP project. • Combined Total VMT reduction for the fully funded SMP projects • Combined Total VMT for all SMP projects • VMT reduction per dollar spent as part of the MTIF TASK 7: NEXUS STUDY The Fehr & Peers team will then move on to the nexus study, which will establish a reasonable relationship between the fee, the project list, and proposed development. We will zwork with the City to determine the complete list of projects and define the development that should be assumed in the assessment (e.g., RTP/SCS land use assumptions, General Plan Buildout, Housing Element Buildout, or some hybrid land use assumption). We will also complete a deficiency assessment to meet the requirements of AB 1600 (e.g., new development cannot pay to fix existing deficiencies). We will also address the requirements included in Section 9 of the TransNet Extension Ordinance, also known as the Regional Transportation Congestion Improvements Plan (RTCIP). The nexus study will generally follow the following key considerations that we will work with the stakeholders and City staff to develop: In addition to establishing the nexus, we will work with staff to evaluate the benefits/detriments to establishing a citywide fee vs. a district-based fee. (Please note, this is largely dependent on where the needs are (and whether they correspond with future development), how much flexibility the city wants in applying the funds, and the cost to administer a more complicated fee program. Also, most agencies, as they mature, tend to adopt a citywide fee to provide greater flexibility in delivering projects.) The final nexus study will also provide a summary of the fee burden comparison and a staff report for consideration/adoption. We will develop a fee schedule that will allocate fees by land use type for City use and will also evaluate some methods/ approaches to transfer fee burden between land uses (such as reducing retail fee burden by 27 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 28 of 43 28 TASK 8: TIF/VMT MITIGATION ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL The Fehr & Peers team will provide a sample ordinance for consideration by the City that can be used for project adoption. Also, we will document the results of Tasks 1-7 in a technical document to memorialize how the TIF was developed. The final document will provide the following key components: • Future facilities eligible for TIF fund- ing per the nexus study • Methodology for the fee and fee schedule (in- cluding identification of the appropriate nexus) • Updated administrative, monitor- ing, and reporting requirements • Ordinance language for the TIF • Two rounds of staff review of the deliverables We will develop a spreadsheet-based TIF calculation tool and will work with the City to identify the best place to develop it (e.g., a stand-alone tool or one integrated with other City tools, like the MMLOS tool and/or a VMT calculator if one is available). The RFP discusses the tool’s capability to estimate fees based on VMT, but that will only be necessary if the nexus is VMT-based. We will work with the City to develop the appropriate tool based on the nature of the fee program. TASK 8 DELIVERABLES: • Final Report, Interactive Tool, Ordinance To support our work on the VMT reduction ordinance for the City of San Diego, Fehr & Peers identified VMT reduction strategies based on a project’s location and the associated citywide VMT reduction potential. TASK 9: CEQA ASSESSMENT The Fehr & Peers team includes Mark Teague from PlaceWorks who will lead the CEQA assessment. Our scope of work assumes that we will be providing environmental coverage consistent with the “simple approach” described under the white paper task. This approach will allow a project to apply VMT reduction associated with payment of the MTIF (based on the amount of VMT reduced per dollar paid developed in Task 7) as part of their VMT analysis. Although we will work with City staff to define the most appropriate way to document potential impacts associated with the TIF update, it is likely that doing an addendum to the General applying pass-by reductions if it is a trip-based nexus/fee schedule and/or transferring some of that demand over to residential if appropriate). Finally, the Fehr & Peers team will work with the City to recalibrate the existing fees and standards to accommodate the TIF program and provide the staff report for the City’s use and verify compliance with the SANDAG Transnet Extension Ordinance. TASK 7 DELIVERABLES: • Draft and Final Project Lists and Nexus Study Finalize the project list and develop high-level cost estimates Establish the maximum allowable fee (e.g., account for existing deficiencies) Finalize the nexus for the project (MMLOS, VMT, etc.) Work with the City on fee adoption (fee schedule, will the City adopt a lower fee, etc.) Identify funding gaps and programs/grants to fill those funding gaps DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 29 of 43 Mobility Zones developed for the City of San Diego’s VMT In lieu fee. Plan EIR (SCH#2011011004) would be the most efficient. Our scope assumes that we will complete an addendum to the General Plan EIR which includes discussion with staff, an administrative draft, and a public draft of the addendum. This brief document does not require circulation or response to public comment, but must be part of the decision process and any hearing(s) conducted to adopt the project. PlaceWorks will prepare the addendum and provide a discussion for the staff report supporting the environmental determination. Based on our experience in other jurisdictions, our approach balances schedule and budget and provides a program that delivers multimodal projects and provides VMT mitigation while avoiding a lengthy CEQA process. We recognize that the RFP indicates that a subsequent or supplemental EIR be prepared with the goal of “allowing for full mitigation for projects consistent with a General Plan for which the MTIF, VMT exchange, and/or VMT program was designed to mitigate a VMT impact in the General Plan EIR.” Also, the RFP indicates that the impact analysis includes the identified projects that are part of the fee program. This approach aligns with the “robust” option described in Task 5 for the white paper. This approach requires an amendment to the General Plan to include a VMT policy and then evaluates the General Plan land uses and the SMP projects to assess VMT impacts (and potentially other CEQA resource area impacts). The projects in the fee program would be included in the citywide VMT analysis and could either be part of the mitigation for the citywide VMT impact or incorporated as implementation of the goals and polices in the General Plan (in which case the VMT reductions would be part of the impact analysis, not the mitigation) In general, we would expect a significant and unavoidable impact with statement of overriding considerations for VMT. There are considerations that affect the schedule and cost of this approach such as the need to revisit GHG, air quality, or other environmental findings in the General Plan EIR. The robust approach is expected to increase the cost of Task 9 by approximately $150,000-$200,000 and would extend the schedule by approximately 12-18 months. We recommend that the regulatory/CEQA options are explored as part of the Task 5 white paper to fully vet the most appropriate path for using the MTIF to reduce land development VMT impacts. As an additional insight, Fehr & Peers is currently working with the City (as a sub-consultant to the environmental team) on the Housing Element EIR. As part of that process, we anticipate providing EIR tiering opportunities for streamlining housing projects in the City. As part of that separate project, our team will be evaluating VMT associated with all housing in the City and performing impact analysis. It is likely that the conclusions will identify a significant VMT impact with a statement of overriding consideration. This will allow housing projects that are consistent with the General Plan Housing Element that incorporate any VMT related mitigation identified in the Housing Element EIR to tier off the VMT impact analysis and significant impact disclosure without the need to perform additional VMT analysis. Our team will offer synergies between the two projects and explore opportunities for collaboration and efficiency between the two efforts. 29 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 30 of 43 30 2022 2023 TASKS AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1 Kick-off Meeting 1.1 1.2 Bi-Weekly Virtual Meetings 1.2 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2.1 Public Outreach Plan 2.1 2.2 Traffic & Mobility Commission Meetings (4)2.3 2.3 Planning Commission Meetings (2)2.4 2.4 City Council Meetings (3)2.5 2.5 Stakeholder Outreach Events (4)2.6 2.6 Outreach Summary Memo 2.7 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 3.1a Document Review 3.1a 3.1b Data Review (Streetlight, Wejo, Collision) 3.1b 3.2 GIS Mapping 3.2 3.3 Slideshow Summary 3.3 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4.1 Review of Projects and Programs (Maps/Matrix) 4.1 4.2 Prioritize SMP Recommendations 4.2 4.3 Conceptual Plans and Cost Estimates 4.3 4.4 Implementation and Funding Strategy 4.4 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 5 WHITE PAPER AND NEXUS STUDY 5.1a White Paper: TIF and VMT Best Practices 5.1a 5.1b Fee Burden Comparison Memo 5.1b 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6.1 Identify VMT Reducing Strategies 6.1 6.2 VMT Reduction Cost Analysis 6.2 7 NEXUS STUDY 7 NEXUS STUDY 7.1a Draft and Final Project List 7.1a 7.1b Nexus Study Documentation 7.1b 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 8.1 Interactive Fee Calculation Tool 8.1 8.2 Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 8.2 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (DRAFT AND FINAL)9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (DRAFT AND FINAL) 9.1 Interactive Fee Calculation Tool 9.1 9.2 Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 9.2 Outreach Plan, Stakeholder List Prelim. Project List, White Paper Final Project List, Cost Estimates & Fees Final Fee Study & Implementation Plan 2023 2024 VALUE ADDED INNOVATION Schedule DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 31 of 43 2022 2023 TASKSAUGSEPTOCTNOVDECJANFEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1.1Kick-off Meeting 1.1 1.2 Bi-Weekly Virtual Meetings 1.2 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2.1Public Outreach Plan 2.1 2.2 Traffic & Mobility Commission Meetings (4)2.3 2.3 Planning Commission Meetings (2)2.4 2.4City Council Meetings (3)2.5 2.5 Stakeholder Outreach Events (4)2.6 2.6 Outreach Summary Memo 2.7 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 3.1aDocument Review 3.1a 3.1bData Review (Streetlight, Wejo, Collision) 3.1b 3.2GIS Mapping 3.2 3.3Slideshow Summary 3.3 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4.1Review of Projects and Programs (Maps/Matrix) 4.1 4.2Prioritize SMP Recommendations 4.2 4.3Conceptual Plans and Cost Estimates 4.3 4.4Implementation and Funding Strategy 4.4 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 5 WHITE PAPER AND NEXUS STUDY 5.1aWhite Paper: TIF and VMT Best Practices 5.1a 5.1bFee Burden Comparison Memo 5.1b 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6.1Identify VMT Reducing Strategies 6.1 6.2VMT Reduction Cost Analysis 6.2 7 NEXUS STUDY 7 NEXUS STUDY 7.1aDraft and Final Project List 7.1a 7.1bNexus Study Documentation 7.1b 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 8.1Interactive Fee Calculation Tool 8.1 8.2 Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 8.2 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (DRAFT AND FINAL)9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS (DRAFT AND FINAL) 9.1Interactive Fee Calculation Tool 9.1 9.2Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 9.2 Outreach Plan, Stakeholder ListPrelim. Project List, White Paper Final Project List, Cost Estimates & Fees Final Fee Study & Implementation Plan 2023 2024 VALUE ADDED INNOVATION Schedule 31 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 32 of 43 32 Jason Pack, PE PrincipalMatt Benjamin, AICP, RSP1 PrincipalKendra Rowley, PE AssociateRon Milam, AICP, PTP PrincipalKaty Cole, PE PrincipalAndrew Scher, EIT Engineer/Planner IIIShane Russell, EIT Engineer/Planner IIIAngelica Rocha Engineer/Planner IIIHeather McGuffin Administrator III Maddie Hasani Engineer/Planner IIISaima Musharrat Senior Engineer/Planner IAdministratorJason Moody PrincipalJulie Cooper Vice PresidentAssociatePaul Martin, PE, TE, LCI Grant WritingAaron Silva, PE Project ManagerJoshua Iniguez, Design Engineer IISam Sharvini PlannerJuan Zermeno Design EngineerMark Teague, AICP PrincipalJasmine A. Osman AssociateDirect CostsTotal HoursTotal CostsTASKS $305 $305 $220 $350 $265 $160 $160 $150 $140 $180 TASKS $155 $140 $300 $240 $185 $270 $270 $147 $130 $121 $250 $150 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 55 $14,765 1.1 Kick-off Meeting 1 2 1 1.1 1 1 1 $330 7 $2,145 1.2 Bi-Weekly Virtual Meetings 8 16 12 1.2 4 3 5 $0 48 $12,620 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 265 $58,830 2.1 Public Outreach Plan 4 6 2 12 16 2.1 6 $0 46 $8,460 2.2 Traffic & Mobility Commission Meetings (4)8 8 4 2.3 16 5 4 6 $1,000 51 $12,580 2.3 Planning Commission Meetings (2)4 4 2.4 8 2 4 4 $500 26 $6,620 2.4 City Council Meetings (3)6 6 2.5 12 4 4 6 $500 38 $9,220 2.5 Stakeholder Outreach Events (4)4 4 8 16 16 2.6 6 6 12 $2,400 72 $16,670 2.6 Outreach Summary Technical Memo 1 1 2 16 4 2.7 4 4 $0 32 $5,190 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICIES 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 134 $32,790 3.1a Document Review 4 4 8 16 3.1a 4 $0 36 $7,160 3.1b Data Review (Streetlight, Wejo, Collision) 4 4 8 4 16 3.1b $6,000 36 $13,680 3.2 GIS Mapping 2 4 4 8 24 3.2 4 $0 46 $8,790 3.3 Slideshow Summary 2 2 2 4 3.3 4 2 $0 16 $3,160 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 802 $141,700 4.1 Review of Projects and Programs (Maps/Matrix) 4 8 12 4.1 2 $0 26 $5,060 4.2 Prioritize SMP Recommendations 8 12 32 16 4.2 4 $0 72 $13,320 4.3 Conceptual Plans and Cost Estimates 16 120 160 4.3 24 8 8 32 100 140 $1,200 608 $105,360 4.4 Implementation and Funding Strategy 12 16 24 4 4.4 4 4 8 24 $0 96 $17,960 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 202 $46,870 5.1a White Paper: Transportation Mitigation Fees 4 2 4 24 5.1a 2 36 60 36 $1,590 168 $40,550 5.1b Fee Burden Comparison Memo 4 2 24 5.1b 4 $0 34 $6,320 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 64 $12,510 6.1 Identify VMT Reducing Strategies 2 2 2 16 6.1 2 $0 24 $4,680 6.2 VMT Reduction Cost Analysis 2 2 8 24 6.2 4 $0 40 $7,830 7 NEXUS STUDY 7 NEXUS STUDY 160 $39,250 7.1a Draft and Final Project List 8 4 24 7.1a 4 $0 40 $8,240 7.1b Nexus Study Documentation 8 4 8 7.1b 2 28 50 20 $1,510 120 $31,010 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 7 NEXUS STUDY 70 $13,340 8.1 Interactive Fee Calculation Tool 4 4 40 7.1a 6 $0 54 $9,860 8.2 Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance 4 2 8 7.1b 2 $0 16 $3,480 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 117 $23,260 9.1 Draft Environmental Analysis 4 2 7.1 2 18 50 $600 76 $14,630 9.2 Final Environmental Analysis 2 2 7.2 1 16 20 $350 41 $8,630 TOTAL LABOR FOR ALL TASKS 90 101 205 22 20 168 160 144 36 60 72 89 86 144 56 16 32 100 24 140 34 70 $15,980 3,738 $383,315 Fehr & Peers EPS Mark Thomas PlaceWorks VALUE ADDED INNOVATION Cost EstimateDocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 33 of 43 Jason Pack, PE PrincipalMatt Benjamin, AICP, RSP1 PrincipalKendra Rowley, PE AssociateRon Milam, AICP, PTP PrincipalKaty Cole, PE PrincipalAndrew Scher, EIT Engineer/Planner IIIShane Russell, EIT Engineer/Planner IIIAngelica Rocha Engineer/Planner IIIHeather McGuffin Administrator III Maddie Hasani Engineer/Planner IIISaima Musharrat Senior Engineer/Planner IAdministratorJason Moody PrincipalJulie Cooper Vice PresidentAssociatePaul Martin, PE, TE, LCI Grant WritingAaron Silva, PE Project ManagerJoshua Iniguez, Design Engineer IISam Sharvini PlannerJuan Zermeno Design EngineerMark Teague, AICP PrincipalJasmine A. Osman AssociateDirect CostsTotal HoursTotal CostsTASKS$305 $305$220$350$265$160 $160 $150 $140 $180 TASKS $155 $140 $300 $240 $185 $270 $270 $147 $130 $121 $250 $150 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 1 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 55 $14,765 1.1Kick-off Meeting1 2 1 1.1 1 1 1 $330 7 $2,145 1.2 Bi-Weekly Virtual Meetings8 16 12 1.2 4 3 5 $0 48 $12,620 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 2 PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH 265 $58,830 2.1Public Outreach Plan4 6 212 16 2.1 6 $0 46 $8,460 2.2 Traffic & Mobility Commission Meetings (4)8 8 4 2.3 16 5 4 6 $1,000 51 $12,580 2.3 Planning Commission Meetings (2)4 4 2.4 8 2 4 4 $500 26 $6,620 2.4City Council Meetings (3)6 6 2.5 12 4 4 6 $500 38 $9,220 2.5 Stakeholder Outreach Events (4)4 4 816 16 2.6 6 6 12 $2,400 72 $16,670 2.6 Outreach Summary Technical Memo1 1 216 4 2.7 4 4 $0 32 $5,190 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICIES 3 REVIEW OF EXISTING PLANS AND POLICES 134 $32,790 3.1aDocument Review 4 4 816 3.1a 4 $0 36 $7,160 3.1bData Review (Streetlight, Wejo, Collision) 4 4 8416 3.1b $6,000 36 $13,680 3.2GIS Mapping2 4 4824 3.2 4 $0 46 $8,790 3.3Slideshow Summary2 2 24 3.3 4 2 $0 16 $3,160 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY PLAN (SMP) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 4 SUSTAINABLE MOBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 802 $141,700 4.1Review of Projects and Programs (Maps/Matrix) 4 812 4.1 2 $0 26 $5,060 4.2Prioritize SMP Recommendations8 123216 4.2 4 $0 72 $13,320 4.3Conceptual Plans and Cost Estimates16120160 4.3 24 8 8 32 100 140 $1,200 608 $105,360 4.4Implementation and Funding Strategy12 16244 4.4 4 4 8 24 $0 96 $17,960 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 5 WHITE PAPER ON TIF/VMT 202 $46,870 5.1aWhite Paper: Transportation Mitigation Fees4 2 424 5.1a 2 36 60 36 $1,590 168 $40,550 5.1bFee Burden Comparison Memo4 224 5.1b 4 $0 34 $6,320 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 6 VMT MITIGATION PROGRAM 64 $12,510 6.1Identify VMT Reducing Strategies2 2 2 16 6.1 2 $0 24 $4,680 6.2VMT Reduction Cost Analysis2 2 824 6.2 4 $0 40 $7,830 7 NEXUS STUDY 7 NEXUS STUDY 160 $39,250 7.1aDraft and Final Project List8 424 7.1a 4 $0 40 $8,240 7.1bNexus Study Documentation8 48 7.1b 2 28 50 20 $1,510 120 $31,010 8 TIF/VMT ORDINANCE AND FEE CALCULATION TOOL 7 NEXUS STUDY 70 $13,340 8.1Interactive Fee Calculation Tool4 440 7.1a 6 $0 54 $9,860 8.2Final Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance4 28 7.1b 2 $0 16 $3,480 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 9 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS 117 $23,260 9.1Draft Environmental Analysis4 2 7.1 2 18 50 $600 76 $14,630 9.2Final Environmental Analysis2 2 7.2 1 16 20 $350 41 $8,630 TOTAL LABOR FOR ALL TASKS90 1012052220168 160 1443660 72 89 86 144 56 16 32 100 24 140 34 70 $15,980 3,738 $383,315 Fehr & Peers EPS Mark Thomas PlaceWorks VALUE ADDED INNOVATION Cost Estimate 33 DocuSign Envelope ID: B848F6E6-2E85-4A7E-AE19-E0B05097173F Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 34 of 43 Page 1 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Virtual Meeting Council Chambers 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Monday, Dec. 6, 2021, 3 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 3 p.m. ROLL CALL: Perez, Linke, Penseyres, Fowler and Coelho PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Chair Perez led the Pledge of Allegiance. This meeting was conducted virtually via Zoom due to the stay-at-home order for COVID-19. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes of the Regular Meeting held Nov. 1, 2021. Motion by Commissioner Coelho, seconded by Vice-Chair Linke to approve the minutes for the Nov. 1, 2021, meeting as presented. Motion carried unanimously, 5/0 PUBLIC COMMENT: None CONSENT CALENDAR: 1.ESTABLISH TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY COMMISSION SCHEDULE FOR 2022 – Support staffrecommendation for the Traffic and Mobility Commission Special meeting schedule for 2022to be held in July 5, and Sept. 6, 2022. (Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt, Public Works) Motion by Vice-Chair Linke, seconded by Commissioner Penseyres to approve Consent Calendar Item 1, as presented. Motion carried unanimously, 5/0 DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS: 2.POLICE MONTHLY REPORT – (Staff Contact: Sergeant Scott Meritt, Police Department) Sergeant Meritt presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Commissioner Penseyres inquired about the citations at the schools and whether they were both given to e-bike riders. Sergeant Meritt responded that both citations at the schools were given for helmet violations (not wearing a helmet). Exhibit 2 Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 35 of 43 Page 2 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Chair Perez asked Sergeant Meritt whether we are seeing an influx of children not wearing helmets while riding bikes to school. Sergeant Meritt answered yes and said that the Police Officers are working on educating the children about the importance of wearing a helmet. They are joining forces with the schools to get the message across. Chair Perez inquired if we have any challenges in the community with students not being able to acquire helmets. Sergeant Meritt responded that in the past they have received grants and worked details with other community members in which they handed out helmets to families that could not afford to purchase. Commissioner Coelho inquired if the school personnel is required to take action if they see kids riding into school without a helmet. Sergeant Meritt answered that schools do not have enforcement authority beyond their disciplinary process, but all of the schools are strongly encouraging students to wear a helmet and follow the rules of the road. 3. CARLSBAD RESIDENTIAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM UPDATES – (Staff Contact: Miriam Jim and John Kim, Public Works) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive an informational presentation providing an overview of the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Program (CRTMP) and provide input Senior Engineer Jim and Associate Engineer Pham presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Commissioner Coelho asked how CRTMP is being implemented and if traffic circles are being included as a chief measure for calming traffic. Senior Engineer Jim answered that traffic circles are being considered as a traffic calming measure for all new developments, but it is decided on a project by project basis. Past experience shows that traffic circles are cost effective and can be a desirable option for residents. Commissioner Penseyres inquired why 32 miles per hour, or mph, was chosen as the speed limit. He also asked if it was time to consider reducing this speed. City Traffic Engineer Kim responded that 32mph, was chosen as the speed limit based on different factors including discussion with the Carlsbad Police Department. The Police stated Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 36 of 43 Page 3 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t that between 30 to 35mph was the threshold that they would consider citing a vehicle for speeding on a road with a 25mph limit. Staff took this feedback and applied it to a number of neighborhood streets that had been complaining about speeding vehicles. The 32mph threshold seemed appropriate in determining which of those streets would benefit from traffic calming and those streets that would not. The traffic calming program gives the ability for a neighborhood to seek an exception to this threshold through the Traffic & Mobility Commission, or T&MC, and it has been done a number of times for streets that have a critical speed lower than 32mph. Staff does not recommend lowering this number any further because residential streets are generally low volume and have a low collision rate and streets with lower speed limits would not benefit from Phase II traffic calming measures. From an engineering perspective it is not as much of a safety issue as it is a quality of life issue. The 32mph works well for that purpose with the understanding that streets with special conditions can seek an exception through the program if appropriate. Commissioner Penseyres inquired about Phase III which also uses 32mph as a starting point for speeding. He also inquired as to whether there will be a follow up to Phase II issues if they are requested by the residents. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that they have not yet implemented Phase III on any street in Carlsbad because Phase II has been very successful. All streets that have been given Phase II treatments have been measured to have critical speeds lower than 32mph and are considered complete in regards to traffic calming. Conditions do change and some neighborhoods may need future adjustments and at that point Phase III could be considered. Staff will make a note to re-evaluate the Phase III criteria. Commissioner Penseyres asked if the information on speed measurements prior to traffic calming and post traffic calming and Phase II are available and can be provided. He noted that it would be beneficial to see how effective each measure was on traffic calming. For instance, is there a major difference between speed bumps and traffic circles in how effective they were in regard to speed surveys. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that he will be sure to include that information when they bring this item back to the T&MC. Vice-Chair Linke followed up on Commissioner Penseyres question regarding any exceptions that were made by request of the residents. He also inquired as to whether there was specific language provided in the traffic program guide for residents regarding the exception process. Does it state that a community has the ability to appeal in front of the T&MC? City Traffic Engineer Kim confirmed that the exception process is present in the current version of the program. Furthermore, all requests for traffic calming are given an electronic copy of the program for their reference. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 37 of 43 Page 4 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Vice-Chair Linke stated that he thinks the program is excellent and well managed. He agrees with all of the proposed changes and mentions that most of his past concerns have been resolved. He inquired as to whether there is an update on the past backlog of projects that were waiting for Phase II to be implemented as reported in 2019. City Traffic Engineer Kim mentioned that in 2019 there was a backlog of approximately ten streets. That number is currently down to two. The last two streets, Harwich Drive and Segovia Way, will be under construction soon. He mentioned that Covid-19 introduced a new challenge as we have not been able to schedule public meetings since 2020. There are currently six streets that have qualified for Phase II but are awaiting the next step, which is a public meeting. Staff has had discussions with the Communications Department regarding this issue and will let the T&MC know of any decisions on this matter. The plan as of now is to wait until public meetings are reinstated with social distancing. Meeting in person is the best way to communicate and achieve the objective. Vice-Chair Linke inquired about the communication process to get the community updates on projects that affects their neighborhood. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that they have not implemented any web-based notifications. He mentioned that staff is very good at responding to any requests from residents on the status of a project. Vice-Chair Linke asked about the traffic calming methods that are used on non-residential streets. He asked if there is a protocol for defining when a non-residential street would be subject for analysis for traffic calming. He asked if it would be possible to set up a similar process as we have for residential streets. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that residential streets are unique as they can be posted at 25mph regardless of prevailing speeds due to the ratio of single-family homes. This makes residential streets natural candidates for traffic calming since prevailing speeds can be significantly higher than the posted speed limit. Non-residential posted speed limits are based on speed surveys. He stated that he is not aware of any agency in the region that has a traffic calming process that applies to non-residential streets. Vice-Chair Linke suggested a formal protocol for how residents can elevate their concerns regarding traffic and speeding to the City of Carlsbad. City Traffic Engineer Kim said that current process evaluates streets on a case-by-case basis and utilizes the guidelines found in the Mobility Element as a basis for recommended improvements. There are currently no established thresholds in the engineering field as to what qualifies a non-residential street for evaluation. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 38 of 43 Page 5 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Commissioner Coelho inquired on how a private resident can communicate their concern about an incident on a specific street. They could potentially report this observation on the website. City Traffic Engineer Kim agreed that this could be beneficial. Staff is aware of concerns on specific streets as reported by the public. There are other ways that incidents can be used to implement improvements. The Local Roadway Safety Program is looking at collision activity to help identify patterns and create criteria for safety projects that may include non-residential arterial speeding issues. Chair Perez inquired about the Carlsbad Connect app and the possibility to use this application as a tool for the residents of the City of Carlsbad to report safety issues on non-residential streets. City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that he believes that they already receive speeding complaints via the app. He will check to see if there is a specific field for speeding and other traffic concerns. Deputy City Manager Gomez shared that there are many opportunities for the residents of the City of Carlsbad and business owners to reach out to the City via email to the City Council Members and others on the website. The emails are forwarded to staff and then all emails are responded accordingly. Chair Perez requested an update in the future on some of the past projects related to traffic and mobility that we have done. 4. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS GUIDELINES - (Staff Contact: Jason Geldert and Jennifer Horodyski, Community Development) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive a presentation and provide input on the informational report and status update This item was pulled from the agenda due to the late arrival of materials relating to the item. Staff needed additional time to review and draft responses to the material before presenting this item. 5. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE UPDATE: DRAFT SCOPE OF WORK - (Staff Contact: Nathan Schmidt, Public Works) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive a presentation and provide input on the draft scope of work for the update of the City’s Traffic Impact Fee program. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 39 of 43 Page 6 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Vice-Chair Linke noted that the Mobility Element Policy 3-P.5 which requires developers to pay their fair share toward improvements. The staff report implied this was exclusively for the Traffic Impact Fee, or TIF, program. The TIF is meant to fund general projects to mitigate the cumulative indirect effects of development. He wanted to clarify whether the direct impact development has in a local area would also be covered by Policy 3-P.5? Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that this was correct, and that Policy 3-P.5 covers both the cumulative projects under the TIF and the direct projects. Vice-Chair Linke mentioned that the municipal code says that the City Council is to review the designation of circulation improvements and the amount of the fee on the TIF, on an annual basis to ensure that there is sufficient funding. All projects and the level of the fee are to be reviewed annually, but all we have done is bump up the fee by the inflation rate increase. It has been over 13 years since the TIF program has been updated. With the currently proposed schedule to complete the TIF update in April 2024, it will have been 16 years since the last update in 2008. At that time, councilmembers, including then-Mayor Bud Lewis, expressed concern that the TIF program had not been updated for the past 17 years, and that perhaps it should be updated every two years, or there would be an unfair burden on future developers and taxpayers. Vice-Chair Linke suggested that the ability to collect meaningful fees may be reduced as Carlsbad reaches build out. We need to take into account which projects are going to be subject to the TIF. We need to examine what concentration of projects will be infill and redevelopment rather than big new projects that would be required to pay a substantial fee. We also need to consider the small projects that may normally get screened out, but cumulatively could add up and have an impact. Another concern is that we need to fully complete all projects that were on the original list from 2008. An example would be the College Boulevard extension. Our city funding this project is a direct impact of cars coming from other places, and a TIF should have been collected for many years already but we have failed to do that. Vice-Chair Linke noted that he is in agreement that Vehicle Miles Traveled, or VMT, based fees should be considered. He believes that the number of local trips should be added as a component as well. He thinks that would be a good idea going forward to specifically call out TDM and TSM in the statement of work. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that this new fee study is essentially an entirely new fee. The focus of this fee would be more multi-modal projects versus the traditional roadway projects that were previously identified as part of the TIF. We will clearly identify that this new fee needs to be updated on an annual basis and will have clear procedures for staff on how to accomplish the task. Average Daily Traffic, or ADT, should also be added as a metric to analyze the impacts. The Traffic Signal Master Plan will be a part of these programs as well. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 40 of 43 Page 7 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Vice-Chair Linke asked if there is a way that we can do a more minor, routine annual update on the current TIF in the absence of creating the nexus between all of these new multi-modal programs. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that they have considered the update but due to the legal requirements of the TIF nexus study it is not something where there can easily be an interim update until the new TIF is adopted. Commissioner Penseyres asked if the city can collect enough from this fee alone to do any good with respect to all of the projects that we need to accomplish. Since the city is pretty built out, in the future we will have smaller projects which probably won’t be able to contribute much. Is there another way to fund these projects? Could we investigate State or Federal grant funds? Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that as part of the TIF update the city will be looking into other funds to help with the programs. Funding won’t be limited to just the TIF but other funding sources as well. Transportation Director Frank shared information regarding the SANDAG regional transportation plan. To read more about it search the website under SANDAG regional plan. There is a lot of information in their new plan. This could be another mechanism for funding mobility improvements. Chair Perez asked about task two regarding the anticipated public and stakeholder outreach. Are these different attendances with the T&MC, Planning Commission, City Council, and more, all in one meeting or separate meetings? Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt replied that these would all be separate meetings. Chair Perez asked if the meetings could be condensed and an advisory committee created? The advisory committee could gather input from the different Commissions and present information to the City Council. This 360-degree approach will help differing point of views and expedite the process. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt answered that they will look at possibly condensing some of the commission meetings down and using representation on the ad-hoc committee. Commissioner Coelho asked if they could provide an estimate on how much revenue we think we can collect from this process. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 41 of 43 Page 8 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt answered that yes, they will provide an estimate. The process will be to solicit a consultant, select a consultant and then when we are ready to move forward with the fee study and we will kick that off with the T&MC. This would allow the city to get the T&MC feedback on the scope of work. Vice-Chair Linke pointed out the following: 1) The Municipal Code and Growth Management Plan requires that we have a TIF program and therefore we can’t eliminate it. 2) He believes that the city can still collect a significant amount of money from the TIF, it just won’t be as much as we could have collected over the past decade if we had kept updating the fee. Vice-Chair Linke inquired on how a new development is required to pay the TIF even if they are not generating any additional traffic from when the old development was in its place. Is this policy still valid? Will this be looked at by the consultant? Transportation, Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt answered that yes this will be explored as part of the nexus fee study. CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER COMMENTS: City Traffic Engineer Kim noted the recent passage AB43 and the resulting changes to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as it relates to speed zoning. CALTRANS should be releasing a traffic safety bulletin on or before January 1, 2022. We will be able to see what opportunities there may be to lower some speed limits in the City of Carlsbad. We are also working to finalize the informational memo to the commission that will be sent out on a monthly basis. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt mentioned that on December 7, the City Council will appoint two new commissioners to the T&MC. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt spoke about the multi-modal level of service and mentioned that they have been working with the ad-hoc committee and a consultant to provide an updated tool so that we can move forward with the testing. We can then provide examples on actual updates that have been made. Chair Perez asked if there are any new traffic laws coming into 2022? City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that he does not have a list of any new traffic laws for 2022 except the one previously discussed regarding the process for setting speed limits in California. Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 42 of 43 Page 9 of 9 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  760-602-2746 t TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Coelho inquired about tracking open items that are mentioned as items of concern. Can we create an ongoing tracker that is part of the agenda each month? City Traffic Engineer Kim replied that the memo that will be sent out monthly will include items that have been brought up under public comment and by the commissioners. Vice-Chair Linke added that he submitted a letter on July 2021, as well as a PowerPoint presentation on December 2021, regarding his concerns with the VMT analysis guidelines. He would like the opportunity to discuss his concerns with staff in a public meeting. He would like this to be added to the agenda soon. Transportation Director Frank replied that the VMT analysis is a part of the work plan so it will be presented to the T&MC for comments. We will add this to the next T&MC meeting agenda Motion by Chair Perez, seconded by Vice-Chair Linke requesting staff to agendize Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines to the January 2022, T&MC meeting including responses to Vice- Chair Linke comments. Motion carried unanimously, 5/0. ADJOURNMENT: Chair Perez adjourned the Traffic & Mobility Commission Meeting on Dec. 6, 2021, at 5:50 p.m. ___________________________ Eliane Paiva, Minutes Clerk Aug. 30, 2022 Item #1 Page 43 of 43