Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-02-07; Traffic and Mobility Commission; MinutesPage 1 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Virtual Meeting Council Chambers 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Monday, Feb. 7, 2022, 3 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: 3:00 p.m. ROLL CALL: Linke, Penseyres, Fowler, Coelho and Proulx Absent: Chair Perez PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Acting Chair Linke 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 Jan. 3, 2022. Motion by Acting Chair Linke, seconded by Commissioner Fowler to approve the minutes for the Jan. 3, 2022, meeting as presented. Motion carried, 5/0/0/1 (Absent: Chair Perez) PUBLIC COMMENT: The following individuals called into the Traffic & Mobility Commission Meeting and voiced their comment for the record: Kiana Graham expressed her concern about La Costa Avenue bike lane nearing the freeway 5. She suggested adding a protected bike lane on the location. Tom Wellman requested that the City of Carlsbad look into adding flashing yellow left turn arrows, or FYA, on intersections that warrants this type of traffic control tool. This would allow drivers to not have to wait for the green arrow, thus reducing greenhouse gases caused by idling. At some of the busier intersections maybe it could be a traditional left turn arrow during peak hours and then switch to a flashing yellow left turn arrow during the overnight. Many neighboring cities including Encinitas use these FYA’s and has been a very efficient way of moving traffic. CONSENT CALENDAR: None DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS: 1.POLICE MONTHLY REPORT – (Staff Contact: Corporal Matt Bowen, Police Department) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive a presentation Page 2 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Corporal Bowen presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Commissioner Fowler inquired if there is a way to get the statistics on how many of the total bicycles collisions on the road in the City of Carlsbad are e-bikes, then we can evaluate if half of all the bicycle collisions on the road involved e-bikes. Corporal Bowen responded that most of these statistics and numbers are being pulled by our Crimes Analysis Assistance and they identify types of collision. Commissioner Coelho asked if the City of Carlsbad is making any efforts to reach adults or parents regarding e-bike safety. Corporal Bowen responded that the bike enforcement is not specifically targeting juveniles. Any violations that are seen whether adult or juvenile is being addressed either through a citation or a warning. We do see a lot of e-bike usage around the schools, so we do focus on those areas to educate kids that don’t have a driver licenses yet about the rules and safety on the road. Commissioner Coelho inquired if any literature is sent home with the students after an e-bike safety presentation at a school. Or are there any emails being sent home from the school after the presentation? Corporal Bowen answered that they created informative flyers and they are distributed during the morning hours at the school on the day of the visit. If the police stop any of the juveniles for a bike violation it is usually followed up with a a phone call to the parents from the scene to notify them and get them involved in the safety. Commissioner Penseyres inquired as to whether the police are noticing an epidemic of driving under the influence and hit and runs. Corporal Bowen replied that the traffic unit did not notice any spike. Commissioner Penseyres asked whether the Police are looking into noise levels from automobiles and motorcycles in the village area. Corporal Bowen replied that they are consistently trying to enforce noise levels, especially in the downtown area. We try to enforce both the loud exhaust and the speed levels. 2. PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE OF MOBILITY IN AND AROUND CARLSBAD – (Staff Contact: Tom Frank and Nathan Schmidt, Public Works) Page 3 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Transportation Director Frank presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) SANDAG Director/Regional Planning Meier commented that she is looking forward to having a conversation with the T&MC at the next meeting in March. She also believes in providing choices and having a balanced approach and that is what SANDAG sought to do with the regional plan. Acting Chair Linke commented that he spends a lot of time trying to get the Carlsbad transit stops upgraded even though the transit system is not being used frequently by many people. Buses are infrequent and some only run a few times a day and therefore we can’t expect people to utilize them. He would like to ensure that we are addressing the transit stops which are mostly just a signpost and don’t even include a bench. It would be important to add a bench, lighting, and cover so people feel safe to use the public transit. If we move forward with micro transit as an option, would these bus stops be able to be utilized as an alternative stop for those vehicles? Or would we assume that people would be driven directly to the place they requested. Transportation Director Frank responded that there are rideshare options as well as public transit options. North County Transit District, or NCTD, launched their NCTD+ to address the first and last mile issue and other cities have launched rideshare programs for low ridership transit routes. In San Clemente they launched a pilot rideshare program which has been very successful and has saved the transit authority millions of dollars per year, and they using the old bus stops as ride share stops. SANDAG and Crew Transport Vehicle will be studying options like these to determine how we provide the best public transit for the taxpayer dollar. Commissioner Coelho inquired about the timeline for these projects and when we will start seeing changes like the bus stops being converted to ride share pickup locations and other changes being implemented. Transportation Director Frank replied that in City of Carlsbad the change has already started with the NCTD+ and SANDAG will be presenting more on this next month as well. NCTD is responsible for the public transit issues and projects like updating bus stop signs to ride share signs. Regarding changes on the City of Carlsbad streets and infrastructure, we are planning on accelerating the re-striping of a lot of our east, west corridors to widen the bike lanes. We will also be working with SANDAG on some pilot programs and with CALTRANS on our studying efforts. Our public process requires a lot of steps and it can take several years to get things planned, designed and in place. SANDAG Director/Regional Planning Meier added that infrastructure improvements take time but some of the rideshare and micro transit options can be launched relatively quickly without a lot of capital investment. Page 4 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t 3.SOUTH CARLSBAD BOULEVARD COASTLINE PROJECT – (Staff Contact: Nikki Matosian, Policy & Leadership City Manager) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive a presentation and provide input Community Relations Manager Matosian presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Commissioner Penseyres commented that he supports movement of the road to the east and open up the entire area for public use. Commissioner Fowler inquired about the zoning for this land and if that is part of the general plan. He commented that people are skeptical and inquiring how many high rises will be built on the open area. Transportation Director Frank replied that there are some opportunities to consider different types of land use, specifically around the Palomar Airport Road area. If City Council elects to study that further, then they would look at what land use or zoning updates would be required and those would be brought forward though a process. Any proposed changes for land use would be brought before a public hearing so there is a lot of opportunity to review any discussions about land use. Acting Chair Linke stated that he is also against any major developments along the coastline. He inquired as to whether we know the traffic volume for that area now. Transportation Director Tom Frank replied that traffic volumes are continually monitored in that area. Any new concepts that we further develop will include traffic studies. Acting Chair Linke mentioned that he heard public comments about traffic issues along that route and if we reduce the roadway down to one lane in each direction the traffic could be exacerbated. He believes that Carlsbad Boulevard is a good candidate for road diet. The area is a large piece of wide open land which give us a lot of options to put in nice bike lanes which could be separated as there are not a lot of intersections. 4. VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS GUIDELINES REVIEW – (Staff Contact: Jason Geldert and Jennifer Horodyski, Community Development) Staff’s Recommendation: Receive a presentation and provide input Engineering Manager Geldert and Associate Engineer Horodyski presented the report and reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Acting Chair Linke reviewed a PowerPoint presentation (on file in the Office of the City Clerk) Page 5 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Assistant City Attorney Contreras stated that staff received the additional comments from Acting Chair Linke today. Back in December of 2021, this item was delayed because staff needed time to review the slides that were submitted on the day of the meeting. Acting Chair Linke submitted additional comments for today’s which would become part of the record, consistent with the Brown Act. However, there were a number of slides in the information that was submitted that deal with past projects which went beyond the item’s topic and could not be discussed. Assistant City Attorney Contreras advised that discussion be limited to slides that did not cover past projects.. Acting Chair Linke replied that he started submitting comments on this topic back in July 2021. Acting Chair Linke disagreed and explained how he thought a discussion of past projects was on topic, specifically that past projects served as case studies to review for future projects. Acting Chair Linke suggested that he could recommend how to modify the guidelines to improve the review process going forward. Assistant City Attorney Contreras understood Acting Chair Linke concerns, but advised about embarking on a slippery slope, and mentioned how the agenda title does not reference past projects. Areas of discussion that would be on topic would be aspects such as methodology, the Active Base Model 2, or ABM2, and the ABM2+ and all of these statistics. Assistant City Attorney Contreras urged that discussion be limited to the metrics and to the methodology to comply with the Brown Act. Acting Chair Linke replied that the staff report included all of this information in the form of his slides and staff’s responses, including the past projects so it is in the agenda packet. Acting Chair Linke didn’t think we are restricted to only discussing things that can be very limited to the title of the agenda item when an entire agenda packet that is hundreds of pages long, includes every word of the VMT Analysis guidelines. In fact, the title is Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines Reviewed, that broadly covers the entire hundreds and hundreds of pages, and was not limited to statistics and maybe what staff wants to discuss and just the things they presented in their presentation. The entire Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines are under review. Part of our work plan was to review the entirety of the guidelines. Acting Chair Linke took issue with being advised to limit his comments to things that staff just presented and the statistics and the ABM1 versus two model. That is a tiny portion of the guidelines and he contended one of the least important aspects of the guidelines. The rest of the guidelines are equally as important. Assistant City Attorney Contreras stated that we are not here to relitigate past projects and related this topic to his comments from the Transportation Demand Management item a few months ago. There he made very clear that we have to be very brief if we chose to go into the discussion of past projects. Assistant City Attorney Contreras reiterated the goal of keeping the City and the Commission on topic. Assistant City Attorney Contreras understood Acting Chair Linke’s desire to go deeper into past project history, but advised that discussion be limited to your set of comments to which staff has had the opportunity to respond. Page 6 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Acting Chair Linke commented that the VMT Guidelines were adopted to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by reducing vehicle miles traveled. This is done by requiring developers who submit applications for development to mitigate the increased vehicle miles traveled that they induce when they build their development. Acting Chair Linke said the way that the city was currently interpreting and enforcing our VMT Analysis Guidelines is not going to accomplish that goal when almost every project gets screened out for the mitigation. It was mentioned during the presentation that the different models include different growth forecasts. The question for staff is when a VMT model run is done on that model, are the growth forecasts not a factor? In staff’s response to my comments they mentioned that no future grown forecast is relevant. Fehr and Peers Consultant Cole responded that the VMT Analysis is done for the base year model conditions. The base year is produced for each version of the model. ABM2, has a base year of 2016. That base year is part of the forecasting package so there’s 26 years of 2016, 2035 and 2050 and all of those model years are part of the same ABM2. They are all done in ABM2 platform with just incremental growth to get to those different model years. Every time you run the travel demand model you get a different answer since it’s a simulation model. Therefore, when you are doing AMB2 2016 base year it will give you slightly different information then base year 2016 using ABM2+. The other difference between them is the underlying software that is used to run these models change over time. Previous versions of the ABM were using a program called TransCad. The current version of the model is using a software called EME. Anytime you run the model in a different version, even if you are only looking at the base year information, it is going to have different results. This will be true even if you run ABM in the exact same model year. It simulates our behavior, our regions behavior on a weekday and every day. Every time you run it you will see a different set of parameters and results. Engineering Manager Geldert wanted to clarify whether Acting Chair Linke was asking if when we run a model for a project if it is using forecasts and data or is it using base year data? Acting Chair Linke responded that was not his exact question. Using the VMT tool what will the impact be in twenty years? My understanding is that the VMT tool does not do the type of horizon analysis; it will only assess the immediate impact. Is that right? Engineering Manager Geldert replied you are correct, that it would only assess the immediate behavior of the project. Fehr and Peers Consultant Cole clarified that the reason is that all of these metrics that we are using VMT per capita and VMT per employee are efficiency metrics. Over time and the travel demand model, those things are going to be better. So, the base year condition is considered the worst-case scenario. Over time the same project that currently produces 18.8 VMT per capita for example, in 50 years because of the behavior assumptions and the network improvements and the access to other travel modes that are built into the model, as you get out to 2035 and to 2050 that VMT per capita goes down, or gets better. Page 7 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Acting Chair Linke asked if instead of applying the SANDAG model that we apply a model based on total current VMT. Knowing that the company that is there is going to double in size over the next few years, how do we compensate for the fact that the total VMT is going to have a huge increase with that type of approach versus the efficiency metric. Fehr and Peers Consultant Cole explained that there are different metrics for different types of projects so the VMT per capita is used for residential projects, the VMT per employee is used for employment based projects and then total change in total VMT is used for other types of regional retail types of projects. That is where you are going to use a tool, whether it be the SANDAG method or some other method to calculate total VMT. That is what needs to be decided for each individual project. Acting Chair Linke referred to the series 13 Carlsbad map on slide 18 that divides the City of Carlsbad up into 183 traffic analysis zones. SANDAG has its own series 13 map shown on the slide but it only divides the City of Carlsbad up into 18 larger census tracks. The City of Carlsbad maps have very different VMT levels as compared to the SANDAG maps. If the SANDAG maps had been used for a previous project instead of the Carlsbad maps, then the VMT would have been a lot higher. When I raised concern about this previously staff responded that the SANDAG maps were not appropriate to evaluate the project VMT because they lack detail and didn’t properly account for all of the trips. The staff report today further confirms that the SANDAG maps are not compliant with the guidance from the State Office of Planning and Research that was referred to in the presentation. The question is if the SANDAG maps are inappropriate for use then why in September 2020 after the Carlsbad maps had only been in use for a couple of months did we switch to the new model that SANDAG put out? Now we have to use the map that is inaccurate, and we have been using it for the past 17 months. Now there is another model coming right on this one’s heels. Is there a legal necessity to switch to the new model? Why can’t we just stick with the current maps? Engineering Manager Geldert replied that VMT is relatively new and SANDAG is still trying to figure it out. Staff feels using the TAZ maps shows a little more granularity, meaning that the census map or census box is big and covers multiple zones and land uses where the TAZ ones do not. SANDAG does not currently use Series 13 as it is no longer in use and the data is no longer available. Therefore, we had to change to use the most recent data, which is ABM2, knowing that ABM2+ was coming quickly after. However, ABM2+ was delayed and we didn’t want to make a new map and then have to do it over again. For the interim we chose to use the interactive maps from SANDAG. In the future when everything is on track with SANDAG for every two years we will have new maps within two weeks, so we won’t have the delay we had this time. Carlsbad staff has been involved with SANDAG with the modeling and has had influence on the development. There will be some post processing that the City will do such as adding data on out of region trips. Page 8 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Fehr and Peers Consultant Cole commented that to provide the best defensible tool you want to be using the most current data and so SANDAG did release the ABM2 data on their website. When that happened, local jurisdictions were given the advice from their local attorneys to use the current data which was the AMB2 data. Acting Chair Linke asked if all applicants that submitted projects after September 2020 have been using the Series 14 data. Associate Engineer Horodyski replied that it was correct, all applicants have used the new series 14 data. Acting Chair Linke inquired whether the City of Carlsbad should develop the 183-zone Carlsbad maps for the model and then wait until the next model is fully baked before switching. Is there some legal reason that we absolutely need to be using the latest model? Engineering Manager Geldert replied that we won’t be switching back and forth, moving forward we anticipate that every few years when SANDAG does come out with new data that we will be able to develop our maps very quickly, probably within a few weeks. No project would use the 18-zone of the SANDAG maps, we would be using our own. There would just be a slight delay of a few weeks before a project would see the new numbers. It has been advised by CEQA and is more defensible to always be using the latest data available. Assistant City Attorney Contreras asked Acting Chair Linke to limit application of this slide and be mindful to discuss what is on the agenda item. Acting Chair Linke responded that he will be brief. This is an incidence where I had said that the consultant developing the VMT guidelines was simultaneously representing a developer who had an application that included a VMT study. Staff’s response was that at the time that the consultant represented the developer, the VMT analysis guidelines project was completed and therefore there was no conflict of interest. However, the record shows that this is not the case. The VMT report that came from that consultant, Fehr & Peers was submitted in April of 2020 when they were still developing our guidelines. There are emails back and forth with City staff from before that and after, changing various aspects. Then a revised VMT report was submitted after those additional changes. I do appreciate that staff in response to this has now implemented a conflict of interest provision in contracts. Acting Chair Linke commented that it seems to be an urgency to stay up to date with CEQA. We still require the level of service approach with our growth management plan but now we need to do VMT as well. I am concerned that the lack of robustness that was applied to the level of service reviews is now being done with VMT as well. Since the VMT approach first came to the City of Carlsbad, a couple of years ago, only three publicly presented projects have not been screened out. Page 9 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Assistant City Attorney Contreras stated that slides 8 through 12 deal with past projects, so he advises that Acting Chair Linke be very brief in his application of VMT to these past projects. Acting Chair Linke replied that this is a case study in how the guidelines were applied previously. Each slide leads to a recommendation and feedback on how we should improve the guidelines to hopefully address the concern. These two projects presented both underwent VMT review. Assistant City Attorney Contreras urged Acting Chair Linke to please sum up his comments in a prospective fashion or be summary in his discussion on how VMT applies in these past projects. Acting Chair Linke replied that he is not alleging that a law has been broken. He is alleging that these are situations where we need to revise the guidelines. He stated that he does not understand the limitation. Assistant City Attorney Contreras urged Acting Chair Linke to be brief and stay on topic. Acting Chair Linke replied that he will be brief. In a different case study where there were two projects submitted a few months apart by the same developer and share the same customer base. Both applications were reviewed simultaneously. The problem here is that when you have a project that is divided in two then you see an apparent reduction in the impact that you see with the environmental review. Assistant City Attorney Contreras urged Acting Chair Linke to please summarize and get back on topic. Acting Chair Linke responded that when we are looking at the VMT impacts, we need to look at the cumulative impact. The developer should not be able to divide the project up into pieces. For example, you can have three 50,000 sq. ft. buildings and independently they have no VMT impact because they are called local serving retail. If it is really one single company and its 150,000 sq. ft., then it does have VMT impact. My recommendation is to include language in the VMT analysis guidelines or some other document that prevents projects from being split up. Acting Chair Linke stated that the next issue is the definition of local versus regional serving retail. Currently the DMC guidelines define 50,000 square feet as a threshold above which a retail development is considered regional. If the development is regional, then it has to do a VMT analysis and if it is local then it does not. However, that 50,000 square foot threshold is rather arbitrary. In my above example, both of the projects had the same customer base so they were considered regional. However, since they were split up and the smaller one had less than 50,000 square feet it did not have to do a VMT analysis. My recommendation here is that even if a building footprint of a development is less than 50,000 square feet staff should assess whether the customer base from the retail outlet is regional or local. Page 10 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Engineering Manager Geldert responded that model run was in there, but it wasn’t intended to restrict it to one model. We based almost all of our VMT analysis guidelines on OPR recommendations, which state to use whatever best fits the situation including any kind of model. On smaller projects a regional model run won’t be effective in determining VMT. Acting Chair Linke asked about the requirements for a larger project who is supposed to do a VMT model run for them to use a non-model-based method. In the example shown the justification for not doing a model run was that the SANDAG travel demand model does not distinguish between the types of retail uses. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that when you do a model run there is a lot of assumptions and it is very broad and very generic. In some cases, there are projects that have specific data like customer data, and they know where the customers are traveling from and they know where their employees live. That is a case that would be looked at and determined by the City which model would be the best fit for that project. It is not advisable to try and do a one size fits all analysis for VMT. Acting Chair Linke suggested that the City better define what types of retail can use a non-model based method. There is a table in our VMT analysis guidelines that shows unusual land uses that can have special conditions. How is it decided when a project doesn’t fit in the SANDAG model and how do we decide what other projects also don’t fit? Engineering Manager Geldert responded that each project is evaluated on a project by project basis. VMT is very unique and it is not like LOS and the predictors are based on people’s behavior. In the case of a residential mixed-use project that is going in an area with a change in the zone from commercial and residential to mixed use, there really would be no data for a project like that. The best way to analyze that would be through a regional model run using SANDAG data. In other cases where we have data that the model wouldn’t show we use a more custom model using the data we have. Acting Chair Linke said that his concern is related to the SANDAG travel demand models and the OPR guidance. He thinks it is being mischaracterized that we are required to allow anything that is in the OPR guidance. There are at least 10 examples of commercially available sketch models and they all have advantages and disadvantages and are not necessarily applicable. There are infinite possibilities of different models because you can pick any of these options here or you can come up with a unique one for the project. It does not seem like a good idea to be able to cherry pick whatever method you choose. My recommendation is that we can’t allow developers and their traffic consultants to come up with any number of custom methods as they will pick the one that shows the lowest VMT impact. My recommendation is that we need to define a smaller number of allowable alternative methods and then really require some level of evidence that the method they use is valid. Page 11 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Acting Chair Linke stated that the level of service of most VMT analyses look at the building footprint to determine what the plausible number of trips are that will be generated but in the example we have talked about the developer just gave us the numbers they wanted to provide. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that there is a lot more to the issue than what is stated. This has been addressed and it was very well looked at by staff and consultants. That analyses went through critical review. Acting Chair Linke stated that the point here is that if you are tripling the size of your facility how can you verify that the company is not going to expand their employee numbers? Engineering Manager Geldert responded that there are instances where they expand the size of the building but maybe it is just a show room expansion, or they are not expanding the bays and they are not expanding anything else. In this case it would not change the number of employees. These examples are specific to each project. Acting Chair Linke asked to move to Case Study Issue #7 which is inappropriate VMT subtraction for displaced local serving retail. Assistant City Attorney Contreras asked Acting Chair Linke to please be brief and keep on topic. Acting Chair Linke referred back to Case Study number 7 which is a case where the VMT was subtracted from the total for a development as it was displacing businesses. However, these businesses were small and the new development comes in and forces those companies and their customers to go further away. That should have led to an increase in VMT not a subtraction. This allowed an avoidance of having to do a sequence analysis. His recommendation is that the staff review process is changed and this type of subtraction does not happen in the future. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that this case was fully studied and vetted. Everything was studied and approved and went through the correct process. Commissioner Coelho inquired about what the VMT Analysis allows us to do. Can it prevent a type of project from being approved because there are too many vehicle miles traveled? Or does this just give the City information so that they can try other mitigation efforts to reduce congestion traffic in certain areas? What are the goals here and what are we trying to do? What authority does the City then have? Engineering Manager Geldert stated that VMT has to do with transportation impacts per the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, so there are a lot of laws and regulations surrounding it. This doesn’t have to do with local traffic or congestion, it is regarding environmental impact. These studies either show that the development does or does not have Page 12 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t an environmental impact. It tells us whether or not they need to mitigate and if they can mitigate there are overriding statements of consideration. Commissioner Coelho asked that if the State of California mandates is conducted to understand the environmental impact of new development, then the State has guidelines or mandates on how it is calculated and interpreted. Is that correct? Engineering Manager Geldert replied that OPR recommends that we use the VMT metric. The State of California said that we cannot use congestion or level of service for our environmental impact for transportation. OPR developed a whole document on how to apply VMT, what the metrics are, how to apply it and what would be considered significant or not significant. These screening thresholds are what we use, and they came out of the office of planning and research and what the State of California recommends. The City is offering our guidelines to help people get through that CEQA process or more specifically to evaluate these transportation impacts. There are details inside each project that are unique and that need to be considered. That is why it is a project by project evaluation. Acting Chair Linke pointed out that he has asked on multiple occasions to meet with staff to discuss the issues he has brought up today, but he had never been taken up on that offer. Acting Chair Linke asked Engineering Manager Geldert to explain how eliminating a local serving retail outlet decreases VMT. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that the project he is referring to actually displaced a business who closed up their shop. Therefore, there were no VMTs associated with that displaced business. That was what was subtracted. Acting Chair Linke stated that he thought that there is no VMT associated with local serving retail. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that a project that is locally serving is considered less than significant, it does not mean that it doesn’t have any VMT. Acting Chair Linke asked if OPR guidance says that the presence of local serving retail actually reduces the VMT and that is why it is considered less than significant. The concept is that having local business means that residents don’t have to drive as far to shop. Associate Engineer Horodyski added that staff looks at when determining whether or not it would be appropriate to provide any credits for existing businesses or existing users on a site is what the whole of the CEQA action? What is the effect of the project on surrounding traffic? If another business moved due to the project or completely went away that would potentially guide us on whether it is appropriate to credit a use that was existing at the site. When a use has moved to another location and is producing VMT somewhere else in the regional bubble, then it would not Page 13 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t be appropriate for us to provide a credit to the new development if we are trying to evaluate the project based on that net change and the regional VMT. Acting Chair Linke reiterated that he is concerned about the way the VMT guidelines are being enforced and he is really concerned about the expansion of any models or spreadsheets that are on the table. As a scientist he knows that a developer will use any method they can to get the result that they want. He is concerned about allowing so much variation from the guidelines. He understands that there has to be some leeway when there is a developer with a very unusual situation, but it seems like the exceptions have turned into the rule. For every big application there are so many exceptions to the rules that are applied, that we are not getting a uniform conclusion. Are we getting to the truth or what the impact of that Company really is? He urged staff to update the guidelines to incorporate his recommendations so that we have a more uniform approach. Engineering Manager Geldert responded that staff does look at each individual project and evaluates it thoroughly. In most cases specific project information is better than generic information that you would get from SANDAG. Staff do not try different methods to evaluate a project to get to a desirable answer. A project is evaluated by the City to ensure that they are correct and they have substantial evidence to support the findings. Associate Engineer Horodyski added that there were limitations to specific methodologies that makes it impossible for staff to come up with a methodology that would be consistent across different projects. For example, the Regional Travel Demand Model has limitations and there is a certain amount of noise associated with that model and if a project is not big enough to overcome the noise of the model then we can’t get a good answer from that model. There are also situations where we have only certain data for the businesses. Some businesses have very well documented databases of customers and employees and some have very limited data. Therefore, you might have to calculate using data derived from GPS or Bluetooth. There really can’t be a one size fits all model and we often don’t have enough data to create a sketch model that we believe would be defensible. The flexibility essentially allows the City to achieve as much as we can. The OPR technical advisory goal of lead agency choosing models that have sensitivity to the features of the project that effect the VMT. So, we want to use the model that we believe has the most sensitivity to VMT based on that data that is provided and the limitations of that data. Acting Chair Linke thanked staff for the presentation and for answering his questions. Assistant City Attorney Contreras stated that many of the comments that Acting Chair Linke made regarding past projects have already been presented to the Planning Commission, to the City Council and even to the City Manager and the City Attorney. It is important that the public and the T&MC has knowledge that it has been fully discussed and presented to various bodies of the city and to other officials at the City of Carlsbad. Page 14 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t Acting Chair Linke says that it is true that when he receives a project that he reviews it and then submits comments to staff. It will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and sometimes by the City Council. The problem is that he feels that staff are always considered to be the experts which they should be, but if he has a valid disagreement with them and a Planning Commissioner or City Council Member asks if the concern is legitimate they will always assume that staff is correct. When speaking with the City Manager, he said he will look into his comments and then his response was that staff said that I am wrong. So yes, the City has my comments and they have been reviewed by staff and the Planning Commission and in some cases by the City Council or the City Manager, but it always comes back to the source of the disagreement. Therefore, my comments have not been independently looked at, it always comes back to the same thing. Assistant City Attorney Contreras disagreed with Acting Chair Linke’s last comment. The City of Carlsbad has a City Attorney who advises the Planning Commission, and a City Attorney who advises the City Council and where necessary we consult with outside counsel who are themselves CEQA experts. There were components of the comments that were vetted through independent counsel and again he wants to make sure that record correctly reflects that staff does not act in a vacuum. Acting Chair Linke appreciated the response. He wants to work with staff and if he is wrong about something he wants to know. He would like to have a better working relationship with the Planning Department staff so that he can better understand their viewpoints and what goes on. He usually receives a legal response that doesn’t necessarily answer the question. He feels that he has a lot of valid concerns. CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER COMMENTS: City Traffic Engineer Kim mentioned that he circulated the newest informational memo to the T&MC last week. Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager Schmidt shared that the City of Carlsbad, in coordination with the San Diego County Bike Coalition is holding a love to ride event on Feb. 26, 2022, at the Islands. Transportation Director Frank added that Commissioner Penseyres was correct earlier during the presentation that there was an error in the table, and the numbers are revised. In response to the questions regarding the zoning around the relocation of the roadway around the Palomar Airport Road interchange and Carlsbad Boulevard it is mostly open space. We will share a link to our zoning map with the T&MC via email shortly. Page 15 of 15 Public Works Transportation 1635 Faraday Avenue  Carlsbad, CA 92008  442-339-2746 t TRAFFIC AND MOBILITY COMMISSION COMMENTS: Commissioner Penseyres commented that last month he asked if we could take a look at the streets sweeping along Jefferson Street and Marron Road and that has been done. He wanted to thank staff for taking the lead on that. Last month he also asked staff to look at the bike lane that runs into Oceanside. That issue might be bigger as the street is so narrow there. ADJOURNMENT: Acting Chair Linke adjourned the Traffic & Mobility Commission Meeting on Feb. 7, 2022, at 6:20 p.m. ___________________________ Eliane Paiva, Minutes Clerk