HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP 2022-0003; FPC RESIDENTIAL - SB 330; VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS; 2022-11-16VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS
FPC RESIDENTIAL
Carlsbad, California November 16, 2022
LLG Ref. 3-22-3538
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
2.0 Project Description .................................................................................................................... 2
2.1 Project Location .................................................................................................................. 2
2.2 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 2
2.3 Project Trip Generation ....................................................................................................... 2
3.0 Vehicle Miles Traveled Overview ............................................................................................. 7
3.1 Senate Bill 743 .................................................................................................................... 7
3.2 VMT Background ............................................................................................................... 7
4.0 Analysis Approach & Methodology ......................................................................................... 8
4.1 Need for a Study ................................................................................................................. 8
4.2 Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................................ 8
4.3 Thresholds of Significance ................................................................................................. 9
4.4 VMT Reductions ............................................................................................................... 10
5.0 Project VMT Screening ........................................................................................................... 11
5.1 Project Screening .............................................................................................................. 11
5.2 Project Land Use Classification & Analysis Approach .................................................... 11
5.3 Preliminary Project VMT Results ..................................................................................... 11
6.0 VMT Reduction Strategies & Analysis .................................................................................. 12
6.1 Applicable CAPCOA Land Use Measures ....................................................................... 13 6.1.1 T-1: Increase Residential Density ......................................................................... 13
6.1.2 T-4: Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing ................................ 14
6.2 Combined Effectiveness of VMT Reduction Measures ................................................... 15 6.2.1 Combined Land Use Measures Reduction ............................................................ 15 6.2.2 Final VMT Reduction ........................................................................................... 15
6.3 Supporting/Non-Quantified VMT Reductions ................................................................. 16
6.3.1 T-18: Pedestrian Network Improvement / T-19A: Construct or Improve Bike
Facility .............................................................................................................................. 17 6.3.2 T-35: Provide Traffic Calming Measures ............................................................. 18
7.0 VMT Impacts Summary and Implementation ...................................................................... 20
7.1 VMT Impact Summary ..................................................................................................... 20
7.2 Implementation ................................................................................................................. 20
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
ii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A. CAPCOA VMT Reduction Measure Excerpts
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION—FIGURE # PAGE
Figure 2–1 Vicinity Map ................................................................................................................... 4
Figure 2–2 Project Area Map ............................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2–3 Site Plan .......................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 6–1 Residential Density – Adjacent TAZs .......................................................................... 19
LIST OF TABLES
SECTION—TABLE # PAGE
Table 2–1 Trip Generation .................................................................................................................... 3
Table 4–1 VMT Analysis by Land Use Type ....................................................................................... 9
Table 4–2 VMT Significance Thresholds ............................................................................................. 9
Table 6–1 VMT Reduction Measure T-1. Increase Residential Density ............................................ 14
Table 6–2 VMT Reduction Measure T-4. Integrate Affordable Housing .......................................... 15
Table 6–3 Project VMT Reduction Strategies Results ....................................................................... 16
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
1
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED ANALYSIS FPC RESIDENTIAL
Carlsbad, California November 16, 2022
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) prepared this Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis for the
FPC Residential project (hereby referred to as the “Project”). The Project entails development of a mix of rowhome, townhome, and triplexes totaling 86 units as described in detail in Section 2.1.
Two distinct analyses are needed to satisfy the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis requirements.
The CEQA Analysis is based on the City’s Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines, VMT
Analysis Guidelines dated September 15, 2020. The City guidelines generally follow the Governor’s
Office of Planning and Research (OPR) recommended practice for VMT analysis, as published in
the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory), dated
December 2018.
Analysis of the local street system, including roadway segments, signalized intersections (queuing at
turn lanes), and multimodal (i.e., pedestrian, bicycle, transit) level of service (LOS) based on the
City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (April 2018), is provided under separate
cover.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
2
2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
2.1 Project Location
The Project site is located at 7290 Ponto Drive north of Ponto Drive and east of Ponto Road, between Carlsbad Boulevard and Avenida Encinas.
The Project is located within the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan (Vision Plan).
2.2 Project Description
The Project proposes to construct a mix of rowhome, townhome, and triplexes totaling 86 units on a
4.64-acre site. Thirteen (13) units, approximately 15% of the total, will be affordable. The site
previously hosted a self-storage facility and junkyard which will be removed.
The Project has been determined to be consistent with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan as
part of the Local Mobility Analysis scoping process. The scoping agreement and transportation
consistency memo are included as part of that document, prepared under separate cover.
Figure 2–1 shows the vicinity map. Figure 2–2 shows a more detailed Project area map. Figure 2–3
shows the Project site plan.
2.3 Project Trip Generation
Trip generation estimates for the Project were based on SANDAG’s Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic
Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (April 2002). A trip credit was taken for the trips
generated by the existing 257-unit self-storage facility on-site, which will be removed.
Table 2–1 tabulates the net Project traffic generation. After accounting for existing uses, the Project
is calculated to generate 637 ADT, with 52 AM (9 inbound / 43 outbound) peak hour trips and 64
PM (45 inbound / 19 outbound) peak hour trips.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
3
TABLE 2–1 TRIP GENERATION
Land Use Size
Daily Trip Ends (ADTs) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate ADT Rate c In:Out Split
Volume Rate c In:Out Split
Volume
In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed Project
Apartment 86 DU 8 /DU 688 8% 20:80 11 44 55 10% 70:30 48 21 69
Existing (to be replaced)
Storage 257 vaults 0.2 /vault 51 6% 50:50 2 1 3 9% 50:50 3 2 5
Net Total Trips — — 637 — — 9 43 52 — — 45 19 64
Footnotes:
a. Trip generation rate from SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002 (“SANDAG Brief Guide”).
General Note:
DU = Dwelling Unit
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
7
3.0 VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED OVERVIEW
This VMT analysis studies the potential transportation impacts due to the Project on VMT to satisfy
CEQA.
This section presents an overview and background on VMT and the implementation of Senate Bill
743 (SB 743), requiring the use of VMT in the evaluation of transportation impacts for CEQA.
3.1 Senate Bill 743
In September 2013, the Governor signed SB 743 into law, starting a process that fundamentally
changed the way transportation impact analysis was conducted under CEQA. Within the State’s
CEQA Guidelines, these changes include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and similar
measurements of vehicular roadway capacity and traffic congestion as the basis for determining
significant impacts. The guidance identifies VMT as the most appropriate CEQA transportation
metric, along with the elimination of auto delay/LOS for CEQA purposes statewide. The
justification for this paradigm shift is that auto delay/LOS impacts lead to improvements that
increase roadway capacity and therefore induce more traffic and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
The legislation was also intended to incentivize development in and around Transit Priority Areas
(TPAs) and High-Quality Transit Corridors (HQTCs), and to encourage high density infill and
mixed-use projects. The three (3) stated goals of the SB 743 legislation codified in Public Resources
Code section 21099, and the OPR Technical Advisory are 1) promote the reduction of GHG
emissions, 2) develop multimodal transportation networks, and 3) diversify land uses.
In January 2016, OPR issued Draft Guidance, which provided recommendations for updating the
CEQA Guidelines in response to SB 743 and adopted a Technical Advisory, dated December 2018.
3.2 VMT Background
VMT is defined as the “amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project” per
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3. VMT is a measure of the use and efficiency of the transportation
network as well land uses in a region. VMT is calculated based on individual vehicle trips generated
and their associated trip lengths. VMT accounts for two-way (roundtrip) travel and is estimated for a
typical weekday for the purposes of measuring transportation impacts.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
8
4.0 ANALYSIS APPROACH & METHODOLOGY
VMT evaluation is based on the City’s VMT Analysis Guidelines. The thresholds of significance and
screening criteria presented in these guidelines were approved by City Council via resolution on
June 16, 2020. The methodology in the City’s guidelines is consistent with the Technical Advisory
and the local Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) San Diego Regional Guidelines, dated May
2019.
4.1 Need for a Study
The City’s guidelines identify the following six cases where a development project would screen out
of a VMT analysis based on a presumption that VMT effects would be less than significant:
1. Small Projects (less than 110 ADT)
2. Projects Located Near Transit (projects located within one-half mile of the Carlsbad Village
or Carlsbad Poinsettia Coaster Stations, or within one-half mile of the Plaza Camino Real
Transit Station)
3. Local-Serving Retail and Similar Land Uses (defined as retail development less than
50,000 SF, or larger than 50,000 SF with a market study showing it serves primarily local
uses)
4. Local Serving Public Facilities (i.e., government uses, parks and public schools, etc.)
5. Affordable Housing Projects (residential projects that are 100% affordable located within
infill areas)
6. Redevelopment Projects That Result in a Net Reduction in VMT (projects that replace an
existing development with a more efficient land use)
4.2 Analysis Methodology
The City guidelines provide guidance on conducting a detailed VMT analysis for various types of
land development projects. The categories and associated VMT metric for each of the project types
are listed in Table 4–1 below:
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
9
TABLE 4–1 VMT ANALYSIS BY LAND USE TYPE
Land Use VMT Analysis Metric
Single Land-Use Residential or
Office Projects
VMT/capita (residential); VMT/employee (office)
Mixed-Use Projects Analyze each individual land use independently.
Internal capture should be considered in the evaluation
of each use.
Redevelopment Projects Determine based on project type. If efficiency metric is
used, it would be based solely on the characteristics of
the new project without any consideration of the
development that is being replaced.
Regional Retail Projects Net change in VMT
Industrial Projects VMT/employee
Source: City of Carlsbad’s Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines (September 15, 2020)
4.3 Thresholds of Significance
The VMT thresholds of significance according to the VMT Analysis Guidelines are shown in
Table 4–2.
TABLE 4–2 VMT SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS
Land Use Type Thresholds for Determination of a Significant Transportation VMT Impact
Residential Projects
A significant transportation impact occurs if the project
VMT per capita exceeds a level 15% below the citywide
average VMT per capita
Office Projects
A significant VMT impact occurs if the project VMT per
employee exceeds a level 15% below regional average
VMT per employee
Regional Retail Projects A significant VMT impact occurs if the project results in
a net increase in VMT
Industrial Employment
A significant VMT impact occurs if the project VMT per
employee exceeds the regional average VMT per
employee
Transportation Projects Significant VMT impact occurs if the project results in a
net increase in VMT
Source: City of Carlsbad’s Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis Guidelines (September 15, 2020)
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
10
4.4 VMT Reductions
If a significant impact is indicated, projects can apply VMT reductions to lower their calculated
resident VMT/capita or employee VMT/employee. Typically, VMT is reduced by implementing
strategies that achieve one of the following:
Reducing the number of automobile trips generated by the project or by the residents or
employees of the project.
Reducing the distance that people drive.
These measures are generally called Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies. Section 6.0 discusses VMT reduction strategies that could apply as Project Design Features (PDFs) or
mitigation measures.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
11
5.0 PROJECT VMT
The Project was evaluated according to the City of Carlsbad analysis methodology and thresholds of
significance as described in the previous section.
5.1 Project Screening
Project trip generation, as shown in Table 2–1, is forecast to be 637 ADT, more than the small
project threshold of 110 ADT. The Project site is approximately 1½ miles from Carlsbad Poinsettia
Station (i.e., not within ½ mile). The Project does not include local serving retail or public facilities
and less than 100% of the residential units will be affordable/below market rate. The Project is a
redevelopment of existing land uses but would not be expected to reduce total VMT.
As such, the Project does not meet any City screening criteria and requires a detailed VMT analysis.
5.2 Project Land Use Classification & Analysis Approach
As the Project does not meet any of the screening criteria, a detailed VMT analysis is needed.
Consistent with the City guidelines, the residential project may be evaluated using efficiency metrics
(VMT/resident).
As the Project trip generation is less than 2,400 ADT, Project VMT/resident was calculated based on
the City of Carlsbad VMT/resident analysis maps and the traffic analysis zone (TAZ) in which the
Project is located.
5.3 Preliminary Project VMT Results
Based on the unadjusted model output, the Project VMT/resident is 24.0. The Carlsbad citywide
average is also 24.0. Therefore, the Project is 100% of the citywide average and exceeds the
significance threshold of 85% of the citywide average VMT/resident. In the case of the Project, the
TAZ in which it is located does not have sufficient population to generate TAZ level results. The
VMT/resident is thus based on the Census Tract in which it is located.
The proceeding sections outline PDFs and TDM measures that may be incorporated into the Project
to reduce the Project VMT/capita to below a level of significance.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
12
6.0 VMT REDUCTION STRATEGIES & ANALYSIS
As discussed in Section 5.3, the unadjusted preliminary model results indicate that the Project
exceeds the significance threshold. Model assumptions, PDFs, and TDM measures were reviewed to
achieve one or both of the following results:
Reduce the number of daily vehicle trips (especially single-occupant vehicle trips) and/or
Reduce the length of trips made by employees.
The City’s VMT Analysis Guidelines contain Appendix D – Vehicle Miles Traveled Reduction
Strategies and Effectiveness Calculations, which present several quantifiable TDM strategies that
can be used to reduce a project’s VMT impacts. Per City VMT Analysis Guidelines, the maximum
feasible overall VMT reduction within Carlsbad is 20%. TDM strategies are quantified using
methodologies described in the Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions,
Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity published by the California Air
Pollution Control Offices Association (CAPCOA) in 2021.
The transportation measures identified in the CAPCOA document that would potentially reduce
VMT/resident are grouped into the following subsectors:
1. Land Use
2. Neighborhood Design
3. Trip Reduction Programs
4. Parking or Road/Pricing/Management
5. Transit
Upon review of the various categories and their respective measures, some Land Use measures
would apply to overall Project VMT based on the intrinsic characteristics of the Project. These types
of measures, which are discussed below, would be considered “PDFs.”
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
13
6.1 Applicable CAPCOA Land Use Measures
For purposes of consistency with the CAPCOA terminology, the term “Land Use Measure” is used
in this report. Two (2) CAPCOA Land Use Measures are applicable to the Project, as follows:
T-1: Increase Residential Density
T-4: Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing
The following is a discussion of the applicable Land Use Measure and its applicability to the Project. Relevant excerpts from CAPCOA for each measure are contained in Appendix A.
6.1.1 T-1: Increase Residential Density
This measure accounts for the VMT reduction achieved by a project that is designed with a higher
density of dwelling units (du) compared to the average residential density in the U.S. Increased
densities affect the distance people travel and provide greater options for the model of travel they
choose. Increasing residential density results in shorter and fewer trips by single-occupancy vehicles
and thus a reduction in GHG emissions. The maximum reduction from this measure is capped at 30
percent. The purpose for the 30 percent cap is to limit the influence of any single built environmental
factor (such as density).1
The net residential of the Project is 18.3 du/acre based on 86 units on a 4.64-acre site. Since the
baseline VMT/resident is based on the regional travel demand model, the relevant density is the
baseline density of the TAZ. However, the preliminary Project VMT of 24.0 VMT/resident is based
on the Census Tract in which it is located, as there is insufficient residential population to provide
data at the TAZ level.
Consequently, LLG evaluated the residential density of the two TAZs immediately adjacent to the
Project TAZ (1345), within the same Census Tract to determine an appropriate baseline residential
density. These include TAZ 1323, north of the Project site and TAZ 1346 to the east. The adjacent
TAZs and corresponding residential density are illustrated in Figure 6–1. It should be noted that
acreage in the context of the CAPCOA methodology pertains to developed land and does not include
streets, schools, parks, open space, or other undevelopable land.
TAZ 1346 contains a larger sample size of total homes and residents; however, it is physically
separated from the Project area by the railroad corridor. TAZ 1323 is the most proximate to the
Project site proper. The residential density of TAZ 1323 is also slightly higher which provides a
more conservative comparison to the Project. Therefore, to provide a conservative analysis, the
residential density of TAZ 1323 was used as the baseline in calculating Measure T-1.
The residential density of TAZ 1323 is calculated to be 10.22 du/acre. Using the formulas in
CAPCOA, the relative residential densities of the Project and the adjacent TAZ correspond to a
17.4% project VMT reduction as calculated below in Table 6–1.
1 The subsector maximum of all Land Use Measures is capped at 65 percent. The final calculated VMT reduction will be checked against the maximum allowable per City guidelines.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
14
This reduction is applied to the Project’s Census Tract level result of 24.0 VMT/resident. This was
done to provide for a conservative analysis of the Project’s VMT and to limit the comparison to TAZ
1323 to its residential density only.
TABLE 6–1 VMT REDUCTION MEASURE T-1. INCREASE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
ID Variable Value Source
Output
A Percent reduction in GHG emissions from
project VMT in study area -17.4% A = (B – C) / C * D
Inputs
B Residential density of project development a 18.3 du/acre
C Residential density of typical development a, b 10.2 du/acre
D Elasticity of VMT with respect to residential
density -0.22
Footnotes:
a. An acre in this context is defined as an acre of developed land, not including streets, school sites, parks, and other undevelopable land. b. If reductions are being calculated from a specific baseline derived from a travel demand forecasting model, the residential
density of the relevant transportation analysis zone should be used instead of the value for a typical development.
General Note:
Source: CAPCOA (2021).
6.1.2 T-4: Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing
This measure requires below market rate (BMR) housing. BMR housing provides greater
opportunity for lower income families to live closer to job centers and achieve a jobs/housing match
near transit. It is also an important strategy to address the limited availability of affordable housing
that might force residents to live far away from jobs or school, requiring longer commutes. The
quantification method for this measure accounts for VMT reductions achieved for multifamily
residential projects that are deed restricted or otherwise permanently dedicated as affordable
housing. The maximum reduction from this measure is 28.6 percent.
The Project will provide 13 of 86 total units (15.1%) as permanently affordable. Using the formulas
in CAPCOA, this corresponds to a 4.3% project VMT reduction as calculated in Table 6–2 below.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
15
TABLE 6–2 VMT REDUCTION MEASURE T-4. INTEGRATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ID Variable Value Source
Output
A
Percent reduction in GHG emissions from
project/site VMT for multifamily residential
developments
-4.3% A = B * C
Inputs
B Percent of multifamily units permanently
dedicated as affordable 15.1% User input
C Percent reduction in VMT for qualified units
compared to market rate units -28.6% ITE 2021
General Note:
Source: CAPCOA (2021).
6.2 Combined Effectiveness of VMT Reduction Measures
The City VMT Analysis Guidelines and CAPCOA report acknowledge that individual strategy
reductions are not additive. The interaction between the various strategies is complex and sometimes
counterintuitive. As described in the CAPCOA report, the VMT reduction calculated separately for
each individual strategy (within their overall TDM strategy category) should be dampened according
to a multiplicative formula to account for the fact that some of the strategies may be redundant or
applicable to the same populations.
The multiplicative formula used to scale the total reduction is as follows:
Total % VMT Reduction = 1-[(1-A) * (1-B) * (1-C) * (1-D)…]
Where A, B, C, D… = percent reduction of each individual VMT reduction strategy
6.2.1 Combined Land Use Measures Reduction
The Land Uses Measures described above are calculated to result in a collective 21.0% Project VMT
reduction as calculated below and shown in Table 6–3. The Land Use Measures are PDFs as noted
above.
Combined VMT Reduction = 1 – (1-17.4%) * (1-4.3%) * = 21.0%
6.2.2 Final VMT Reduction
The Project’s final VMT reduction is limited to 20% as the maximum allowed per the City’s VMT
Analysis Guidelines.
The final Project VMT/resident would be 19.2 or 80% of the citywide average as shown in Table 6-3
below. The threshold of significance for residential projects is 85% of the citywide average
VMT/resident, or 20.4. The Project is therefore below the threshold of significance and a less than
significant transportation impact would occur.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
16
TABLE 6–3 PROJECT VMT REDUCTION STRATEGIES RESULTS
Reduction Measure Range of Effectiveness VMT Reduction
Categorical VMT Reduction a
Combined VMT Reduction b
VMT Reduction Measures
Land Use/Location Measures
20.0% T-1: Increase Residential Density 0.0-30 .0% 17.4%
21.0% T-4: Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing 0.0-28.6% 4.3%
Results
City Average VMT per Resident c 24.0
Threshold of Significance (85% of City Average VMT per Resident) 20.4
Project VMT per Resident (pre-VMT reduction measures) 24.0
Project VMT per Resident (post-VMT reduction measures) (24.0 x [1-20.0%]) 19.2
Above Level of Significance? No
Footnotes: a. VMT reduction from the combined implementation of all measures within the Land Use subsector is capped at 65%. b. The total overall VMT Reduction is capped at 20% per the VMT Analysis Guidelines. c. City of Carlsbad average VMT per Resident obtained from City of Carlsbad ABM2+ VMT per Resident maps. d. Project baseline VMT per Resident obtained from City of Carlsbad ABM2+ VMT per Resident maps for Census Tract 178.13. General Notes:
Reduction results based on methodology from Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA 2021) .
Each VMT reduction measure’s percent reduction is combined multiplicatively to get the Project’s total VMT Reduction as follows:
Combined Total Reduction = 1- [(1-A) x (1-B) x (1-C) x …]; A,B,C, = each measure’s percent reduction
6.3 Supporting/Non-Quantified VMT Reductions
The Project provides or contributes to additional VMT-reducing measures that were not directly
quantified, either because they are considered “Supporting or Non-Quantified” measures by
CAPCOA and/or the full benefits will be realized with the development of the Vision Plan.
The Ponto Beachfront Village “is an active pedestrian- and bicycle-oriented, mixed-use area,” with a
“concentration of specialty retail, restaurants, plazas, and a community-based nature and arts center”.
The Ponto Beachfront Village mixed use components include “an informal mix of townhomes, live-
work units, and mixed use residential [to] enhance the vitality and add life to the Village.”
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
17
One parcel has been developed within the Vision Plan area (Cape Rey Carlsbad Beach resort hotel)
and there are currently two other active applications for development aside from the proposed
Project.
6.3.1 T-18: Pedestrian Network Improvement / T-19A: Construct or Improve Bike Facility
Measure T-18 pertains to increasing sidewalk coverage to improve pedestrian access. Providing
sidewalks and an enhanced pedestrian network encourages people to walk instead of drive.
Measure T-19A pertains to constructing or improving a single bicycle lane facility (Class I, II, or IV)
that connects to a larger bikeway network. Providing bicycle infrastructure helps to improve biking
conditions with an area and encourage a mode shift from vehicles to bicycles.
With respect to pedestrian and bicycle circulation, the entire Ponto Beachfront Village is designed to
create a pleasant walking environment and to support bicycling. The following pedestrian and
bicycle facilities are planned, as illustrated in the figure below:
Internal Sidewalks and Paseos
Multi-Use Path East of Carlsbad Boulevard
Multi-Use Path West of Carlsbad Boulevard
Beachfront Resort Community Trail (part of proposed Project)
Connection to Regional Trail System
Boardwalk Trail
Pedestrian Underpass to State Beach Entrance
The Project will construct half-width improvements that include a 10’ sidewalk/ shared use path along its frontage (northbound direction of travel). The Project will also provide a Class II bike lane
on Ponto Road (southbound direction of travel). These improvements will connect to existing
pedestrian and bicycle facilities to the north and future facilities to be developed as part of the Vision
Plan to the south.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
18
The Land Use Measures discussed above are quantifiable measures within the CAPCOA framework.
However, the Project is only a portion of the overall Vision Plan pedestrian and bicycle network and
cannot assure the future development of other parcels within the Vision Plan area. Therefore, these
measures were conservatively not quantified for purposes of the current analysis.
6.3.2 T-35: Provide Traffic Calming Measures
This measure requires projects to include pedestrian/bicycle safety and traffic calming measures
above jurisdictional requirements. Traffic calming features may include marked crosswalks, count-
down signal timers, curb extensions, speed tables, raised crosswalks, raised intersections, median
islands, tight corner radii, roundabouts or mini-circles, on-street parking, planter strips with street
trees, chicanes/chokers, and others. This is considered a Supporting or Non-Quantified measure in
CAPCOA.
The Vision Plan livable streets design includes traffic calming measures such as raised crosswalks,
pedestrian refuge islands, street trees, mid-block crossings, and corner bulb-outs. Planned traffic
calming elements are illustrated below.
Additionally, and not illustrated on the figure above, a roundabout is planned for the intersection of Avenida Encinas and Ponto Drive.
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
N:\3538\Report\3538.VMT Report.docx
20
7.0 VMT IMPACTS SUMMARY AND IMPLEMENTATION
7.1 VMT Impact Summary
Based on the City of Carlsbad VMT/resident analysis maps, the baseline Project’s VMT/resident is
24.0, or 100% of citywide average.
After accounting for and calculating two (2) CAPCOA measures related to the Project’s intrinsic
design and unit mix, the Project VMT/resident would be reduced to 19.2 or 80% of the citywide
average.
Project VMT reduction measures were calculated using the methodology outlined in the published
Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities,
and Advancing Health and Equity (CAPCOA 2021).
The threshold of significance for residential projects is 85% of the citywide average VMT/resident,
or 20.4. The Project is therefore below the threshold of significance and a less than significant
transportation VMT would occur.
7.2 Implementation
The Project VMT reduction measures are PDFs intrinsic to the Project and do not require mitigation
monitoring.
Supporting measures to be constructed by the Project, including the provision of sidewalks and bike
lanes along its frontage will be subject to requirements of the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis
Guidelines as a condition of approval.
End of Report
TECHNICAL APPENDICES – VMT FPC RESIDENTIAL
Carlsbad, California November 16, 2022
LLG Ref. 3-22-3538
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN, engineers LLG Ref. 3-22-3538 FPC Residential
APPENDIX A
CAPCOA VMT REDUCTION MEASURE EXCERPTS
TRANSPORTATION | 70
T-1. Increase Residential Density
GHG Mitigation Potential
Up to 30.0% of GHG
emissions from project VMT
in the study area
Co-Benefits (icon key on pg. 34)
Climate Resilience
Increased density can put people closer to
resources they may need to access during
an extreme weather event. Increased density
can also shorten commutes, decreasing the
amount of time people are on the road and
exposed to hazards such as extreme heat
or flooding.
Health and Equity Considerations
Neighborhoods should include different
types of housing to support a variety of
household sizes, age ranges, and incomes.
Measure Description
This measure accounts for the VMT reduction achieved by a project
that is designed with a higher density of dwelling units (du)
compared to the average residential density in the U.S. Increased
densities affect the distance people travel and provide greater
options for the mode of travel they choose. Increasing residential
density results in shorter and fewer trips by single-occupancy vehicles
and thus a reduction in GHG emissions. This measure is best
quantified when applied to larger developments and developments
where the density is somewhat similar to the surrounding area due to
the underlying research being founded in data from the
neighborhood level.
Subsector
Land Use
Locational Context
Urban, suburban
Scale of Application
Project/Site
Implementation Requirements
This measure is most accurately quantified when applied to larger
developments and/or developments where the density is
somewhat similar to the surrounding neighborhood.
Cost Considerations
Depending on the location, increasing residential density may
increase housing and development costs. However, the costs of
providing public services, such as health care, education, policing,
and transit, are generally lower in more dense areas where things
are closer together. Infrastructure that provides drinking water and
electricity also operates more efficiently when the service and
transmission area is reduced. Local governments may provide
approval streamlining benefits or financial incentives for infill and
high-density residential projects.
Expanded Mitigation Options
When paired with Measure T-2, Increase Job Density, the
cumulative densification from these measures can result in a
highly walkable and bikeable area, yielding increased co-benefits
in VMT reductions, improved public health, and social equity.
30%
T-1. Increase Residential Density TRANSPORTATION | 71
GHG Reduction Formula
A = B −C
C × D
GHG Calculation Variables
ID Variable Value Unit Source
Output
A Percent reduction in GHG emissions from project
VMT in study area
0–30.0 % calculated
User Inputs
B Residential density of project development [ ] du/acre user input
Constants, Assumptions, and Available Defaults
C Residential density of typical development 9.1 du/acre Ewing et al.
2007
D Elasticity of VMT with respect to residential density -0.22 unitless Stevens
2016
Further explanation of key variables:
▪ (C) – The residential density of typical development is based on the blended average
density of residential development in the U.S. forecasted for 2025. This estimate includes
apartments, condominiums, and townhouses, as well as detached single-family housing
on both small and large lots. An acre in this context is defined as an acre of developed
land, not including streets, school sites, parks, and other undevelopable land. If reductions
are being calculated from a specific baseline derived from a travel demand forecasting
model, the residential density of the relevant transportation analysis zone should be used
instead of the value for a typical development.
▪ (D) – A meta-regression analysis of five studies that controlled for self-selection found
that a 0.22 percent decrease in VMT occurs for every 1 percent increase in residential
density (Stevens 2016).
GHG Calculation Caps or Maximums
Measure Maximum
(Amax) The percent reduction in GHG emissions (A) is capped at 30 percent. The purpose for
the 30 percent cap is to limit the influence of any single built environmental factor (such as
density). Projects that implement multiple land use strategies (e.g., density, design, diversity)
will show more of a reduction than relying on improvements from a single built
environment factor.
T-1. Increase Residential Density TRANSPORTATION | 72
Subsector Maximum
(∑AmaxT-1 through T-4 ≤65%) This measure is in the Land Use subsector. This subcategory
includes Measures T-1 through T-4. The VMT reduction from the combined implementation
of all measures within this subsector is capped at 65 percent.
Example GHG Reduction Quantification
The user reduces VMT by increasing the residential density of the project study area. In this
example, the project’s residential density would be 15 du per acre (B), which would reduce
GHG emissions from project VMT by 14.2 percent.
Quantified Co-Benefits
Improved Local Air Quality
The percent reduction in GHG emissions (A) would be the same as the percent
reduction in NOX, CO, NO2, SO2, and PM. Reductions in ROG emissions can be
calculated by multiplying the percent reduction in GHG emissions (A) by an
adjustment factor of 87 percent. See Adjusting VMT Reductions to Emission
Reductions above for further discussion.
Energy and Fuel Savings
The percent reduction in vehicle fuel consumption would be the same as the percent
reduction in GHG emissions (A).
VMT Reductions
The percent reduction in VMT would be the same as the percent reduction in GHG
emissions (A).
Sources
▪ Ewing, R., K. Bartholomew, S. Winkelman, J. Walters, and D. Chen. 2007. Growing Cooler: The
Evidence on Urban Development and Climate Change. October. Available:
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/cit_07092401a.pdf. Accessed: January 2021.
▪ Stevens, M. 2016. Does Compact Development Make People Drive Less? Journal of the American
Planning Association 83:1(7–18), DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2016.1240044. November. Available:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309890412_Does_Compact_Development_Make_People_
Drive_Less. Accessed: January 2021.
A = 15 du
ac −9.1 du
ac
9.1 duac
× -0.22 = -14.2%
TRANSPORTATION | 80
T-4. Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate
Housing
GHG Mitigation Potential
Up to 28.6% of GHG
emissions from project/site
multifamily residential VMT
Co-Benefits (icon key on pg. 34)
Climate Resilience
Increasing affordable housing creates the
opportunity for a greater diversity of people
to be closer to their desired destinations and
the resources they may need to access during
an extreme weather event. Close proximity to
destinations allows for more opportunities to
use active transportation and transit and to
be less reliant on private vehicles. Alleviating
the housing-cost burden also enables more
people to remain housed, and increases
people’s capacity to respond to disruptions,
including climate impacts.
Health and Equity Considerations
Neighborhoods should include different types
of housing to support a variety of household
sizes, age ranges, abilities, and incomes.
Measure Description
This measure requires below market rate (BMR) housing. BMR
housing provides greater opportunity for lower income families to
live closer to job centers and achieve a jobs/housing match near
transit. It is also an important strategy to address the limited
availability of affordable housing that might force residents to live
far away from jobs or school, requiring longer commutes. The
quantification method for this measure accounts for VMT reductions
achieved for multifamily residential projects that are deed restricted
or otherwise permanently dedicated as affordable housing.
Subsector
Land Use
Locational Context
Urban, suburban
Scale of Application
Project/Site
Implementation Requirements
Multifamily residential units must be permanently dedicated as
affordable for lower income families. The California Department
of Housing and Community Development (2021) defines lower-
income as 80 percent of area median income or below, and
affordable housing as costing 30 percent of gross household
income or less.
Cost Considerations
Depending on the source of the affordable subsidy, BMR housing
may have implications for development costs but would also have
the benefit of reducing costs for public services, similar to Measure
T-1, Increase Residential Density.
Expanded Mitigation Options
Pair with Measure T-1, Increase Residential Density, and Measure
T-2, Increase Job Density, to achieve greater population and
employment diversity.
28.6%
T-4. Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing TRANSPORTATION | 81
GHG Reduction Formula
A = B × C
GHG Calculation Variables
ID Variable Value Unit Source
Output
A Percent reduction in GHG emissions from
Project/Site VMT for multifamily residential
developments
0–28.6 % calculated
User Inputs
B Percent of multifamily units permanently
dedicated as affordable
0–100 % user input
Constants, Assumptions, and Available Defaults
C Percent reduction in VMT for qualified units
compared to market rate units
-28.6 % ITE 2021
Further explanation of key variables:
▪ (B) – This refers to percent of multifamily units in the project that are deed restricted or
otherwise permanently dedicated as affordable.
▪ (C) – The 11th Edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual (ITE 2021) contains daily
vehicle trip rates for market rate multifamily housing that is low-rise and not close to
transit (ITE code 221) as well as affordable multifamily housing (ITE code 223). While
these rates do not account for trip length, they serve as a proxy for the expected
difference in vehicle trip generation and VMT generation presuming similar trip lengths
for both types of land use. If the user has information about trip length differences
between market rate and affordable housing, then adjusting the percent reduction
accordingly is recommended.
Users should note that the ITE trip rate estimates are based on a small sample of studies
for the affordable housing rate and that no stratification of affordable housing by
number of stories was available. This is an important distinction since the multifamily
low-rise vehicle trip rate applies to four or fewer stories. Therefore, this measure may not
apply to affordable housing projects with more than four stories.
GHG Calculation Caps or Maximums
Measure Maximum
(Amax) The maximum GHG reduction from this measure is 28.6 percent. This maximum
scenario is presented in the below example quantification.
T-4. Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing TRANSPORTATION | 82
Subsector Maximum
(∑AmaxT-1 through T-4 ≤65%) This measure is in the Land Use subsector. This subsector includes
Measures T-1 through T-4. The VMT reduction from the combined implementation of all
measures within this subsector is capped at 65 percent.
Example GHG Reduction Quantification
The user reduces project VMT by requiring a portion of the multifamily residential units to
be permanently dedicated as affordable. In this example, the percent of units (B) is 100
percent, which would reduce GHG emissions from VMT by 28.6 percent.
Quantified Co-Benefits
Improved Local Air Quality
The percent reduction in GHG emissions (A) would be the same as the percent
reduction in NOX, CO, NO2, SO2, and PM. Reductions in ROG emissions can be
calculated by multiplying the percent reduction in GHG emissions (A) by an
adjustment factor of 87 percent. See Adjusting VMT Reductions to Emission
Reductions above for further discussion.
Energy and Fuel Savings
The percent reduction in vehicle fuel consumption would be the same as the percent
reduction in GHG emissions (A).
VMT Reductions
The percent reduction in VMT would be the same as the percent reduction in GHG
emissions (A).
Sources
▪ California Department of Housing and Community Development. 2021. Income Limits. Available:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/income-
limits/index.shtml#:~:text=%E2%80%9CAffordable%20housing%20cost%E2%80%9D%20for%20lowe
r,of%20gross%20income%2C%20with%20variations. Accessed; November 2021.
▪ Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). 2021. Trip Generation Manual. 11th Edition. Available:
https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip-and-parking-generation/. Accessed; November 2021.
A = 100% × -28.6% = -28.6%