Tilly chang sfcta alameda county climate action working group october 14 2009
Download
1 / 19

SAN FRANCISCO - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 322 Views
  • Updated On :

Tilly Chang, SFCTA Alameda County Climate Action Working Group October 14, 2009 SAN FRANCISCO Automobile Trips Generated CEQA Measure and Mitigation Program Purpose and Background

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'SAN FRANCISCO' - andrew


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Tilly chang sfcta alameda county climate action working group october 14 2009 l.jpg

Tilly Chang, SFCTA

Alameda County Climate Action Working Group

October 14, 2009

SAN FRANCISCOAutomobile Trips GeneratedCEQA Measure and Mitigation Program


Purpose and background l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

Purpose and Background

What is the best way for San Francisco to measure transportation impacts under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)?

Strategic Analysis Report on Automobile LOS requested by Authority Board and completed in 2004

Identified problems with current measure

Suggested several possible approaches for moving away from LOS

Automobile Trips Generated Study completed in 2007

Recommended discontinue use of Level of Service (LOS) as CEQA impact measure

Measure impacts based on automobile trips generated (ATG)

Provide more effective impact mitigation via fee program

Nexus Study currently underway


The problems with los l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The Problems with LOS

Today, project CEQA impacts on transportation are defined as auto delay at intersections (LOS)‏

Three problems with this measure of impact:

LOS does not capture important environmental impacts (rather reflects motorist pov)

LOS contradicts the City’s Transit First/Climate Action Plan policies and priorities (again, optimizes individual motorist experience vs. system performance)

LOS makes CEQA review process inefficient (for both Planning Department and project sponsors)


Los does not capture environmental impacts l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

LOS does not capture environmental impacts

LOS measures the delay experienced by drivers at an intersection

LOS does not capture environmental impacts

Carbon emissions

Safety

Transportation system efficiency

Air and water quality

Neighborhood livability

Noise

Environmental impacts ARE related to the automobile trips generated (ATG) by a project


Los does not capture environmental impacts5 l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

LOS does not capture environmental impacts

Environmental Impact

Automobile Trips Generated (ATG)‏

Air Quality

CO hotspots rare in Bay Area

ROG, NOx, PM10

Greenhouse Gases

From cold starts

System Efficiency

Traffic Intrusion

Traffic volumes affect neighborhoods

Noise

At congested intersections only

Captures noise conditions

Safety

Delay unrelated to safety

SF DPH Vehicle-Pedestrian Injury Collision model

Automobile Delays (LOS)‏


Los does not reflect city policies l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

LOS does not reflect City policies

LOS impacts contradict the Transit First Policy

LOS standards discourage density

Climate Action Plan calls for reduction in driving

Auto tripmaking is 50% of SF’s greenhouse gas emission

Mitigations to LOS are environmentally harmful

Worsen conditions for pedestrians, transit, and bicycling

Induce more driving


Los does not reflect city policies7 l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

LOS does not reflect City Policies

Providing a pedestrian crossing here would increase delays for right-turning drivers, potentially triggering significant LOS impacts...

Minimizing automobile delays takes precedence over minimizing pedestrian delays.


Los results in inefficient ceqa review l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

LOS results in inefficient CEQA review

LOS analysis and impacts are:

Difficult for project sponsors to predict

Not transparent for project sponsors or the public

A burden to the “last project in” (last-in problem)‏


The last in problem l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The “last-in” problem

Project #1

LOS = B

No Impacts


The last in problem10 l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The “last-in” problem

Project #2

LOS = D

No Impacts


The last in problem11 l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The “last-in” problem

Project #3

LOS = F

Significant Impacts!


The problem l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The Problem

Fortunately, CEQA statute grants local jurisdictions the authority to define impact measures and thresholds consistent with local policy…

…However, this is constrained by State CEQA Guidelines and past practice

“Transportation” is an impact area distinct from air, water, noise, etc.

State CEQA Guidelines recommend use of LOS to measure impacts


State ceqa guidelines revisions l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

State CEQA Guidelines Revisions

Proposed Language for CEQA Guidelines Appendix G (Transportation Impacts)

Explicitly recognizes local variation in environmental context

More supportive of an ATG impact measure than current language

Further improvement would replace “capacity” concept with “performance”

XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC --Would the project:

a) Exceed the capacity of the existing Conflict with an applicable local plan, ordinance, or policy that establishes a measure of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?


San francisco s new proposed approach l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

San Francisco's New Proposed Approach

ATG Measure + Transportation Impact Mitigation Fee

Each net new automobile trip added by a project contributes to negative impacts for CEQA purposes (Conservative)

Each added automobile trip (starting with 1 trip) contributes to impact

Projects that do not generate net new automobile trips have no impact

e.g. bicycle or BRT projects

Automobile trips generated mitigation fee (ATMF) program

Project sponsors pay per-trip impact mitigation fee

Fee revenues fund actions that help reduce new automobile tripmaking (by improving transit, walking, and bicycling as choices)‏

Payment of fee mitigates ATG impacts for CEQA purposes


Atmf improves mitigation effectiveness l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

ATMF improves mitigation effectiveness

Mitigate local and citywide impacts

Nexus study to demonstrate link between countywide program of improvements and cumulative reduction in ATG

ATMF revenues contribute to large projects that will have significant effects on tripmaking patterns

Portion of ATMF dedicated to local area improvements

More equitable and accountable (for project sponsors and the public)‏

Eliminates last-in problem; each project contributes in proportion to impact levels

More simple and transparent process for identifying and mitigating impacts

Clear nexus between fee collected and projects funded


Slide16 l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

Process for Applying ATG Measure

Will the Project generate new auto trips?

Yes

No

Determine Impact:

Estimate automobile trips generated or induced by the project

Stop. No impacts in this area.

Determine needed mitigation:

Calculate impact mitigation fee payment based on volume of trips generated / induced


The benefits l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

The Benefits

Environmentally protective

Captures incremental impacts

More closely related to actual environmental effects

Consistency with City policies and vision

Reduces time and cost to implement Transit First projects

More effective at discouraging auto-oriented projects

Improved efficiency

More predictable for project sponsors

More transparent for the public

More accountable - mitigations linked directly to local and citywide improvements


Implementation roadmap l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

Implementation Roadmap

Authority Board approved final report in October 2008

Nexus Study

Jointly led by Mayor’s Office of Economic Development, SF Planning Department, the Authority, and SFMTA

Scheduled for completion in 2009/10

Planning Commission adoption of an ordinance approving the ATG measure and ATMF package

Refine trip generation rates

Refinements to current trip generation rates should account for “smart growth” project features as much as possible

San Francisco often has unique trip generation rates (difficult to import generalized rates)


Thank you www sfcta org l.jpg

Auto Trips Generated Impact Measure Presentation, CA APA, September 14, 2009

Thank you!

www.sfcta.org


ad