1 / 29

Recommended Methods for Assessing VMT

Explore diverse impacts of high VMT developments on health, environment, and economy. Guidelines and thresholds for VMT reduction strategies across transportation and land use projects. Learn to evaluate various development types to foster sustainable communities.

psims
Download Presentation

Recommended Methods for Assessing VMT

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Recommended Methods for Assessing VMT Chris Ganson Governor’s Office of Planning and Research

  2. Background - Impacts of High VMT Development • Health • Collisions • Physical activity • Emissions • GHGs • Regional pollutants • Mental health • Cost • Increased costs to state and local government • Roads • Other infrastructure • Schools • Services • Increased private transportation cost • Increased building costs (due to parking costs) • Reduced productivity per acre due to parking • Housing supply/demand mismatch  future blight • Environment • Emissions • GHG • Regional pollutants • Energy use • Transportation energy • Building energy • Water • Water use • Runoff – flooding • Runoff – pollution • Consumption of open space • Sensitive habitat • Agricultural land

  3. Background - Impacts of High VMT Development • Health • Collisions • Physical activity • Emissions • GHGs • Regional pollutants • Mental health • Cost • Increased costs to state and local government • Roads • Other infrastructure • Schools • Services • Increased private transportation cost • Increased building costs (due to parking costs) • Reduced productivity per acre due to parking • Housing supply/demand mismatch  future blight • Environment • Emissions • GHG • Regional pollutants • Energy use • Transportation energy • Building energy • Water • Water use • Runoff – flooding • Runoff – pollution • Consumption of open space • Sensitive habitat • Agricultural land

  4. Background – State GHG Goals

  5. Background – State GHG Goals Scoping Plan Need Scoping Plan Baseline

  6. OPR Recommendations – Overall Approach Land Use Projects Streamline low VMT projects Mitigate high VMT projects Transportation Infrastructure Projects Streamline VMT-reducing projects Streamline projects which increase VMT only marginally Mitigate projects which substantially increase VMT

  7. OPR Recommendations - Overview • Primary metric of transportation impact statewide is VMT • Use VMT screening maps for residential and office projects • Presume development near transit leads to a less than significant impact* • Recommendation that transit, active transportation projects presumed less than significant • More stringent thresholds may be applied at lead agency discretion *exceptions: • FAR < 0.75 • Parking > minimum requirements • Inconsistent with SCS VMT Map of Fresno COG, generated by the California Statewide Travel Demand Model

  8. Mapping Shortcut

  9. Mapping Shortcut

  10. Methods and Thresholds

  11. OPR Recommendations – Residential and Office Residential project recommendations: • Assess residential with trip-based approach • Threshold: 15 percent below regional or city VMT/capita Office project recommendations: • Assess office with trip-based approach • Threshold: 15 percent below regional VMT/employee

  12. OPR Recommendations – Retail Retail project recommendations: • Assess retail with “Net VMT” approach • Retail which increases VMT compared to previous shopping patterns may be considered significant • Local-serving retail presumed less than significant

  13. OPR Recommendations – Mixed Use Mixed-use development • Can consider each use separately, compare to threshold for that use • Each use should take credit for internal capture due to proximity of other uses in project Example: Residential-retail—if near transit, locally serving retail, recommend presumed less than significant

  14. OPR Recommendations – Plans Land Use Plan recommendations: • Specific plans: Same methods and thresholds as land use projects • General plans: At or below VMT levels in SCS (aggregate across jurisdiction) RTP-SCSs recommendations: • Sufficient VMT reductions to achieve ARB-specified GHG target

  15. OPR Recommendations – Transportation Projects Transportation Project recommendations: • Presume transit and active transportation projects lead to less than significant VMT • Projects which substantially increase roadway capacity may induce VMT • Roadway projects which add only marginally to capacity presumed to lead to less than significant VMT • Examples on next slide…

  16. Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement and repair • Roadway shoulder enhancements • Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, or emergency breakdown lanes • Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets • Conversion of existing general purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes • Reduction in number of through lanes • Grade separation • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices • Timing of signals • Installation of roundabouts • Installation of traffic calming devices • Adoption of or increase in tolls • Addition of tolled lanes, where tolls are sufficient to mitigate VMT increase • Initiation of new transit service • Conversion of streets from one-way to two-way • Removal of off-street parking spaces • Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions • Addition of traffic wayfinding signage • Any lane addition under 0.3 miles in length

  17. OPR Recommendations – Transportation Projects Transportation Project recommendations: • Threshold focuses on VMT allowable to achieve 2030 GHG reduction target (ARB Scoping Plan, Mobile Source Strategy) • Four suggested methodologies • …including a simple method using researched elasticities: [%  in lane miles] x [existing VMT] x [elasticity] = [VMT resulting from the project]

  18. OPR Recommendations Other recommendations: • Rural projects choose thresholds on a case-by-case basis • Small projects screening threshold – 100 vehicle trips per day • Addition of transit riders not an impact; blocking stations or routes may be an impact

  19. Measuring and Modeling VMT

  20. What VMT to Count • Trip-based • Residential: VMT/capita • Office: VMT/employee • Net VMT • Retail: Net VMT • Transportation infrastructure projects: Net VMT

  21. What VMT to Count CEQA Rule of Reason requires capturing spillover VMT

  22. Estimating tour-based VMT Residence to Coffee Shop Coffee Shop to Work Work to Sandwich Shop Sandwich Shop to Work Work to Residence Residence to Store Store to Residence 1 2 5 7 6 4 3

  23. Estimating tour-based VMT Residence to Coffee Shop Coffee Shop to Work Work to Sandwich Shop Sandwich Shop to Work Work to Residence Residence to Store Store to Residence 1 2 Shopping Tour 5 7 6 4 3 Work Tour

  24. Estimating tour-based VMT Residence to Coffee Shop Coffee Shop to Work Work to Sandwich Shop Sandwich Shop to Work Work to Residence Residence to Store Store to Residence 1 2 5 7 6 4 3 “Household” VMT

  25. Estimating trip-based VMT Residence to Work Work to Residence Home to Coffee Shop Coffee Shop to Store Store to Home 1 Home-Based-Work trip 3 2 Home-Based-Shopping trip 5 4 Non-Home-Based trip

  26. Estimating trip-based VMT Residence to Work Work to Residence Home to Coffee Shop Coffee Shop to Store Store to Home 1 Home-Based-Work trip 3 2 Home-Based-Shopping trip “Home-based” VMT 5 4 Non-Home-Based trip

  27. OPR Recommendations Methodologies for… • Threshold determination • Project Assessment • Project Mitigation …must be apples to apples

  28. Thanks! chris.ganson@opr.ca.gov

More Related