R 5030 RESOLUTION NO. 5030
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE ADOPTING A POLICY ESTABLISHING THRESHOLDS OF
SIGNIFICANCE FOR EVALUATING TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
PURSUANT TO SB 743
WHEREAS, SB 743 was signed into law in 2013, with the intent of better aligning
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) practices with statewide sustainability goals
related to efficient land use, greater multi-modal transportation choices, and greenhouse
gas reductions; and
WHEREAS, SB 743 included amendments to CEQA that required the Office of Planning
and Research (OPR) to develop new guidelines for measuring a project's transportation
impacts under which automobile delay, traditionally measured as level of service (LOS),
will no longer be considered an environmental impact under CEQA and, instead, a
project's generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will determine a project's transportation
impacts; these changes were effective as of July 1, 2020; and
WHEREAS, OPR adopted new guidelines consistent with SB 743 that became effective
on July 1, 2020; and
WHEREAS, under CEQA, lead agencies have discretion to formulate their own
significance thresholds and may do so through formally adopted thresholds that are
consistently applied to all projects, which promotes predictability and consistency for the
environmental review process and increases defensibility of the lead agency's
significance determinations; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to adopt a policy establishing thresholds of significance for
the evaluation of transportation impacts that is consistent with SB 743, CEQA, and the
State CEQA Guidelines and that is supported by substantial evidence in the record.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande
as follows:
1. The City Council finds and declares that substantial evidence exists to support
the thresholds of significance and policies set forth in Exhibit A, as described
in the staff report presented to the City Council on September 8, 2020, its
attachments, all supporting memoranda, and all materials referenced therein,
which are incorporated herein by reference as though set forth in full.
2. The Policy Establishing Thresholds of Significance for Evaluating
Transportation Impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act
Consistent with SB 743 attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A
is hereby adopted.
3. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.
RESOLUTION NO. 5030
PAGE 2
On motion of Mayor Ray Russom, seconded by Council Member Paulding, and by the
following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: Mayor Ray Russom, Council Members Paulding, George, Barneich, and Storton
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The foregoing Resolution was approved this 8th day of September, 2020.
RESOLUTION NO. 5D3v
PAGE 3
110 111
CAREN RA : SOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
(ALi-GoAAJL_
KELLY W TM RE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
BILL ROBESON, A TING CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
Exhibit A
Policy Establishing Thresholds of Significance
for Evaluating Transportation Impacts under the
California Environmental Quality Act Consistent with SB 743
The following standards and thresholds of significance shall be used to evaluate potential transportation
impacts of projects subject to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), in compliance with SB
743, Public Resources Code section 21099, and CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, which are hereby
incorporated by reference.
1. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Generally, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts. For
purposes of this policy, "vehicle miles traveled"or"VMT" refers to the amount and distance of automobile
travel attributable to a project. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on
transit and non-motorized travel. A project's effect on automobile delay does not constitute a significant
environmental impact. However, a project's effect on roadway levels of service will be considered in
determining a project's consistency with the City's General Plan, as described further in Section 3 below.
1.1 Projects Assumed to be Less Than Significant
The California Office of Planning & Research (OPR)Technical Advisory has established the following
thresholds under which development projects are presumed to have less than significant impacts on
vehicle miles traveled, which are hereby adopted. Projects that meet these screening criteria are
assumed to have less than significant environmental impacts and do not require further CEQA review as
it relates to transportation.
A) Projects that are consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy(SCS) or the General
Plan and generate fewer than 110 daily trips based on the most current edition of the Institute
of Traffic Engineer's Trip Generation Manual.
B) Projects that are within 1/2 mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute or less headways, unless the project:
a. Has a floor to area ratio (FAR)of less than 0.75;
b. Includes more parking than required under the City's zoning code;
c. Is inconsistent with the region's Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code,
or City Land Use Policies, including the City's General Plan or any applicable Specific
Plan; or
d. Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate-or high-income
residential units.
C) Local-serving retail projects, which are generally defined as projects within the City that are
less than 50,000 square feet in size. The determination of whether a retail project is local-
serving or regional-serving shall be made by City staff on a case by case to determine whether
1
they are likely to attract regional trips. For instance, auto dealerships and specialty retailers
may propose less than 50,000 square feet of retail space but be deemed regional serving.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not require
a quantitative VMT analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets (traffic
lane reductions/narrowing), roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety
improvements that do not substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration of
lanes not for through traffic(addition of left/right turn lanes, etc.), timing of traffic signals,
removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit
facilities and services.
2. Thresholds of Significance
2.1 Baseline VMT
Baseline VMT is established as the countywide average, including incorporated cities, as calculated by
the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)travel demand model.
The baseline VMT per capita is 20.2 for residential projects and the proposed baseline VMT per
employee is 14.0 for non-residential projects. These baselines shall be updated periodically, consistent
with updates to the SLOCOG Regional Transportation Demand/Sustainable Communities Strategy and
Regional Transportation Demand Model.
2.2 Residential Projects and Uses
Project VMT per capita shall be calculated by performing a run of the SLOCOG travel demand model and
comparing the total regional VMT with and without the project to determine total project VMT. Total
project VMT then shall be divided by the proposed dwelling units multiplied by the City's average persons
per household from the US Census (2.54 Average Persons Per Household).
(Total Regional VMT)
(Proposed Dwelling Units)x(Average Persons per Household)
Significance Criteria:Project VMT per capita exceeds 17.2, 15%below the existing regional average VMT
per capita (20.2).
2.3 Office Projects
Derivation of Square Feet per Employee Based on:
Project VMT per capita shall be -MEDIAN EMPLOYEES PER ACRE
-MEDIAN FAR
calculated by performing a run of the FIVE COUNTY REGION Net/Gross Adjustment Factor: 0.75
SLOCOG travel demand model and #of Employees/ Building Square Feet/
comparing the total regional VMT Land Use Cateaory Records FAR Acre Efficiency Emalovee
with and without the project to Regional Retail 27 0.59 14.99 0.80 1,023
determine total project VMT. Total OtherRetail/Svc. 1013 0.28 13.49 0.85 585
VMT then shall be divided by
Low-Rise Office 349 0.36 22.91 0.90 466
project High-Rise Office 46 1.19 116.32 0.90 300
the proposed office square feet Hotel/Motel 16 0.61 11.04 N/A 1,804
R 8 0/Flex Space 70 0.31 18.13 0.95 527
divided by an estimate of the average UghtManufacturing 1047 0.35 11.63 0.95 924
square feet per office worker. An Heavy Manufacuring o - 17.05 NIA
Warehouse 121 0.42 10.63 0.95 1,225
Employment Density Report prepared Government Offices 32 0.37 16.23 0.90 672
Figure 1: SCAG 2001 Employment Density Report Table 1A
2
for the Southern California Association of Governments by the Natelson Company is recommended as
guidance for estimating this value. The appropriate table from this report is shown in Figure 1 to the right.
(Total Regional VMT)
(Proposed Office Sq.Ft.)/(Average Sq.Ft.per Office Worker)
Significance Criteria: Project VMT exceeds 11.9 VMT/Employee, 15%below the existing regional
average VMT per employee (14.0).
2.4 Retail, Industrial, &Other Projects Not Otherwise Addressed
Project VMT per capita shall be calculated by performing a run of the SLOCOG travel demand model and
comparing the total regional VMT with and without the project to determine total project VMT.
Significance Criteria:Project VMT results in a total net increase of the regional VMT.
2.5 Transportation Projects
For transportation projects that increase auto capacity, such as the addition of through lanes on existing
or new highways, which would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in VMT, quantitative
analysis is required to calculate the amount of additional vehicle travel anticipated. For transportation
projects that have already been evaluated for VMT at a programmatic level, such as within a General
Plan or Specific Plan, the City may tier from that analysis. For transportation projects located within the
City that are anticipated to increase vehicle travel, the VMT threshold of significance shall be evaluated
and determined on a case-by-case basis, while ensuring that the analysis addresses:
A) Direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the transportation project, including potential for induced
demand (CEQA Guidelines§15064(d) and (h));
B) Near-term and long-term effects of the transportation project(CEQA Guidelines§§15063(a)(1),
15126. 2(a));
C) The transportation project's consistency with state greenhouse gas reduction goals (Pub. Res.
Code§21099);
D) The impact of the transportation project on the development of multimodal transportation
networks (Pub. Res. Code§21099); and
E) The impact of the transportation project on the development of a diversity of land uses (Pub. Res.
Code§21099).
2.6 Mixed-Use Projects
Each proposed use will be analyzed separately and compared to the corresponding threshold.
Alternatively, the City may consider only the project's dominant use where doing so will not underestimate
potential transportation impacts resulting from the project. In the analysis of each use, a project should
take credit for internal capture.
3
2.7 Redevelopment Projects
Where a project replaces existing VMT-generating land uses, if the replacement leads to a net overall
decrease in VMT, the project would lead to a less-than-significant transportation impact. If the project
leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds described above apply.
3. Level of Service
A project's impacts to transportation levels of service(LOS), roadway safety, intersection queuing and
access management, and multimodal transportation infrastructure (collectively referred to hereafter as
"transportation infrastructure")will be considered in determining consistency with the City's General Plan
and land use policies. Project-level analysis of potential impacts to transportation infrastructure will be
completed consistent with the City's General Plan, Circulation Element, and Traffic Impact Analysis
Guidelines. The results of these analyses will be considered in determining the project's consistency with
the City's General Plan and land use policies.Where impacts to transportation infrastructure are
identified, projects may be conditioned to ensure that the standards stated in the City's General Plan and
land use policies, including but not limited to the City's Circulation Element and Traffic Impact Analysis
Guidelines, are met through direct infrastructure improvements or fair share contributions to
improvements.
4
OFFICIAL CERTIFICATION
I, KELLY WETMORE, City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis
Obispo, State of California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury, that the attached
Resolution No. 5030 was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Arroyo Grande on the 8th day of September, 2020.
WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of Arroyo Grande affixed this 10th day of
September, 2020.
L1(2iWOJ\L
KELLY WET ORE, CITY CLERK