Santee City Council
April 27, 2022

MEETING INFORMATION
Wednesday, April 27, 2022
6:30 p.m.

Council Chambers | Building 2
10601 Magnolia Ave • Santee, CA 92071
TO WATCH LIVE:

AT&T U-verse channel 99 (SD Market) | Cox channel 117 (SD County) www.cityofsanteeca.gov

IN-PERSON ATTENDANCE
Please be advised that current public health orders recommend that attendees wear face coverings while inside the Council Chambers.

LIVE PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public who wish to comment on matters on the City Council agenda or during Non-Agenda Public Comment may appear in person and submit a speaker slip, before the item is called. Your name will be called when it is time to speak.

PLEASE NOTE: Public Comment will be limited to 3 minutes and speaker slips will only be accepted until the item is called. The timer will begin when the participant begins speaking.

April 27, 2022 | 6:30 p.m.
2 ROLL CALL: Mayor John W. Minto
Vice Mayor Ronn Hall
Council Members Laura Koval, Rob McNelis and Dustin Trotter LEGISLATIVE INVOCATION: The Village Church San Diego – Brian Wilbur

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CONSENT CALENDAR:

PLEASE NOTE: Consent Calendar items are considered routine and will be approved by one motion, with no separate discussion prior to voting. The public, staff or Council Members may request specific items be removed from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion or action. Speaker slips for this category must be presented to the City Clerk at the start of the meeting. Speakers are limited to 3 minutes.
(1) Approval of Reading by Title Only and Waiver of Reading in Full of Ordinances and Resolutions on the Agenda. (City Clerk – Ortiz)
(2) Approval of Meeting Minutes of the Santee City Council for the April 13, 2022, Regular Meeting and the April 20, 2022, District 4 Town Hall Meeting. (City Clerk – Ortiz)
(3) Approval of Payment of Demands as Presented. (Finance – McDermott) (4) Approval of the Expenditure of $88,289.18 for March 2022 Legal Services and Reimbursable Costs. (Finance – McDermott)
(5) Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Award of a Contract for Custodial Services – Offices to Prizm Janitorial Services, Inc. per RFB #22/23-20060, in an Amount Not to Exceed $63,045.27. (Public Services Department) (6) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Council Chamber A/V Upgrades (CIP 2016-51) Project as Complete. (Development Services – Engineering) (7) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the City Hall Trash Enclosure Modifications (CIP 2018-52) Project as Complete. (Development Services – Engineering) (8) Adoption of a Resolution Approving the Final Map for 24 Condominium Units and One Common Lot (TM2005-05) and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Associated Subdivision Improvement Agreement. Location: East Side of Marrokal Lane. Applicant: James Meng. (Development Services – Engineering) (9) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Bridge Repairs – Magnolia Avenue (CIP 2013-01) Project as Complete. (Development Services – Engineering) April 27, 2022 | 6:30 p.m.
3 (10) Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Submittal of a Grant Application to the Federal Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight and Highway Projects Grant Program (INFRA) for State Route 52 (SR-52) Improvements. (Development Services – Engineering)
(11) Adoption of a Resolution Supporting a Submittal of a FY 2023 Community Project Funding Request Form to Congressman Darrell Issa (CA-50) for Consideration for the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development for Additional Funding for the Santee Community Center. (City Manager – Best)
(12) Adoption of a Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of a Report Made by the Fire Chief in Accordance with Section 13146.4 of the California Health and Safety Code (Annual Fire Inspection Compliance Report). (Fire – Garlow) (13) Purchase of a New 800MHz Portable Radio from Motorola Solutions, Inc. per County of San Diego Regional Communications System Contract No. 553982 in an Amount Not to Exceed $7,540.30. (Fire – Garlow)
(14) Acceptance and Appropriation of the Monetary Donation of $8,014.58 for the Purchase of Fencing Materials for the Pickleball Courts at Big Rock Park from the Santee Community Foundation. (Public Services Department) NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT (15 minutes):

Persons wishing to address the City Council regarding items not on the posted agenda may do so at this time. In accordance with State law, Council may not take action on an item not scheduled on the Agenda. If appropriate, the item will be referred to the City Manager or placed on a future agenda. This first Non-Agenda Public Comment period is limited to a total of 15 minutes. Additional Non-Agenda Public Comment is received prior to Council Reports.

PUBLIC HEARING:
(15) Public Hearing to Adopt a Resolution Approving the Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan and Authorizing the City Manager to Submit a Grant Application for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funds to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (Development Services – Engineering)
Recommendation:

1. Conduct and close the Public Hearing; and

2. Adopt the Resolution approving the Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan and authorizing the City Manager to submit the grant application to HUD.

April 27, 2022 | 6:30 p.m.
4 (16) Public Hearing for the “Prospect Estates II” Major Revision (MJR2022-1) to Tentative Map (TM2016-3) and Development Review Permit (DR2016-4) to Waive the Requirement of Undergrounding Overhead Facilities for a Residential Subdivision Consisting of 38 Condominium Units and 15 SingleFamily Residences Located on a 6.8-Acre Site on Prospect Avenue at Marrokal Lane (APN 383-112-32 and 383-112-55). Applicant: M. Grant Real Estate, Inc. (Michael Grant). (Development Services – Planning)
Recommendation:

1. Conduct and close the Public Hearing; and

2. Deny the application for Major Revision MJR2022-1.

CONTINUED BUSINESS:
(17) Approve the City’s Participation in the San Diego County Sheriff's Department’s Safe Santee Program and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Related Memorandum of Understanding. (Sheriff – McNeill) Recommendation:

Approve the City’s participation in the Sheriff’s Safe Santee Program and authorize the City Manager to execute the related MOU with the Sheriff’s Department.

NEW BUSINESS:
(18) Resolution Adopting the City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines Containing “Vehicle Miles Traveled” Thresholds of Significance for Purposes of Analyzing Transportation Impacts Under the California Environmental Quality Act. (Development Services – Engineering)
Recommendation:

Adopt Resolution adopting the City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines.

NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT (Continued):

All public comment not presented within the first Non-Agenda Public Comment period above will be heard at this time.

CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:

CITY MANAGER REPORTS:

CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS:

CLOSED SESSION:

ADJOURNMENT:

April 27, 2022 | 6:30 p.m.
5 Apr 07 SPARC Council Chamber
Apr 11 Community Oriented Policing Committee Council Chamber Apr 13 Council Meeting Council Chamber
Apr 20 District 4 Town Hall Pathways Church
Apr 27 Council Meeting Council Chamber
May 05 SPARC Council Chamber
May 09 Community Oriented Policing Committee Council Chamber May 11 Council Meeting Council Chamber
May 25 Council Meeting Council Chamber
The Santee City Council welcomes you and encourages your continued interest and involvement in the City’s decision-making process.

For your convenience, a complete Agenda Packet is
available for public review at City Hall and on the
City’s website at www.CityofSanteeCA.gov.

The City of Santee complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with disabilities, as required by Section 12132 of the American with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 USC § 12132). Any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (619) 258-4100, ext. 112 at least 48 hours before the meeting, if possible.

BOARDS, COMMISSIONS & COMMITTEES

APRIL & MAY MEETINGS

Minutes DRAFT
Santee City Council
Council Chamber – Building 2
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California
April 13, 2022
This Regular Meeting of the Santee City Council was called to order by Mayor John W.

Minto at 6:30 p.m.

ROLL CALL: Present: Mayor John W. Minto, Vice Mayor Ronn Hall and Council Members Laura Koval, Rob McNelis and Dustin Trotter – 5.

Officers present: City Manager Marlene Best and City Clerk Annette Fagan Ortiz INVOCATION was given by Annie LaVoire – Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Captain Michael McNeill CONSENT CALENDAR:
(1) Approval of Reading by Title Only and Waiver of Reading in Full of Ordinances and Resolutions on the Agenda. (City Clerk – Ortiz) (2) Approval of Meeting Minutes of the Santee City Council for the March 9 and March 23, 2022, Regular Meetings. (City Clerk – Ortiz) (3) Approval of Payment of Demands as Presented. (Finance – McDermott) (4) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Electric Vehicle Charging Station at City Hall (CIP 2022-32) Project as Complete. (Development Services – Engineering) (Reso 037-2022)
(5) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the San Diego River Trail Improvements, Walmart to Cuyamaca Street (CIP 2020-42) Project as Complete. (Development Services – Engineering) (Reso 038-2022) (6) Adoption of a Resolution Accepting the Public Improvements for the Mission Gorge Multi Family Subdivision Project (TM2015-06) as Complete. Location: 7927-7941 Mission Gorge Road. (Development Services – Engineering) (Reso 039-2022)
(7) Authorization of the Award of an Agreement for Whole Structure Fumigation to Agricultural Pest Control Services per RFB #21/22-20062 in an Amount Not to Exceed $45,000.00. (Public Services)
Santee City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2022 Page 2 of 4 (8) Adoption of a Resolution Approving the City of Santee Investment Policy and Delegating Authority to the City Treasurer. (Finance – McDermott) (Reso 040-2022)
(9) Authorize the Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with Rogers Anderson Malody & Scott, LLP for Audit Services. (Finance – McDermott)
(10) Adoption of a Resolution Initiating Proceedings and Ordering the Preparation of an Engineer’s Report for the FY 2022-23 Santee Landscape Maintenance District Annual Levy of Assessments, and the Authorization of a First Amendment to the Professional Services Agreement Between the City of Santee and Spicer Consulting Group. (Finance – McDermott) (Reso 041-2022)
(11) Adoption of a Resolution Initiating Proceedings and Ordering the Preparation of an Engineer’s Report for the FY 2022-23 Town Center Landscape Maintenance District Annual Levy of Assessments. (Finance – McDermott) (Reso 042-2022)
(12) Adoption of a Resolution Initiating Proceedings and Ordering the Preparation of an Engineer’s Report for the FY 2022-23 Santee Roadway Lighting District Annual Levy of Assessments. (Finance – McDermott) (Reso 043-2022)
(13) Purchase of New Structural Firefighting Clothing (Turnouts) from Municipal Emergency Services, per Sourcewell Contract #032620-MES in an Amount Not to Exceed $15,046.86. (Fire - Garlow)
ACTION: Council Member McNelis moved approval of the Consent Calendar.

Vice Mayor Hall seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Mayor Minto:

Aye; Vice Mayor Hall: Aye; and Council Members Koval: Aye; McNelis: Aye; and Trotter:

Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0.

NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT (15 minutes):
(A) Steven Gerard Sidlovsky provided a handout to council and spoke regarding sanctuary cities.

CONTINUED BUSINESS:
(14) American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Expenditure Plan Update. (City Manager – Best)
The City Manager introduced the Item and the Director of Finance provided a PowerPoint Santee City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2022 Page 3 of 4 presentation and responded to Council questions.

PUBLIC SPEAKER(S):
• Dan Bickford
ACTION: Council Member McNelis moved approval of staff recommendation.

Vice Mayor Hall seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Mayor Minto:

Aye; Vice Mayor Hall: Aye; and Council Members Koval: Aye; McNelis: Aye; and Trotter:

Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0.

NEW BUSINESS:
(15) Resolution Approving a Five-Year Agreement with the County of San Diego and the San Diego County Sheriff for Municipal Law Enforcement Services for the Period July 1, 2022 through June 30, 2027; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute the Agreement. (City Manager – Best) (Reso 044-2022)
The City Manager introduced the Item and the Assistant to the City Manager provided a PowerPoint presentation and responded to Council questions.

ACTION: Council Member Trotter moved approval of staff recommendation.

Council Member Koval seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Mayor Minto: Aye; Vice Mayor Hall: Aye; and Council Members Koval: Aye; McNelis: Aye; and Trotter: Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0.
(16) Authorize the Execution of a Professional Services Agreement with AP Triton, LLC, for Consultant Services to Conduct a Community Risk Assessment and Long-Range Fire and Emergency Services Delivery Analysis. (Fire – Garlow)
The Fire Chief provided a PowerPoint presentation and responded to Council questions.

ACTION: Council Member Koval moved approval of staff recommendation.

Vice Mayor Hall seconded the motion, which carried by the following vote: Mayor Minto:

Aye; Vice Mayor Hall: Aye; and Council Members Koval: Aye; McNelis: Aye; and Trotter:

Aye. Ayes: 5. Noes: 0.

NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT: (Continued)
None.

Santee City Council Regular Meeting Minutes of April 13, 2022 Page 4 of 4 CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:

Vice Mayor Hall reported on his attendance with the World Society Church to clear out the debris from the river bed.

Council Member Koval reported that she accompanied Code Enforcement and the Planning Department to various commercial properties along Mission Gorge that were not maintaining their properties; she suggested incorporating a maintenance plan with all development to hold commercial properties accountable; she also mentioned SANDAGs goal to reduce time for border crossing.

Mayor Minto spoke regarding SANDAG; he also reported on his attendance at the League of California Cities meeting and updating the bylaws.

Council Member Trotter spoke regarding the District 4 Town Hall meeting on Wednesday, April 20, 2022, at Pathways Church.

Council Member McNelis spoke regarding transit issues with SANDAG.

CITY MANAGER REPORTS:

The City Manager commended staff for the Bunny Hop on Easter at Trolley Square and introduced the new Human Resources Director Matt Rankin.

CITY ATTORNEY REPORTS:

The Assistant City Attorney provided a brief update on the Fanita Ranch litigation.

CLOSED SESSION:

Council Members recessed at 8:03 p.m. and convened in Closed Session at 8:09 p.m. (17) CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
(Government Code Section 54957.6)
City Designated Representative: City Manager
Employee Organization: Santee Firefighters Association
Council Members reconvened in Open Session at 8:42 p.m. with all members present.

Mayor Minto reported direction was given on Item 17.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:44 p.m.

Date Approved:

Annette Ortiz, CMC, City Clerk
Minutes
TOWN HALL – DISTRICT 4

PATHWAYS COMMUNITY CHURCH
9626 Carlton Hills Blvd.

April 20, 2022

1. Call to Order

Present: Mayor John W. Minto and Council Member Dustin Trotter.

The Special Meeting was called to order by Council Member Trotter at 6:06 p.m.

2. Town Hall – District 4
Council Member Trotter made brief comments regarding events that have occurred, goals that were achieved and future goals throughout the City; Padre Dam provided a brief presentation regarding water reclamation; Council Member Trotter presented Marty Smothermon, Santee Food Bank, with the District 4 Person of the Year Award.

3. Public Comments and Questions
Council Member Trotter and Mayor Minto responded to questions from the community.

4. Adjournment
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m.

Date Approved:

Annette Ortiz, CMC, City Clerk

vchlist
04/07/2022 9:16:05AM
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher
130187
130188
130189
130190
130191
130192
130193
130194
130195
Date Vendor
4/7/2022 12903 AMERICAN FIDELITY ASSURANCE CO
4/7/2022 10208 ANTHEM EAP
4/7/2022 10334 CHUC
4/7/2022 14458 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
4/7/2022 10785 RELIANCE STANDARD LIFE
4/7/2022 10424 SANTEE FIREFIGHTERS
4/7/2022 10776 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
4/7/2022 14467 TEXAS LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
4/7/2022 10001 US BANK
9 Vouchers for bank code : ubgen
9 Vouchers in this report
Prepared by: �
Date: 4 {1 / 201..,?...

APP'°"''l/c y)u,yj,u,�
Date: -7 -;10¢.;k
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
6048112
046585399041
2982362
71263309
April 22
PPE 03/30/22
PPE 03/30/22
SMOFOU20220213001A
PPE 03/30/22
PO# Description/Account

FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNT
Total:

EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE PROGRAI
Total:

HEALTH INSURANCE
Total:

DENTAL INSURANCE
Total:

VOLUNTARY LIFE INSURANCE
Total:

DUES/PEC/BENEVOLENT/BC EXP
Total:

WITHHOLDING ORDER
Total:

VOLUNTARY INS RIDERS
Total:

PARS RETIREMENT
Total:

Bank total:

Total vouchers
Page: 6
Amount
1,861.31
1,861.31
277.50
277.50
187,956.04
187,956.04
11,619.69
11,619.69
501.16
501.16
3,286.92
3,286.92
449.53
449.53
110.35
110.35
861.44
861.44
206,923.94
206,923.94
Page: 6
7 7
vchlist
04/07/2022 9:57:35AM
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher
723413
723466
Date Vendor
4/8/2022 10782 VANTAGEPOINT TRNSFR AGT/801801
4/8/2022 10959 VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENT/457
2 Vouchers for bank code : ubgen
2 Vouchers in this report
Prepared by: �
Date: Y 1"1 I 2 CJ i L.
�:�;�ve-'-+-'-;a�,JM;"'-'-"'--&;,-tiu,_______y_t1_�
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
PPE 03/30/22
PPE 03/30/22
------- PO# ' Description/Account

RETIREE HSA
Total:

ICMA-457
Total:

Bank total:

Total vouchers
Page: 8
Amount
4,159.26
4,159.26
33,179.84
33,179.84
37,339.10
37,339.10
Page: 8
vchlist
04/13/2022
Bank code:

Voucher
62493
62504
12:28:0SPM
ubgen
Date Vendor
4/11/2022 10955 DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
4/11/2022 10956 FRANCHISE TAX BOARD
2 Vouchers for bank code :
2 Vouchers in this report
ere,,reas, �
Date: ti/! JZoii
ubgen
Approved by: �W)At.,0
Date: l/""(p�..?@ff
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
April 22 Retirees
PPE 03/30/22
April 22 Retirees
PPE 03/30/22
-------- PO# Description/Account

FEDERAL WITHHOLDING TAX

FED WITHHOLD & MEDICARE

CA STATE TAX WITHHELD

CA STATE TAX WITHHELD
Total:

Total:

Bank total :

Total vouchers :

Page:

Amount
211.00
80,126.99
80,337.99

46.00 26,292.66
26,338.66
106,676.65
106,676.65
Page:
9 9
vchlist
04/13/2022 5:24:55PM
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher
1102
Date Vendor
4/11/2022 12774 LIABILITY CLAIMS ACCOUNT
1 Vouchers for bank code : ubgen
1 Vouchers in this report
Prepared by: �
Date: e,(// 5 /7C1'l L
Approved
Date: 4-/t/-J-;)-
by: UU-t!��r f
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
03312022
------- PO# Description/Account
MARCH 2022 LIABILITY CLAIMS
Total:

Bank total:

Total vouchers
Page: 10
Amount
555.00
555.00
555.00
555.00
Page: 10
vchlist
04/13/2022
Bank code:
12:34:10PM
ubgen
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account
3225 4/12/2022 10353 PERS 03 22 5 RET PYMT/REPL BENEFIT FUND Vouchers for bank code ubgen
Vouchers in this report
Prepared by: �
Date t-/ / / � /Zo l 2.

Approved by: N&ruk(_,..-dl-rr.&'UA(:0
Date t{-£3 ·;ia;:;-;rTotal:

Bank total:

Total vouchers
Page:

Page:

Amount
120,628.24
120,628.24
120,628.24
120,628.24
11 11
vchlist
04/13/2022
Bank code :

Voucher
130196
130197
130198
130199
130200
130201
130202
130203
130204
130205
130206
1:36:20PM
ubqen
Date Vendor
4/13/2022 12060 ACCOUNTING PRINCIPALS
4/13/2022 13456 AGRICULTURAL PEST CONTROL
4/13/2022 13576 AVTECH SOFTWARE INC
4/13/2022 14508 BENICEWICZ, ROBERT
4/13/2022 13130 BURNS, CHRIS
4/13/2022 10299 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS
4/13/2022 12665 CARROLL BUSINESS SUPPLY
4/13/2022 10032 CINTAS CORPORATION #694
4/13/2022 10050 CITY OF EL CAJON
4/13/2022 10171 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AUDITOR &
4/13/2022 10333 COX COMMUNICATIONS
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
12331428
632808
I NV302023368
RFD-G1113
42622
11102-553649
975348-0
4114335797
0000016212
02/2022 OMV REVENUE
03/22 AGENCY REV
03/22 OMV REVENUE
03/22 PHOENIX REV
094486701-APR22
094557701-APR22
112256001-MAR22
PO# Description/Account
53612 TEMPORARY ACCOUNTING
Total:
53491 PEST CONTROL SERVICES
Total:
53743 COMPUTER ROOM MAINTENANCE
Total:

RELEASE GRADING EROSION
Total:

SENIOR PROGRAMMING
Total:
53407 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS
Total:
53433 OFFICE SUPPLIES
Total:
53483 UNIFORM/PARTS CLEANER RENTAL
Total:
4TH QTR MEMBER ASSESSMENT
Total:
02/2022 OMV PARK CITE REPT
03/22 AGENCY PARK CITE REPT
03/22 OMV PARK CITE REPT
03/22 PHOENIX CITE REV REPT
Total:

CITY HALL GROUP BILL
10601 N MAGNOLIA AVE APT 2
9130 CARL TON OAKS DR USAGE
Page: 12
Amount
1,767.87
1,767.87
125.00
125.00
1,729.13
1,729.13
6,453.31
6,453.31
100.00
100.00

54.17 54.17
271.55
271.55

44.39 44.39
53,193.11
53,193.11
200.00
133.50
303.50
562.50
1,199.50
1,214.41

26.64 91.45
Page: 12
vchlist
04/13/2022 1:36:20PM
Bank code: ub�en
Voucher Date Vendor
130206 4/13/2022 10333 10333 COX COMMUNICATIONS
130207 4/13/2022 11418 DAMOOR, KESHAV
130208 4/13/2022 13129 DAVID TURCH AND ASSOCIATES
130209 4/13/2022 11017 DIVISION OF THE STATE
130210 4/13/2022 13275 DOCHTERMAN, LINDA
130211 4/13/2022 13582 DOWNSTREAM SERVICES INC
130212 4/13/2022 14446 ENTERPRISE FM TRUST
130213 4/13/2022 10057 ESGIL CORPORATION
130214 4/13/2022 14423 GQ BUILDERS INC
130215 4/13/2022 13274 GRANBOIS, DARCY
130216 4/13/2022 10070 HAWTHORNE CAT MACHINERY
130217 4/13/2022 13848 HMS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
130218 4/13/2022 10256 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice PO#
(Continued)
03192022KD
03222022 53644
AB1379 JAN-MAR 2022
03192022
105776 53718
2696 53705
01/2022
02/2022
CIP 2018-52 #4 53699
CIP 2018-52 #R4
03192022DG
R4937101 53632
CIP 2017-02
1152091 53410
Description/Account
Total:

COMMISSION STIPEND
Total:

DAVID TURCH & ASSOCIATES
Total:

AB1379 JAN-MAR 2022
Total:

COMMISSION STIPEND
Total:

MAST PARK STORMWATER
Total:
2022-04 FLEET LEASE PAYMENT
Total:

SHARE OF FEES

SHARE OF FEES
Total:

CITY HALL TRASH ENCLOSURE

RETENTION
Total:

COMMISSION STIPEND
Total:

GENERATOR RENTAL FIRE
Total:

RETENTION RELEASE
Total:

SHOP SUPPLIES
Page: 13
Amount
1,332.50

50.00 50.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
336.40
336.40

50.00 50.00
10,393.31
10,393.31
460.02
460.02
52,656.86
97,658.93
150,315.79
6,840.00
-342.00
6,498.00

50.00 50.00
4,661.97
4,661.97
15,323.72
15,323.72

98.44 Page: 13
vchlist Voucher List
04/13/2022 1:36:20PM CITY OF SANTEE
Bank code: ub!::)en
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
130218 4/13/2022 10256 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 1152092
1152093
3150939
5161317
130219 4/13/2022 14089 INDUSTRIAL METAL SUPPLY CO 1529298 130220 4/13/2022 10204 LIFE ASSIST INC 1188033
130221 4/13/2022 14492 LINDYN HANEY 2222
130222 4/13/2022 10079 MEDICO HEALTHCARE LINEN 20573895 20573898
130223 4/13/2022 10308 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS 2968-475193
2968-475558
130224 4/13/2022 14266 PATCH, LILI 03192022LP
130225 4/13/2022 10442 PAYCO SPECIALTIES 1768-01-2022
1768-02-2022
1768-10-2021
130226 4/13/2022 10092 PHOENIX GROUP INFO SYSTEMS 022022031 130227 4/13/2022 10097 ROMAINE ELECTRIC CORPORATION 12-055881 PO# Description/Account
53410 CR-SHOP SUPPLIES RETURNED
53410 SHOP SUPPLIES
53410 TRAINING PROP
53410 STATION SUPPLIES
Total:
53722 HOSE BED FABRICATION
Total:
53477 EMS SUPPLIES
Total:

INSTRUCTOR PAYMENT
Total:
53546 MEDICAL LINEN SERVICE
53546 MEDICAL LINEN SERVICE
Total:
53458 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS
53458 VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS
Total:

COMMISSION STIPEND
Total:
53789 STREET STRIPING MAINTENANCE
53789 STREET STRIPING MAINTENANCE
53789 STREET STRIPING MAINTENANCE
Total:
53605 FY 21/22 PARKING CITE PROCESS
Total:
53413 VEHICLE REPAIR PART
Total:

Page: 14
Amount
-49.21

38.75 84.28
161.27
333.53
1,807.09
1,807.09

45.26 45.26
294.00
294.00

20.62 13.01

33.63 102.34

88.54 190.88

50.00 50.00
17,054.83
4,238.21
2,147.61
23,440.65
266.00
266.00
107.62
107.62
Page: 14
vchlist Voucher List
04/13/2022 1:36:20PM CITY OF SANTEE
Bank code: ub�en
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice
130228 4/13/2022 10107 SANTEE MINISTERIAL COUNCIL SFB-2021-2 130229 4/13/2022 10768 SANTEE SCHOOL DISTRICT 9171
9172
9186
130230 4/13/2022 13171 SC COMMERCIAL, LLC 2081841-IN
2084660-IN
2086593-IN
2089658-IN
2092050-IN
130231 4/13/2022 14284 SDI PRESENCE LLC 8912
130232 4/13/2022 14500 SPROUT SOCIAL INC. INV-20270
130233 4/13/2022 10217 STAPLES ADVANTAGE 3502940974
3503150415
3503150416
130234 4/13/2022 10250 THE EAST COUNTY 00116144
00116363
130235 4/13/2022 10520 TRAFFIC SAFETY MATERIALS LLC 9894 130236 4/13/2022 10482 TRISTAR RISK MANAGEMENT 106566
130237 4/13/2022 12480 UNITED SITE SERVICES 114-12848333 PO# Description/Account
53686 CDBG SUBRECIPIENT
Total:
53500 JOINT USE FIELDS - RIO SECO
53500 JOINT USE FIELDS - RIO SECO

BUS TRANSPORTATION
Total:
53480 DELIVERED FUEL
53480 DELIVERED FUEL
53480 DELIVERED FUEL
53480 DELIVERED FUEL
53480 DELIVERED FUEL
Total:
53387
Total:
53783
Total:
53548
53631
53513
Total:
53772
53772
Total:
53709
Total:
53598

SANTEE LMS PROCUREMENT

SOCIAL MEDIA MGMT SOFTW

OFFICE SUPPLIES - DDS

OFFICE SUPPLIES

OFFICE SUPPLIES - FINANCE

ADVERTISING FOR RFB

ADVERTISING FOR RFB/P

DISC GOLF SPONSOR SIGNS

WORKERS' COMPENSATION
Total:
53419 PORTABLE TOILETS RIO SECO
Page: 15
Amount
4,248.73
4,248.73
361.37
316.59
433.45
1,111.41
1,136.49
772.34
713.51
632.68
1,279.41
4,534.43
522.00
522.00
4,047.00
4,047.00
139.20

83.46 119.34
342.00
199.50
217.00
416.50
1,250.99
1,250.99
7,197.25
7,197.25
238.11
Page: 15
vchlist
04/13/2022
Bank code:

Voucher
130237
130238
130239
1:36:20PM
ubqen
Date Vendor
4/13/2022 12480 12480 UNITED SITE SERVICES
4/13/2022 10338 VANDIVER, EDDIE
4/13/2022 13996 WESTERN AUDIO VISUAL
44 Vouchers for bank code : ubgen
44 Vouchers in this report
P�pa,ed by, � Date '1 / f!/m
Approved by:��
Date: 4.., f'1y ,,;r;>
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
(Continued)
03192022EV
9 9R
PO# Description/Account
Total:

COMMISSION STIPEND
Total:
53179 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER AN

RETENTION
Total:

Bank total:

Total vouchers :

Page: 16
Amount
238.11

50.00 50.00
805.71
-40.28
765.43
315,702.25
315,702.25
Page: 16
vchlist Voucher List Page: 17
04/13/2022 3:53:42PM CITY OF SANTEE
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount 130240 4/13/2022 10001 US BANK 00011715 MEETING SUPPLIES 2.49 00144935 DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES 11.60
0024 STAFF LUNCH 22.33
009146 STATION SUPPLIES 129.27
0122332 ENGRAVING 17.21
0127 MEETING SUPPLIES 13.38
012888 STATION SUPPLIES 94.25
0219 TEEN CENTER SUPPLIES 38.04
026026 STATION SUPPLIES 5.39
0267707 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 51.73
03/02/2022 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVE 45.00
032916 FRAMES 22.58
051390 MEETING SUPPLIES 15.30
062931 SUPPLIES 6.74
06567 STATION SUPPLIES 16.77
080001 CREDIT - REPAIR PART RETURNE[ -4.35
087628 POSTAGE 35.80
088559 MEETING SUPPLIES 9.35
09195053 GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVE 121.24
1000064715 MICR PRINTER TONER 553.37
1001065.007 FIRE MECHANICS ACADEMY 140.00
10094 MEETING SUPPLIES 10.92
10309 MEETING SUPPLIES 13.77
111-5988285-3716247 OFFICE SUPPLIES 32.31
112-0616729-94562 ENGINEERING SUPPLIES 62.35
112-1547061-66394 CODE SUPPLIES 21.54
112-2127605-83402 PLANNING SUPPLIES 34.93
112-3411144-80570101 GREETING CARDS 17.63
112-3411144-80570102 GREETING CARDS 25.04
112-6517214-5051421 GREETING CARDS 8.05
112706 VEHICLE REPAIR 132.79
113-4247687-67074081 OFFICE SUPPLIES 21.52
113-4379398-9309809 MEDIC UNIT EQUIPMENT 1,729.84
113-9426406-1885810 OFFICE SUPPLIES 17.57
114-0241460-804 7 430C CREDIT - ITEM RETURNED -11.64
114-1545179-4536260 FITNESS EQUIPMENT 646.52
Page: 17
vchlist Voucher List Page: 18
04/13/2022 3:53:42PM CITY OF SANTEE
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Description/Account Amount 130240 4/13/2022 10001 US BANK (Continued)
114-34127828-2893015 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 138.26
114-50097 49-2339459 REPLACEMENT CABLE 16.13
114-6306232-158984 7 FITNESS EQUIPMENT 387.90
114-6594543-1320200A WELLNESS NUTRITION 97.47
114-6594543-13202008 WELLNESS NUTRITION 26.98
114-9551722-4599424 WELLNESS NUTRITION 23.85
1208697127 ONLINE MEETING SOFTWARE 129.35
1208700914 ONLINE MEETING SOFTWARE 129.35
1208705290 ONLINE MEETING SERVICES 30.00
12297357 MEETING SUPPLIES 19.50
136427362-A HOP DOWN BUNNY TRAIL SUPPLIE 188.82
136427362-B HOP DOWN BUNNY TRAIL SUPPLIE 41.96
1380 UBER RIDE 38.70
1449 3CMA MEMBERSHIP 845.00
14546 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 153.78
1460 UBER RIDE 4.48
15840 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 216.63
174543 LUNCH FOR INTERVIEW PANEL 65.79
1815093 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 59.24
18629 BROOMS REORDER 62.90
18758 SMALL TOOLS 100.74
19167A2 CREDIT - BROOMS REFUND -62.90
200042356 SOFTWARE RENEWAL 745.20
202696 SENIOR PROGRAMMING 2,705.00
2036669 SPROUTS WELLNESS PROGRAM � 146.58
2062493791 DOMAIN NAME PURCHASE 31.34
206700004150 TREE PLANTING EVENT 120.42
21747 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 49.75
2379115 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 6.50
26501398 HOP DOWN BUNNY TRAIL & BREW 529.47
2652708 SMALL TOOLS 330.68
26840 2159 CA FIRE PREVENTION INSTITUTE 851.25
28165 VEHICLE REPAIR PART 76.00
2889002 MATERIALS & SUPPLIES 70.51
2905-3352 FITNESS PROGRAM 139.95
2961634 OFFICE SUPPLIES 48.49
Page: 18
vchlist Voucher List Page: 19
04/13/2022 3:53:42PM CITY OF SANTEE
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO# Amount
130240 4/13/2022 10001 US BANK (Continued)
3010360883 120.00
3102022PM 9.99
320802846578 28.08
3318 211.19
337901 60.25
34861 49.92
353514 500.00
35721 398.00
3891465 129.20
39167 3.85
392022AM 8.96
392022PM 7.90
3984 2.49
4212 176.44
4299752001
Description/Account

DISPOSAL SERVICES

CONFERENCE TRANSPORTATION

STATION SUPPLIES

BUILDING FORMS

STAFF LUNCH - FIDO FEST

PRINTING

ICSC DUES

VEHICLE REPAIR PARTS

MISCELLENEOUS OFFICE SUPPLIE

MATERIALS & SUPPLIES

CONFERENCE TRANSPORTATION

CONFERENCE TRANSPORTATION

SENIOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES

MATERIALS & SUPPLIES
ONLINE MEETING SERVICE 88.76
4431 5.00
4591 55.79
462067683505853 8.05
49136 277.25
50005 2,059.75
515425 7.43
5811 5.00
6006 20.47
61066A -196.59
6113 1,317.60
61529 99.53
61885 25.07
65589543 395.49
6671 82.04
700036 59.33
74951023 290.89
798249913 685.16
798249914 685.16
798249915 685.16
8410 439.20
8527776

SENIOR PROGRAM TRIP

SENIOR PROGRAM SUPPLIES

GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVE

MATERIALS & SUPPLIES

SENIOR PROGRAM TRIP

MEETING SUPPLIES

SENIOR PROGRAM TRIP

SENIOR TRIP LUNCH

BACKDROP REFUND

SENIOR PROGRAM TRIP

GRAFFITI REMOVAL

MATERIALS & SUPPLIES

GENERAL SUPPLIES SPECIAL EVE

TEEN CENTER SUPPLIES

STAFF LUNCH - FIDO FEST

TRAINING MATERIALS

CPRS CONFERENCE LODGING

CPRS CONFERENCE LODGING

CPRS CONFERENCE LODGING

SENIOR PROGRAM TRIP
MEDIC UNIT INSPECTION 63.39
Page: 19
vchlist
04/13/2022 3:53:42PM
Bank code: ubqen
Voucher
130240
Date Vendor
4/13/2022 10001 US BANK
1 Vouchers for bank code : ubgen
1 Vouchers in this report
Pcepa�d by, � Date: L.-f [ l 1 tZ.,
Appco"ed by �,U�� Date: l{- � � [
Voucher List

CITY OF SANTEE
Invoice
(Continued)
9016301
9135
935809
95837
9662401
DM5043391
HMZB5
INV715850
JCMT22-0213
M1448695
USC 17099309
WP27624551
WP27624551-2
PO# Description/Account

CA FIRE PREVENTION INSTITUTE

TEEN CENTER SUPPLIES

VEHICLE REPAIR PART

UBER RIDE

FIDO FEST & TREE PLANTING

TREE PLANTING

HOUSING FOR CPRS CONFERENC

EQUIPMENT REPAIR

EQUIPMENT REPAIR PART

VEHICLE MAINTENANCE

FITNESS EQUIPMENT

SMALL TOOLS

SMALL TOOLS
Total:

Bank total:

Total vouchers
Page: 20
Amount

73.07 35.94

66.72 29.91
120.00
350.19
1,135.05
615.00
155.87
120.00
485.25
238.10
483.80
25,449.80
25,449.80
25,449.80
Page: 20

LEGAL SERVICES BILLING SUMMARY Attachment 1
MARCH 2022

CURRENT INVOICE

DESCRIPTION AMOUNT NUMBER NOTES
Retainer $ 15,743.00 931488
1001.00.1201.51020 15,743.00
Labor & Employment:

Labor & Employment 1,603.80 931510
Employee Benefits 777.60 931517
1001.00.1201.51020 2,381.40
Litigation & Claims:

Litigation & Claims 1,020.60 921511
Affordable Housing Coalition of San Diego County 10,736.20 931514 Brooks Receivership 607.50 931492
1001.00.1201.51020 12,364.30
Special Projects (General Fund):

Community Oriented Policing 9,925.50 931512
Climate Action Plan 583.20 931515
CEQA Special Advice 3,547.80 931503
Water Quality 291.60 931516
Parcel 4 Hotel 1,218.30 931489
Housing Element 5,953.50 931490
Advanced Records Center Services for PRA 1,262.50 931493 Cannabis 6,585.30 931494
AT&T Wireless Facility 62.40 931508
ADA Transition Plan 364.50 931496
Crown Castle Wireless Facilities 188.50 931509
1001.00.1201.51020 29,983.10
Special Projects - CSA 69 (General Fund)
CSA 69 Dissolution 1,093.50 931495
1001.03.2203.51020
Special Projects (Other Funds):

Mobile Home Rent Control Commission 3,402.00 931513 2901.04.4106.51020 Cuyamaca Street Right-of-Way Acquisition 5,928.18 931491 cip71402.30.05 Cuyamaca Street Right-of-Way Acquisition 243.00 931511 cip71402.30.05 9,573.18
Third-Party Reimbursable:

Sky Ranch 62.40 931498 grd0928a.40.05
Rancho Fanita Villas 93.60 931499 grd1348a.20.05
Castlerock (Weston) 1,145.30 931500 spp0801a.10.05
MSCP Subarea Plan 188.50 931501 spp2101a.91.05
HomeFed Project 263.90 931502 spp1704a.10.05
HomeFed Project 3,076.90 931502 ehp2101a.10.05
Redevelopment of Carlton Oaks Golf Course 9,085.70 931504 cup1906a.10.05 Tyler St. Subdivision 2,827.50 931505 tm17001a.10.05
Arco Station (9015 Mission Gorge) 406.90 931507 cup2003a.10.05 17,150.70
Total $ 88,289.18
LEGAL SERVICES BILLING RECAP Attachment 2
FY 2021-22
Adopted Revised Previously Spent Available Current Request Category Budget Budget Year to Date Balance Mo/Yr Amount General Fund:

General / Retainer $ 190,920.00 $ 190,920.00 $ 126,152.12 $ 64,767.88 Mar-22 $ 15,743.00 Labor & Employment 60,000.00 60,000.00 27,395.55 32,604.45 Mar-22 2,381.40 Litigation & Claims 275,000.00 275,000.00 69,894.19 205,105.81 Mar-22 12,364.30 Special Projects 271,000.00 271,000.00 224,108.33 46,891.67 Mar-22 31,076.60 Total $ 796,920.00 $ 796,920.00 $ 447,550.19 $ 349,369.81 $ 61,565.30 Other City Funds:

MHFP Commission $ 5,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 8,966.70 $ 1,033.30 Mar-22 $ 3,402.00 Capital Projects 75,000.00 75,000.00 20,824.01 54,175.99 Mar-22 6,171.18 Highway 52 Coalition 5,000.00 5,000.00 801.90 4,198.10 - Total $ 85,000.00 $ 90,000.00 $ 30,592.61 $ 59,407.39 $ 9,573.18 Third-Party Reimbursable:

Total $ 100,482.09 Mar-22 $ 17,150.70
`
Total Previously Spent to Date
Total Proposed for Payment
General Fund $ 447,550.19 General Fund $ 61,565.30
Other City Funds 30,592.61 Other City Funds 9,573.18
Applicant Deposits or Grants 100,482.09 Applicant Deposits or Grants 17,150.70 Total $ 578,624.89 Total $ 88,289.18
FY 2021-22

RESOLUTION NO. ________
1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE AUTHORIZING

AWARD OF A CONTRACT FOR CUSTODIAL SERVICES - OFFICES TO PRIZM JANITORIAL SERVICES, INC. PER RFB #22/23-20060
WHEREAS, in compliance with the City’s purchasing ordinance, Santee Municipal Code 3.24.100, the Finance Department administered a formal bid process for a new contract for Custodial Services - Offices in February 2022; and WHEREAS, on the 10th day of March 2022, three proposals were received for Custodial Services – Offices per RFB #22/23-20060; and
WHEREAS, based on the requirements for lowest responsive responsible bid, staff recommends awarding the contract for Custodial Services – Offices to Prizm Janitorial Services, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $63,045.27 for Fiscal Year 2022-23; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends authorizing the City Manager to execute a Custodial Services – Offices contract with Prizm Janitorial Services, Inc. for an amount not to exceed $63,045.27 for Fiscal Year 2022-23; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends authorizing the City Manager to approve three (3) additional 12-month options to renew and one (1) 90-day extension; and WHEREAS, staff recommends authorizing the City Manager to approve change orders up to 10% of the then-current contract amount; and WHEREAS, staff recommends authorizing the Director of Community Services to execute annual Notices of Completion and authorizing the City Clerk to file said notices upon satisfactory completion of work; and
WHEREAS, this item is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to section 15301 (maintenance of existing structures, facilities or mechanical equipment).

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, that it hereby:

SECTION 1. Awards the contract for Custodial Services – Offices to Prizm Janitorial Services, Inc. for an amount not to $63,045.27 for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

SECTION 2. Authorizes the City Manager to approve three (3) additional 12-month options to renew and one (1) 90-day extension.

SECTION 3. Authorizes the City Manager to execute the Custodial Services – Offices contract on behalf of the City and approve change orders up to ten percent (10%) of the then-current contract amount.

RESOLUTION NO. ________
2 SECTION 4. Authorizes the Director of Community Services to execute annual Notices of Completion and authorizes the City Clerk to file said notices upon satisfactory completion of work.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular Meeting thereof held this 27th day of April 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK
April 15, 2022
RFB #22/23-20060
Bid Results
for

CUSTODIAL SERVICES - OFFICES
Bids received, verified:

1. Prizm Janitorial Services, Inc. Total: $ 63,045.27

2. Base Hill, Inc.(CORRECTION from $65,316.37) Total: $ 65,314.37

3. Aztec Janitorial Total: $ 100,704.67

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS A/V UPGRADES (CIP 2016-51) PROJECT

AS COMPLETE
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2020, the City Council awarded the design-build contract to Western Audio Visual to implement the Council Chamber A/V Upgrades (CIP 2016- 51) project in the amount totaling $341,230.93, authorized the City Manager to approve change orders in a total amount not to exceed $34,123.00 and Determined a Categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301(a) of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2020, the City Council authorized a $37,148.00 increase in the City Manager’s change order authorization for the Contract for a total change order authorization of $71,271.00 to provide for the installation of the Tightrope media cablecast system to host the City’s Public, Educational, and Government (“PEG”) channel; and
WHEREAS, on August 11, 2021, the City Council authorized a $172,894.13 increase in the City Manager’s change order authorization for the Contract for a total change order authorization of $244,165.13 to provide for closed captioning, split screen functionality, on-screen text and additional interior improvements, and WHEREAS, six contract change orders were approved for the contract in the amount totaling $241,412.56; and
WHEREAS, the project was completed for a total contract amount of $582,643.49; and
WHEREAS, Western Audio Visual has completed the project in accordance with the request for proposals prepared for the design-build contract.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. The work for the construction of the Council Chamber A/V Upgrades (CIP 2016-51) project is accepted as complete on this date and the City Clerk is directed to record a Notice of Completion with the San Diego County Clerk.

RESOLUTION NO.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING THE CITY HALL TRASH ENCLOSURE MODIFICATIONS (CIP 2018-52)

PROJECT AS COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council awarded the construction contract for the City Hall Trash Enclosure Modifications (CIP 2018-52) project to GQ Builders, Inc. on October 13, 2021 for $66,500.00; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized staff to approve construction change orders in a total amount not to exceed $6,650.00; and
WHEREAS, two change orders in the amount of $4,154.07 were approved for additional work; and
WHEREAS, the construction contract was completed for a total contract amount of $70,654.07; and
WHEREAS, GQ Builders, Inc. has completed the project in accordance with the contract plans and specifications.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, that the work for the construction of the City Hall Trash Enclosure Modifications (CIP 2018-52) project is accepted as complete on this date and the City Clerk is directed to record a Notice of Completion.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022 by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK
EXHIBIT A SITE MAP Sheet 1 of 1 City Hall Trash Enclosure Modifications CIP (2018-52) Trash Enclosure Location MAGNOLIA AVE ALPHONSE ST BUILDING 7 BUILDING 8
BUILDING 5 BUILDING 4
BUILDING 6
BUILDING 3 Remove Trash Enclosure Reconstruct Trash Enclosure Remove Trash Enclosure Reconstruct Trash Enclosure 1 2 4 3 1234 BUILDING 1 BUILDING 2 NOT TO SCALE

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR 24 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND ONE COMMON LOT (TM2005-05) AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE THE ASSOCIATED SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT.

LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF MARROKAL LANE.

APPLICANT: JAMES MENG
WHEREAS, on March 14, 2007, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 018-2007 approving Tentative Map 2005-05, for a 24 unit multi-family condominium subdivision with one common lot located at the east side of Marrokal Lane; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved and adopted a Negative Declaration (AEIS) dated February 1, 2007, which fully disclosed, evaluated and mitigated the environmental impacts of the proposed project, including the Tentative Map contemplated in this Resolution. No further environmental review is required for the City to adopt this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the developer James Meng has complied with all provisions of the tentative map approval required for recordation of the Final Map; and WHEREAS, under the direction of the City Engineer the Final Map has been examined and found to be technically correct, in compliance with State law, applicable Municipal Code provisions, and in substantial conformance with the approved Tentative Map.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Santee does hereby approve the Final Map of Tentative Map 2005-05.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute the Subdivision Improvement Agreement on their behalf and directs the City Clerk to certify approval of the Final Map and the associated Subdivision Improvement Agreement and certify rejection or acceptance of all dedications and easements as indicated on the Final Map, and directs staff to submit the map to the County Recorder for recordation.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April 2022, by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK
Meng Subdivision (TM 2005-05)
Rancho Fanita Village

MISSION GORGE ROAD

MARROKAL LANE
Marrokal Property
Prospect Estates
Phase 2 (TM 2016-03)
(Future Development
Prospect Estates
Phase 1 (TM 2015-01)

VICINITY MAP

RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING THE BRIDGE REPAIRS – MAGNOLIA AVE (CIP 2013-01) PROJECT AS

COMPLETE
WHEREAS, the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Bridge Repairs – Magnolia Ave (CIP 2013-01) project to Truesdell Corporation of California, Inc. on December 8, 2021 for $1,248,248.00; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized staff to approve construction change orders in a total amount not to exceed $62,412.00; and
WHEREAS, five change orders were authorized in the net deductive amount of $215,878.27 which were due to cost savings during the progression of the work; and WHEREAS, the construction contract was completed for a total contract amount of $1,032,369.73; and
WHEREAS, Truesdell Corporation of California, Inc. has completed the project in accordance with the contract plans and specifications.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, that the work for the construction of the Bridge Repairs – Magnolia Ave (CIP 2013-01) project is accepted as complete on this date and the City Clerk is directed to record a Notice of Completion.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022 by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO. __________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA

AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE FEDERAL

NATIONALLY SIGNIFICANT MULTIMODAL FREIGHT AND HIGHWAY PROJECTS (INFRA) GRANT PROGRAM FOR STATE ROUTE 52 (SR-52) IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, State Route 52 (SR-52) is a major east-west transportation corridor that connects residents in east San Diego County to employment centers in west and north county, as well as provides a key freight route for the region; and WHEREAS, SR-52 experiences significant traffic congestion during peak hours affecting commuters and freight traffic alike; and

WHEREAS, heavy traffic congestion on SR-52 significantly impacts the quality of life of Santee residents as well as East County residents, and affects the economic vitality of the region; and

WHEREAS, improvements planned by SANDAG for SR-52 are not scheduled for completion before 2035; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santee has helped stakeholders organize the Highway 52 Coalition to address the traffic issues on SR-52 and has been pursuing opportunities to partner with stakeholders to advance improvements to SR-52; and WHEREAS, an effort is underway with the design work funded by a private developer for Phase I improvements to SR-52; and
WHEREAS, additional funds are needed to complete the Phase I improvements; and
WHEREAS, the federal Nationally Significant Multimodal Freight and Highway Projects (INFRA) grant program is currently accepting applications; and WHEREAS, SR-52 Phase I improvements qualify for INFRA grant funds; and WHEREAS, the total estimated cost of SR-52 Phase I improvements is $50 million; and

WHEREAS, this action is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because it involves a fiscal activity of governments that will not result in any potentially significant impact on the environment. In the event full funding is eventually obtained for the Phase I improvements, such improvements will be subject to environmental review.

RESOLUTION NO. __________
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, as follows:

Section 1. City staff is authorized to prepare and submit an INFRA grant application for improvements on SR-52.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO. __________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA SUPPORTING A SUBMITTAL OF A FY 2023 COMMUNITY PROJECT FUNDING REQUEST FORM TO CONGRESSMAN DARRELL ISSA (CA-50) FOR

CONSIDERATION FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR THE SANTEE

COMMUNITY CENTER
WHEREAS, The City Council has designated the construction of the Santee Community Center as a Tier 1 priority; and
WHEREAS, the Santee Community Center Project is included in the Fiscal Years 2022-2026 Capital Improvement Program approved by City Council on June 23, 2021; and
WHEREAS, City Council approved a consultant design contract with HMC Group DBA HMC Architects on October 27, 2021 to begin the design and environmental analysis for the project; and
WHEREAS, through the design and development of the project staff has identified the need for additional funding for the construction of the project; and WHEREAS, Congressman Darrell Issa (CA-50) is accepting Community Project Request Forms for consideration by the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development; and
WHEREAS, Staff has identified $1.5 million of funding in the Economic Development Initiative program as a potential funding opportunity to assist in addressing the funding shortfall for the Santee Community Center; and WHEREAS, staff is requesting City Council support of the submission of the funding request to Congressman Darrell Issa.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, as follows:

SECTION 1. The Santee City Council supports the submission of a Community Project Request Form in the amount of $1.5 million for consideration by the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Economic Development Initiative program
RESOLUTION NO. __________
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO. _________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE ACKNOWLEDGING

RECEIPT OF A REPORT MADE BY THE FIRE CHIEF OF THE SANTEE FIRE DEPARTMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 13146.4 OF THE CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code section 13146.4 was added in 2018 and became effective on January 1, 2019; and,
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 require all fire departments that provide fire protection services to perform annual inspections in every building used as a public or private school, hotel, motel and apartment house for compliance with building standards, as provided; and,
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code section 13146.4(a) requires all fire departments that provide fire protection services to report annually to the administering authority its compliance with sections 13146.2 and 13146.3; and,
WHEREAS, the Council of the City of Santee intends this Resolution to fulfill the requirements of section 13146.4 of the California Health and Safety Code regarding acknowledgement of the Santee Fire Department’s compliance with California Health and Safety Code sections 13146.2 and 13146.3.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Santee that it expressly acknowledges receipt of the report for calendar year 2021 made by the Fire Chief of the Santee Fire Department in accordance with section 13146.4 of the California Health and Safety Code regarding sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 of the California Health and Safety Code which require annual inspections of schools, apartment houses and hotels/motels.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular Meeting thereof held this 27th day of April 2022, by the following roll call vote, to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
___________________________________
JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK

RESOLUTION NO. __________

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE PROGRAM YEAR 2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND AUTHORIZING

THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT A GRANT APPLICATION FOR COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) FUNDS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING

AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT (HUD)

WHEREAS, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) annually sets aside Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the City of Santee; and WHEREAS, the City of Santee is required to prepare and adopt an Annual Action Plan to implement the FY 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan prior to the submittal of a grant application to HUD; and
WHEREAS, in Program Year 2022, the City of Santee anticipates receiving an allocation of approximately $279,789 in CDBG funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Santee has an unexpended prior year allocation of $25,387 available for allocation in Program Year 2022; resulting in a total estimated amount available for allocation of $305,176; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santee has followed the prescribed format prior to submission of the required documents; and
WHEREAS, this action is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378 because it involves a fiscal activity of governments that will not result in any potentially significant impact on the environment. Even if this action is considered a project, it is exempt from environmental review under CEQA by CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3), as there is no potential for the action to cause a significant environmental effect.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Santee, California, does hereby:

1. Adopt the Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan; and

2. Direct the City Manager, upon notification by the Department of Housing and Urban Development of the amount of CDBG funding allocated to the City of Santee in Program Year 2022, to proportionately adjust allocations among Public Services, Public Facilities and Administrative activities to accommodate any shortfall or surplus between the estimated Program Year 2022 CDBG allocation of $279,789 and the actual CDBG grant allocated to the City of Santee for Program Year 2022; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to submit the Program Year 2022 Action Plan and Grant Application.

RESOLUTION NO. __________
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
1 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Third Program Year
Action Plan, City of Santee
This document includes Narrative Responses to specific questions that grantees of the Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership, Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS and Emergency Shelter Grants Programs must respond to in order to be compliant with the Consolidated Planning Regulations.

Executive Summary
AP-05 Executive Summary - 91.200(c), 91.220(b)

1. Introduction
The City of Santee 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan (Con Plan) outlines the community's strategies for meeting its identified housing and community development needs, developed through a citizen participation process as detailed in the 2020-2024 Citizen Participation Plan. The five-year Consolidated Plan includes a needs assessment, market analysis, and identification of priority needs and long-term strategies.

The Con Plan is a five-year planning document that identifies needs within low-to -moderate- income (LMI) communities and outlines how the City will address those needs. Ultimately, it guides investments in and helps achieve HUD’s mission of providing decent housing, suitable living environments, and expanded economic opportunities for LMI populations.

An Annual Action Plan implements the strategies included in the Con Plan and provides a basis for allocating federal block grant resources. This document represents the City of Santee’s Program Year 2022 CDBG Action Plan. It identifies the goals and programming of funds for activities to be undertaken in the second year of the five-year Consolidated Plan.

2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan This could be a restatement of items or a table listed elsewhere in the plan or a reference to another location. It may also contain any essential items from the housing and homeless needs assessment, the housing market analysis or the strategic plan.

In Program Year 2022, the Santee Annual Action Plan will generate the following estimated results:
• Render homeless prevention support and services for up to 190 persons; DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
• Assist up to 15,494 low- and moderate-income persons, many with special needs, via CDBG funded public services;
• Fund public infrastructure improvements to benefit disabled and visually impaired persons (presumed low- and moderate-income) through the Citywide Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Pedestrian Ramp Project.
• Assist up to 150 persons with fair housing issues funded with CDBG Administration Funds.

3. Evaluation of past performance
This is an evaluation of past performance that helped lead the grantee to choose its goals or projects.

Each program year of the Consolidated Plan period, the City must submit to HUD a Consolidated Annual Performance and Review Report (CAPER) with detailed information on progress towards the priorities, goals and objectives outlined in the Consolidated Plan.

In its most recent completed review of Consolidated Plan program funds, HUD has determined that the overall performance of the City’s CDBG program was satisfactory.

4. Summary of Citizen Participation Process and consultation process Summary from citizen participation section of plan.

The City of Santee conducted two public hearings to solicit public participation in the allocation of federal block grant resources. The first was held on February 9, 2022 during which public input on community needs and priorities was invited. The second hearing was conducted on March 9, 2022 during which the allocation of Program Year 2022 Community Planning and Development (CPD) funding was determined based on the estimated PY 2022 City of Santee allocation. A 30-day public review and comment period for the City of Santee Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan began on March 25, 2022 and extended through April 25, 2022. A public hearing was held on April 27, 2022 by the Santee City Council where it sought input on the draft plan and ultimately approved the Program Year 2022 Action Plan. Public hearing dates and comment periods were published in the East County Californian and notices were published on the City's website.

5. Summary of public comments
This could be a brief narrative summary or reference an attached document from the Citizen Participation section of the Con Plan.

To be determined
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)

6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them To be determined.

7. Summary
This document represents the City Santee’s Program Year 2022 CDBG Action Plan.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies - 91.200(b)

1. Agency/entity responsible for preparing/administering the Consolidated Plan The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator SANTEE Department of Development
Services
Table 1 – Responsible Agencies
Narrative
None.

Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Bill Crane, Senior Management Analyst, City of Santee Department of Development Services, [email protected]
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l)

1. Introduction
The City of Santee conducted two public hearings to solicit public participation in the allocation of federal block grant resources. The first was held on February 9, 2022 during which public input on community needs and priorities was invited. The second hearing was conducted on March 9, 2022 during which the allocation of Program Year 2022 Community Planning and Development (CPD) funding was determined. A 30-day public review and comment period for the City of Santee Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan began on March 25, 2022 and extended through April 25, 2022. A public hearing was held on April 27, 2021 by the Santee City Council where it sought input on the draft plan and ultimately approved the Program Year 2022 Action Plan. Public hearing dates and comment periods were published in the East County Californian and notices were published on the City's website.

Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(l)).

The City of Santee allocates CDBG resources to expand social services, prevent homelessness, provide emergency shelter, transitional housing and other support services for homeless and special needs clients throughout the region. The City of Santee participates in the Regional Task Force on the Homeless (RTFH), an integrated array of stakeholders tasked with strategic planning and coordination of resources to strengthen its collective impact with the goal of ending homelessness in the San Diego region.

The City of Santee also participates in the East County Homeless Task Force (ECHTF), which is under the East County Chamber of Commerce Foundation. The role of the ECHTF is to;

• Increase service provider programs' capacity;
• Facilitate collaboration to bring funding to the region; • Provide information about access to homeless resources; • Act as a conduit for inserting East County needs into County-wide discussions; and • Sponsor monthly coordinated homeless outreach meetings.

Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness.

Santee is committed to addressing the needs of homeless citizens in relation to both physical and mental/behavioral health needs. The City of Santee participates in a regional Continuum of Care (Regional Task Force on the Homeless). The Regional Task Force on the Homeless provides direction on planning and policy issues that impact the homeless population by making updates to the Regional Plan DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
6 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
to End Homelessness and a consolidated application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in support of programming that assists the Santee’s homeless and ‘at risk’ population.

Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction’s area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards for and evaluate outcomes of projects and activities assisted by ESG funds, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the operation and administration of HMIS The City of Santee consulted with the Regional Task Force on the Homeless, however, the city does not directly receive HUD Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) resources.

2. Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and consultations
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
7 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated 1 Agency/Group/Organization CRISIS HOUSE, INC.

Agency/Group/Organization Type Services - Housing
Services-Homeless
Services – Victims of Domestic Violence
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Homeless Needs - Chronically homeless Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Homelessness Strategy
Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing.

Recipient of $30,000 in CDBG-CV funding for emergency
housing services.
2 Agency/Group/Organization SANTEE MINISTERIAL COUNCIL- SANTEE FOOD BANK Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
Services-Elderly Persons
Services-Persons with Disabilities
Services-Persons with HIV/AIDS
Services-homeless
Services-Health
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Homeless Needs - Families with children
Homelessness Needs - Veterans
Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth
Homelessness Strategy
Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
8 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing. 3 Agency/Group/Organization MEALS ON WHEELS OF GREATER SAN DIEGO Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Elderly Persons Services-Persons with Disabilities
Services-Persons with HIV/AIDS
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing. 4 Agency/Group/Organization EAST COUNTY YMCA-CAMERON FAMILY FACILITY Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
Services-Health
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Non-Homeless Special Needs Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing. 5 Agency/Group/Organization ELDERHELP OF SAN DIEGO
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Elderly Persons Services-Persons with Disabilities
Services-Persons with HIV/AIDS
Services-Health
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
9 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing. 6 Agency/Group/Organization CSA SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Agency/Group/Organization Type Service-Fair Housing
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Housing Need Assessment Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing. 7 Agency/Group/Organization Voices for Children
Agency/Group/Organization Type Services-Children
Services-Victims of Domestic Violence
What section of the Plan was addressed by Consultation? Homelessness Needs - Unaccompanied youth Non-Homeless Special Needs
Anti-poverty Strategy
Briefly describe how the Agency/Group/Organization was consulted.

What are the anticipated outcomes of the consultation or areas for improved coordination?
Attendance and testimony/involvement at public hearing on February 9, 2022
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
10 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting The citizen input process associated with the preparation of the Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan was inclusive and involved many organizations, entities and persons.

Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan? Regional Task Force on the
Homeless
San Diego Regional
Continuum of Care
Seek to further the efforts of the RTFH.

City of Santee Housing
Element, 2021-2029 City of Santee
The 2020-2024 City of Santee Consolidated Plan conforms with the adopted City of Santee Housing Element, 2021-2029
Table 3 - Other local / regional / federal planning efforts Narrative
All of the Program Year 2022 CDBG applicants addressed the Mayor, City Council and members of the public present at the City Council Public Hearing. The applicants provided information on the programs that would be funded by CDBG and the various needs and demographics of the persons their programs serve.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
11 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-12 Participation - 91.401, 91.105, 91.200(c)

1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting Information regarding the CDBG program, resources, and local program contact information were all posted on the City website. Public notices were published in a local newspaper to inform the public of public meetings, public hearings and document public review periods, including the Program Year 2022 Annual Action Plan containing the proposed activities for the program year.

Citizen Participation Outreach
Sort Ord
er
Mode of Outrea
ch
Target of Outrea
ch
Summary of
response/attendan
ce
Summary of
comments receiv
ed
Summary of comme
nts not accepted
and reasons
URL (If applicable)
1 Newspaper Ad
Nontargeted/broad
community
Notice of two
Public Meetings
(1/28/2022) in East
County Californian
N.A. N.A.
2 Public Hearing
Nontargeted/broad
community
Public Meetings on
2/9/2022, 3/9/2022
and 4/27/2022 to
solicit public input.

Speakers at the
February public
hearings
addressed needs
of community,
including elderly
persons,
homeless, youth,
low-income and
disabled.

All comments were
considered.
www.cityofsanteeca.g
ov
Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
12 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Expected Resources
AP-15 Expected Resources - 91.420(b), 91.220(c)(1,2)
Introduction
The City of Santee is a CDBG Entitlement jurisdiction. The City will receive an estimated $279,789 in CDBG funds in Program Year 2022. The City of Santee is a member of the San Diego County HOME Investment Opportunities Consortium. The County of San Diego is recognized by HUD as a Participating Jurisdiction on behalf of the Consortium and includes HOME Program goals, activities and accomplishments in its Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plans. The City of Santee does not receive Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) or Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) program funding. Please refer to the County of San Diego (www.sdhcd.com) and City of San Diego (www.sandiego.gov) Annual Action Plans for details on the goals and distribution of HOPWA and ESG funds.

The City does not anticipate a regular stream of Program Income over the course of this Consolidated Plan. Program income received from the repayment of home rehabilitation loans (CDBG and HOME) and First Time Homebuyer loans will be applied to approved current-year activities DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
13 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Anticipated Resources
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses of Funds Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expected Amount
Available
Remainder
of ConPlan
$
Narrative Description
Annual
Allocation:
$
Program
Income:
$
Prior Year
Resources:
$
Total:
$
CDBG public -
federal
Acquisition
Admin and
Planning
Economic
Development
Housing
Public
Improvements
Public Services
297,789 0 25,387 305,176 505,000
The City of Santee plans to apply for
Section 108 Loan for a Citywide ADA
Pedestrian Ramp Project. The project
would benefit 3,557 Santee residents
citywide that have “ambulatory
difficulties” and 1,232 residents that have
“vision difficulties” according to the U.S.

Census Bureau’s 2019 ACS. This Section
108 Loan would be combined with
allocations from PYs 2021 and 2022 to
make approximately $1.71 million
available for the project.

Table 5 - Expected Resources – Priority Table
Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied
While the CDBG program does not require matching funds, CDBG funds offer excellent opportunities to leverage private, local, state and other federal funds to allow for the provision of public service activities. For example, many State homes programs have scoring criteria that reward applicants who have matching funds.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
14 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan
As the housing crisis has worsened in California, utilizing publicly owned land for affordable housing development has become an increasingly popular policy solution. In January 2019, Governor Gavin Newsom issued an Executive Order directing State agencies to inventory and assess surplus State properties for their development potential. Unfortunately, the State owns just seven surplus properties, resulting in 25 total acres, in San Diego County (none are in Santee). For its part, the City regularly reviews its real estate portfolio and assesses if properties are being put to best use. However, the City has no city-owned property zoned for housing. Most City-owned properties are remnant parcels associated with improvements to the Prospect Avenue industrial collector.

Discussion
See Above.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
15 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Annual Goals and Objectives
AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives - 91.420, 91.220(c)(3)&(e) Goals Summary Information
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Geographic
Area
Needs Addressed Funding Goal Outcome Indicator
1 Improve
community
infrastructure and
facilities.
2020 2024 Infrastructure Improve
Infrastructure and
Facilities
CDBG:
$207,254
Citywide ADA Pedestrian Ramp
Improvement Project: To be
determined
2 Provide Public
Services
2020 2024 Public Services Public Services for
LMI-Resident
CDBG:
$41,967
Public service activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit: 15,494 Persons Assisted
Homelessness Prevention: 190 Persons
Assisted
3 Support Affordable
Housing
Opportunities LMI
2020 2024 Affordable
Housing
Support Affordable
Housing for LMI
Residents.

CDBG: $0 Public service activities for
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit: 45 persons served – Caring
Neighbors program suspended due to
coronavirus pandemic.
4 Fair Housing 2020 2024 Fair Housing Fair Housing CDBG:
$15,500
Provide Fair Housing and
Tenant\Landlord Mediation Services:
150 persons assisted.

Table 6 – Goals Summary
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
16 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Goal Descriptions
1 Goal Name Improve community infrastructure and facilities.

Goal
Description
Provision of public facilities/infrastructure maintenance and support via CDBG resources, of which part are comprised of Section 108 loan funding.
2 Goal Name Provide Public Services
Goal
Description
Provide public services and activities to improve the quality of life for residents, including special needs populations and individuals experiencing homelessness - Provision of housing and/or support services to clients of which many are comprised of special needs populations, to include those experiencing homelessness. 3 Goal Name Support Affordable Housing Opportunities LMI Goal
Description
Assist in facilitation the creation of new affordable rental and homeownership housing through acquisition, preservation, and rehabilitation.
4 Goal Name Fair Housing
Goal
Description
Retain the services of a Fair Housing provider, promote fair housing education, and outreach within Santee.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
17 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-35 Projects - 91.420, 91.220(d)
Introduction
The following projects are based on the City’s identified priority needs and activities. Projects/programs that are operated citywide are noted. The majority of the projects are targeted low- and moderateincome persons, or neighborhoods in census tracts with 51% or more who are low- or moderateincome. All proposed activities are eligible and meet program service targets. # Project Name
1 Program Administration
2 Program Administration - Fair Housing – CSA San Diego 3 Public Services - East County Family YMCA
4 Public Services - Crisis House
5 Public Services - ElderHelp San Diego
6 Public Services - Meals on Wheels Greater San Diego
7 Public Services - Santee Food Bank
8 Public Services – Voices for Children
9 Public Facilities – Citywide ADA Pedestrian Ramp Project Table 7 – Project Information
Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs
Allocation priorities were established by the City of Santee City Council based on their collective knowledge of the community’s needs. The most significant obstacle to addressing underserved needs is the lack of sufficient resources to do so.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
18 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-38 Project Summary
Project Summary Information
1 Project Name Program Administration
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Public Facilities/Infrastructure Support Affordable Housing Production & Maintenance
Public Services Support.

Homeless Prevention Services
Fair Housing Services
Needs Addressed Infrastructure Maintenance & Support
Acquisition &r Maintenance of Affordable Housing
Support Services for Special Needs Clients
Homeless Prevention & Services.

Fair Housing Support
Funding CDBG: $40,455
Description General program administration.

Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
N/A
Location Description Citywide
Planned Activities City of Santee administrative resources for the FY 2022/2023 CDBG program.
2 Project Name Program Administration - Fair Housing -CSA San Diego Target Area
Goals Supported Fair Housing
Needs Addressed Fair Housing
Funding CDBG: $15,500
Description Provide fair housing counseling and referral services. Conduct fair housing testing.

Target Date 6/30/2023
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
19 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Up to 150 residents will receive assistance with fair housing issues and landlord/tenant disputes.

Location Description Citywide.

Planned Activities Provide counseling and referral services to persons alleging violations of Fair Housing laws and persons seeking information and/or resolution regarding conflicts between tenants and landlords.
3 Project Name Public Services - East County Family YMCA Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Residents
Funding CDBG: $3,750
Description Provides class and program fees (scholarships) for low- and moderate-income youth ages 5 to 13.

Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
This activity will benefit up to 59 low-income and disadvantaged youth and teens (Kindergarten thru 8th Grade) in Santee schools.

Location Description East County (Cameron Family) YMCA, 10123 Riverwalk Drive, Santee, CA 92071
4 Project Name Public Services - Crisis House
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Residents
Funding CDBG: $5,000
Description Homeless prevention/resolution through case management, food, shelter and referrals.

Target Date 6/30/2023
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
20 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Crisis House anticipates serving approximately 190 City of Santee residents. All will be at or below low- to moderate-income levels.

Location Description Citywide.

Planned Activities Address homeless issues through case management. Provide food, shelter vouchers and referrals.
5 Project Name Public Services - ElderHelp San Diego
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Residents
Funding CDBG: $6,500
Description Independent living support for Santee Seniors through case management and referrals.

Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
ElderHelp of San Diego anticipates serving 40 older adults, with an average age of greater than 75, in the City of Santee. Ninety-six percent of those served are either low income or very low-income person, many of which are disabled.

Location Description Citywide.

Planned Activities Provide grocery delivery and case management and services through a trained social worker to help seniors remain in their homes by providing referrals and information.
6 Project Name Public Services - Meals on Wheels Greater San Diego Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Residents
Funding CDBG: $5,000
Description Administer home delivered meals to elder adults, most of whom are low- to extremely-low income.

Target Date 6/30/2023
DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
21 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
Meals on Wheels anticipates serving 83 unduplicated homebound low-income seniors in the city of Santee.

Location Description Citywide.

Planned Activities Provide meals to homebound Santee residents, including seniors and persons with special needs.
7 Project Name Public Services - Santee Food Bank
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Resident
Funding CDBG: $16,717
Description Provide emergency food assistance to community residents.

Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
The Santee Food Bank anticipates serving 15,350 Santee residents in Program Year 2022.

Location Description Program serves residents citywide. Santee Food Bank is located at 9715 Halberns Blvd, Santee, CA 92071.

Planned Activities Provide an emergency food assistance and commodity distribution. 8 Project Name Public Services - Voices for Children
Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Provide Public Services
Needs Addressed Public Services for LMI-Resident
Funding CDBG: $5,000
Description Support Services-Abused and Neglected Foster Children Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
The Voices for Children anticipates serving two foster children with two Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASAs). CASAs are volunteers who provide a single child or sibling group with comprehensive advocacy in court and the community.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
22 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Location Description Citywide.

Planned Activities Provide CASAs for foster children in Santee. 9 Project Name Public Infrastructure – Citywide ADA Pedestrian Ramp Project Target Area Citywide
Goals Supported Improve community infrastructure and facilities.

Needs Addressed Infrastructure improvements in Low-and Moderate-Income Communities
Funding CDBG: $207,254
Description Citywide installation of ADA compliant pedestrian ramps at locations where no ramp exists and the retrofitting of existing pedestrian ramps to conform with current ADA Standards.

Target Date 6/30/2023
Estimate the number and
type of families that will
benefit from the proposed
activities
The project will benefit 3,557 Santee residents citywide that have “ambulatory difficulties” and 1,232 residents that have “vision difficulties” according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2019 American Community Survey.

Location Description ADA Pedestrian Ramps to be installed or improved citywide. All eligible intersections without pedestrian ramps and all non-ADA compliant pedestrian ramps will be improved in the City’s low and moderate-income census block groups.

Planned Activities Citywide ADA Pedestrian Ramp Project is planned to start construction in Program Year 2022.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
23 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-50 Geographic Distribution - 91.420, 91.220(f)
Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed The geographic priority area for available CDBG resources is the City of Santee in its entirety. Public improvements which may occur in Program Year 2022 will be located within a CDBG-eligible census tract or otherwise qualified area.

Geographic Distribution
Target Area Percentage of Funds
Citywide
Table 8 - Geographic Distribution
Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The geographic priority area for available CDBG resources is the City of Santee in its entirety. CDBG resources were allocated based on the quality and quantity of applications submitted. The allocation of CDBG in Program Year 2022 to fund public facilities will likely occur citywide with an emphasis on completing all non-ADA compliant pedestrian ramp locations in CDBG-eligible low- and moderateincome areas and this rationale will continue through the Consolidated Plan planning period.

Discussion
The allocation of CDBG in Program Year 2022 to fund public infrastructure will likely occur in CDBGeligible low- and moderate-income areas and citywide as discussed above and this rationale will continue through the Consolidated Plan planning period.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
24 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-75 Barriers to affordable housing -91.420, 91.220(j) Introduction
The City of Santee has a long record of supporting affordable housing. The City has adopted numerous provisions in its Zoning Ordinance that facilitate a range of residential development types and encourage affordable housing, including flexible development standards, density bonus provisions, and reasonable accommodation procedures for persons with disabilities. In addition, the City and its former Redevelopment Agency have provided direct financial assistance to support affordable housing projects.

The loss of Redevelopment Housing Funds after the dissolution of redevelopment in California in 2012, combined with reductions in federal HOME funds, has impaired the City’s ability to provide direct financial for future affordable housing production in the City.

In addition to funding constraints, the primary barrier to the provision of affordable housing in the City of Santee is the lack of vacant land suitable for residential development. Private lands owners hold much of the underdeveloped and residentially zoned land in the City. This calls for alternative policy tools such as lot consolidation and/or demolition of existing older structures to accommodate higher density infill development.

Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment
The City firmly believes that its policies and current practices do not create barriers to affordable housing. In 2020, the City participated in the update of the Regional Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice, in which it reviewed various city policies and regulations and has determined that none of these is an impediment to housing.

Discussion
The city will continue to review any new policies and procedures to ensure they do not serve as an actual constraint to development.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
25 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
AP-85 Other Actions - 91.420, 91.220(k)
Introduction
This section of the Program Year 2022 City of Santee Annual Action Plan includes the actions planned to address the obstacles in meeting underserved needs, to foster and maintain affordable housing, reduce lead-based paint hazards, reduce the number of families in poverty, develop the institutional structure and enhance coordination between public and private housing and social services agencies.

Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs The primary obstacle to meeting all of the identified needs, including those identified as priorities, is the general deficiency of funding resources available to the public and private agencies that serve the needs of low- and moderate-income residents. The elimination of redevelopment agencies significantly impacted the city's efforts to maintain infrastructure, expand housing and promote economic development. Furthermore, entitlement grants have leveled off over recent years, further stretching funds available to provide increasing needs for services and meet the City’s needs. Santee will seek to remedy obstacles by exploring alternative funding vehicles, leveraging resource investments to the maximum feasible degree and exploring new sources of municipal revenue generation.

Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing Santee will continue efforts to maintain and improve the infrastructure of the city’s low- and moderateincome neighborhoods as well as assist residents by helping them acquire and/or maintain affordable housing in the community. The city plans on funding specific activities that will improve the quality of life for seniors and persons with special needs, including those with ambulatory and vision difficulty, as well as strengthen the local provision of homeless services and homeless prevention services.

Additionally, the City is currently in the process of updating its Housing Element. The Housing Element is the City’s main housing policy and planning document that identifies housing needs and constraints, sets forth goals and policies that address these needs and constraints, and plans for projected housing needs for all income levels over an eight-year planning period that coincides with a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA).

Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards
The City of Santee requires that all federally-funded projects be tested for lead-based paint and abate hazards as needed. Lead-based paint warnings are distributed with applications for property related assistance. All applicants are required to sign and return the lead-based paint warning to verify that they have read its contents and are aware of the dangers lead-based paint presents. Factors such as housing age and condition and the age of household members are taken into consideration when DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
26 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
determining lead-based paint danger.

Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families The City of Santee seeks to reduce the number of people living in poverty by continuing to implement its anti-poverty strategy incorporating housing assistance and supportive services. A major partner in reducing poverty in Santee is the County, which administers the CalWORKs Program. CalWORKs provides cash aid to needy families to cover the cost of essentials like housing, healthcare, and clothing.

It also supports job training through the County and the Community College Districts. The County also administers CalFresh, the federally funded food assistance program that is widely regarded as one of the most impactful anti-poverty programs in the country.

As a means of reducing the number of persons with incomes below the poverty line, the City will coordinate its efforts with those of other public and private organizations serving lower income residents.

Actions planned to develop institutional structure
As the administrator of block grant programs, Department of Development Services staff collaborates with City departments and outside agencies to implement the objectives established in the Consolidated Plan. The City conducts annual monitoring visits with grant subrecipients to review administrative practices and activity effectiveness.

Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies
Santee is committed to fostering coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies. The City of Santee regularly deals with residential development entities that are both profit and non-profits. The city will continue to work with such organizations to foster the provision of affordable housing in the region and connect such housing organizations with social service providers operating and serving the City of Santee.

Discussion
In the course of monitoring CDBG-financed public services/resources to local services agencies, the City will endeavor to strengthen coordination with public and private affordable housing organizations and the San Diego County Housing Authority. Santee will continue to address the needs of persons experiencing Homelessness in relation to both physical and mental/behavioral health needs. Santee participates in a regional Continuum of Care plan.

DRAFT
Annual Action Plan
2022
27 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 06/30/2018)
Program Specific Requirements
AP-90 Program Specific Requirements - 91.420, 91.220(l)(1,2,4) Introduction
The following identifies additional resources available for allocation to Program Year 2021 activities.

Also identified are the amount of urgent need and percentage expended on activities that benefit persons of low- and moderate- income are provided.

Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out.

1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 0

2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee's strategic plan. 0

3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 0

4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan 0

5. The amount of income from float-funded activities 0
Total Program Income: 0
Other CDBG Requirements

1. The amount of urgent need activities 0

2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income.Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. 100.00% Discussion
The City of Santee plans to expend all of its CDBG resources for the benefit of low- and moderateincome persons.

STAFF REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE “PROSPECT ESTATES II” MAJOR REVISION (MJR2022-1) TO TENTATIVE MAP (TM2016-3) AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMIT (DR2016-4) TO WAIVE THE REQUIREMENT OF UNDERGROUNDING OVERHEAD FACILITIES FOR A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION CONSISTING OF 38 CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 15 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES LOCATED ON A 6.8-ACRE SITE ON PROSPECT AVENUE AT MARROKAL LANE (APN 383-112-32 AND 383-112-55).

APPLICANT: M. GRANT REAL ESTATE, INC. (MICHAEL GRANT)

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 27, 2022
A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the East County Californian on April 15, 2022.

A total of 322 owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the project site and other interested parties were notified by US Mail on April 14, 2022. Notices were also hand-delivered to the coaches in the Mission Gorge Villa MHP that front the development site and provided to the park management office on April 14, 2022.

Staff Report, April 27, 2022
MJR2022-1

A. SITUATION AND FACTS

1. Requested by ............................. M. Grant Real Estate, Inc. (Michael Grant)

2. Land Owner………………………. Prospect Estates II, LLC (APN: 383-112-32) and M__ Grant_ Real Estate, INC (APN: 383-112-55)

3. Type and Purpose of Request …. Major Revision to a Tentative Map and a Development Review Permit

4. Location ………………………….. Prospect Avenue at Marrokal Lane (APN: 383-112-32 and 383-112-55)

5. Site Area …………………………. 6.8 Acres

6. Number of lots …………………… 2 existing / 1-lot condominium with 38 dwelling units_ and 15 single-family lots are proposed

7. Hillside Overlay ........................... No

8. Existing Zoning R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) & R-7______ (Medium Density Residential)

9. Surrounding Zoning..................... North: R-7 (Medium Density Residential) South: R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential)
East: R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) / R-7
(Medium Density Residential)
West: R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) _____

10. General Plan Designation ……… R-7 (Medium Density Residential) (APN:383-112-32) R-2 (Low-Medium Density Residential) (APN: 383-
112-55)

11. Existing Land Use ...................... APN: 383-112-32 contains a single-family home____ APN: 383-112-55 is vacant____________________

12. Surrounding Land Use ............... North: Vacant
South: Single family residential
East: Detached condominiums & single family
residential
West: Mission Gorge Villa Mobile Home Park (MHP)

13. Terrain........................................ The topography on the site slopes from south to north with the lowest point of the site near the northeast
corner.

14. Environmental Status ................. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (State Clearinghouse Number 2018051040) was previously
adopted. The project would not result in any new
additional significant impacts, nor would it
substantially increase the severity of previously
Staff Report, April 27, 2022
MJR2022-1

anticipated significant impacts.

15. APN............................................. 383-112-32 and 383-112-55

16. Within Airport Influence Area....... The project is within Airport Influence Area 2 and does not require a consistency review with the Gillespie
Field Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP).

B. BACKGROUND
On January 28, 2022 the applicant requested a Major Revision to waive the requirement for undergrounding utilities along Marrokal Lane. Santee Municipal Code (SMC) Section 11.24.100 states “In exceptional circumstances the property owner may request that the City defer/waive the requirement to underground utilities. The City Council will conduct a public hearing and allow the applicant to present evidence supporting deferment/waiver.” To process the waiver request, the applicant must provide the following for a public hearing:
• A fee in the amount established by resolution of the City Council - A Major Revision Application and fee was submitted.
• A letter detailing the extenuating circumstances supporting a deferment/waiver - A letter was provided by Development Contractor, Inc. (Exhibit B) • Written, itemized cost estimates for undergrounding from SDG&E or an undergrounding consultant
- Not provided.
• A plat map showing size and location of all utility lines and facilities on-site and adjacent to the site
- A conceptual dry utility plan and aerial utility map (Exhibit C) was provided which identifies the existing overhead lines along Marrokal Lane and Prospect Avenue. The plan indicates “Existing overhead lines (servicing the mobile home park) along Marrokal Lane will not be undergrounded.” and identifies a section of existing overhead lines along Prospect Avenue that will be undergrounded.
• Electronic images of all utility lines involved in the request for deferment/waiver - Photos are provided (Exhibit D).

Staff Report, April 27, 2022
MJR2022-1

C. ANALYSIS
Overview:

The applicant states that undergrounding the utilities along Marrokal Lane is onerous and does not serve the purpose of the City’s ordinance. In addition, the applicant states that the requirement to underground is unclear and ambiguous in that it requires partial undergrounding or a portion of existing overhead facilities.

SMC Section 11.24.100 requires all new and all existing utilities within the boundaries of the project and within the half street abutting the project to be placed underground.

Limitations and exemptions are allowed under certain circumstances (see text of Section 11.24.100 attached as Exhibit A); however, Staff does not believe the project or applicant has demonstrated they meet the limitation or exemption requirements.

As part of the TM and DR approval in 2019, the project was conditioned to underground the existing utilities along Prospect Avenue abutting the project site (north side only) as required by SMC Section 11.24.100. In addition, the project was conditioned to underground the existing utilities along Marrokal Lane because the utilities are within the boundaries of the project as required by SMC Section 11.24.100.

Thus, Resolution 096-2019 was adopted with the following condition of approval:

30. Applicant shall place all new utilities required to serve the project underground.

No overhead facilities or extension of overhead facilities is permitted. In addition, the applicant shall underground any existing overhead facilities onsite and underground any overhead facilities adjacent to the project to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. Adjacent facilities are defined as existing overhead facilities in the abutting half street and may include extension of the undergrounding to either side of the project to the nearest existing utility pole.

Applicant shall underground all existing power and communication transmission lines, facilities and ancillaries along Marrokal Lane to the maximum extent possible. This may include reduction in height of existing poles and may require the addition of new service poles to provide overhead support of the existing services to the mobile home park (Mission Gorge Villa) units located west of the project site.

It should be noted that the condition was drafted to underground utilities to the maximum extent possible and to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services. This allows the project to not underground existing overhead services from Marrokal Lane and west to the MHP as it is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). It also allows for modifications to the ultimate design plan which is also required to comply with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) requirements.

Staff Report, April 27, 2022
MJR2022-1

Staff requested from the applicant but did not receive preliminary plans from SDG&E and / or a utility consultant demonstrating compliance with the condition of approval.

In addition, a note was added to the improvement plans to allow for this concern to be deferred until a later date so that undergrounding plans could be properly prepared by SDG&E and or a utility consultant for staff review and approval.

The Rancho Fanita Villas (TM2005-5) project located adjacent to Prospect Estates II is currently under construction and is also required to underground the overhead facilities. The issued grading plans for Rancho Fanita Villas identify the undergrounding requirement with the intention to underground the overhead utilities along the project’s property frontage along Marrokal Lane. Staff is concerned that granting a waiver to the Prospect Estates II project will establish a precedent to challenge this requirement on other projects that are, or have been conditioned with this same requirement which has been in effect since 1988.

Environmental Status:

A Mitigated Negative Declaration (AEIS 2016-8) (State Clearinghouse Number 2018051040) was previously adopted in 2019. The project would not result in any new additional significant impacts, nor would it substantially increase the severity of previously anticipated significant impacts.

D STAFF RECOMMENDATION

1. Conduct and close the Public Hearing; and

2. Deny the application for Major Revision MJR2022-1
Exhibit A
Santee Municipal Code 11.24.100

11.24.100 Undergrounding of utilities—Required.

All new and all existing overhead utilities within the boundaries of the project and within the half street abutting the project must be placed underground except as indicated below. Undergrounding of electrical lines of 69 kv or greater will not be required.

A. Limitations. At the discretion of the approval authority, undergrounding requirements may be limited to placement of conduit for future undergrounding of utilities in the following situations:

1. Where the value of the building improvement is less than 25% of the current market value of all buildings on the lot in consideration; and

2. Where the length of frontage to be under-grounded is less than 200 feet but more than 50 feet.

B. Exemptions. The following are exempt from undergrounding utilities in the adjacent right-of-way:

1. Single-family dwellings in an area where most utilities have been undergrounded, but the value of the building improvement is less than 50% of the current market value of all buildings on the lot;

2. Single-family dwellings in a built-out area where overhead utilities have not been undergrounded in the neighborhood, and there are no plans for undergrounding these utilities;

3. Any unit or development which has 50 feet or less frontage that includes overhead utilities;

4. Single-family dwelling replacements when the existing residential unit has been completely removed from the lot in a built-out neighborhood, and there are no plans for overhead facilities to be undergrounded in the foreseeable future.

C. Exemption. Utilities which serve properties outside the project boundaries and which are not adjacent to the street frontage.

D. In-Lieu Cash Deposits. Where the City Engineer determines that undergrounding the utilities is impractical, the undergrounding improvements may be deferred and an in-lieu cash deposit collected by the City in the amount equal to the estimated cost of undergrounding of such utilities.

E. Deferment/Waivers. In exceptional circumstances the property owner may request that the City defer/waive the requirement to underground utilities. The City Council will conduct a public hearing and allow the applicant to present evidence supporting deferment/waiver. The owner/applicant must provide the following with the application for a public hearing:

1. A fee in the amount established by resolution of the City Council to cover the cost of the public hearing;

2. A letter detailing the extenuating circumstances supporting a deferment/waiver;

3. Written, itemized cost estimates for undergrounding from the appropriate utility companies or an undergrounding consultant;
Exhibit A

4. A plat map, prepared on 11-inch by 17-inch paper, showing size and location of all utility lines and facilities on-site and adjacent to the site;

5. Electronic images of all utility lines involved in the request for deferment/waiver.

If the Council elects to defer the undergrounding requirement, the applicant must enter into an agreement with the City to accept the establishment of an undergrounding district at a future date and waiving the right to protest against such a district. The agreement must be binding on the heirs, successors, and assigns of the property owner, and must be recorded against the property. (Ord. 564 § 3, 2019)

Exhibit B
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS
SS

SS CATV TEL TC CATV TEL TC
CATV

TEL TC CATV TEL TC
CATV

TEL TC MARROKAL LANE

MISSION
ROAD
GORGE

MESA ROAD

PROSPECT

AVE ANLEE DRIVE CLIFFORD HEIGHTS ROAD PLACID VIEW DRIVE FANITA DRIVE OUR WAY

PROSPECT
FIELDS
125
52 24' 28'
Joint Utility Trench
(Adjust Path to Avoid Conflicts) 4'
36'
18' 18'
52'
6' 10'
℄

R/W R/W STREET PROFILE
2% 2%

5.5'
TYPICAL SECTION 52' R/W
2%
SW
2%
TRENCH ℄
1'
HH/PB

4.5'

PROPOSED MARROKAL LANE
Joint Utility Trench
(Adjust Path to Avoid Conflicts)
30'
15' 15'
42' 4' 8'
℄
SW

STREET PROFILE
2%
4'
TYPICAL SECTION 42' R/W
2%
PB
3' SW
2%
TRENCH ℄
1'
PL PL
4'
TENNIS LANE (20+00.00 TO 21+53)
Joint Utility Trench
(Adjust Path to Avoid Conflicts) 4'
26'
13' 13'
40'
6' 8'
℄

R/W R/W STREET PROFILE
2% 2%
4'
TYPICAL SECTION 40' R/W
2%
SW
2%
TRENCH ℄
3'PME
4'
Joint Utility Trench
(Adjust Path to Avoid Conflicts)
30'
15' 15'
42'
4' 8'
℄
SW

STREET PROFILE
2%
4'
TYPICAL SECTION 42' R/W
2%
PB
3' SW
2%
TRENCH ℄
1'
PL PL
4'
TENNIS LANE (21+53 TO 24.12)
Joint Utility Trench
(Adjust Path to Avoid Conflicts)
36'
18' 18'
52'-56'
8'-10'
4'-6'
℄
SW

STREET PROFILE
2%
4'-6'
TYPICAL SECTION 52-56' PUE
2%
PB
3' SW
2%
TRENCH ℄
1'
PL PL
4'
KEANE WAY (11+23 TO 13+70.11)
8'-10'
WIMBLEDON CIRCLE (1+00 TO 2+68.05)
LEGEND
ELEC. 17"X30" PULL BOX
ELEC. 46"X48" TRANSFORMER

PROPOSED STREET LIGHT LOCATION

TELCO PULL BOX

CHARTER PULL BOX

JOINT TRENCH

ELECTRIC CONDUIT

COMMUNICATIONS CONDUIT

GAS MAINLINE

WORKING CLEARANCE

WINDOW CLEARANCE
ELEC. 3'X6' HANDHOLE
TEL
CATV
GRADE
18" NATIVE SOIL

BACKFILL
12" SAND IMPORT
12" SAND IMPORT

TELEPHONE & CATV CONDUITS

JOINT TRENCH PROFILE
(ELECTRIC, TELEPHONE, CATV & GAS)
18" WIDE
℄
18"
T

G GAS MAIN
12" SAND IMPORT
E
1" SAND IMPORT

ELECTRIC CONDUITS

TV TV T

DRAWING HISTORY
JOB NO.

SHEET DESCRIPTION BY DATE
1130 Via Callejon
San Clemente, CA 92673
949.218.8500

CREATED

REVISIONS
STATUS
of
DATE DRAWN / PM:

SCALE
F
O
P R
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
B
Y
P
R
O
J
E
C
T Property of Morrow Management - San Clemente, CA P
R
E
P
A
R
E
D
F
O
R
MGC202

PRELIMINARY
10/08/2021
1" = 60'
1 1 HT/KM
Michael Grant Companies
Santee, CA
Prospect Estates 2
Santee, California
Tract 2016-03
Dry Utility Composite
Initial Composite HT 09/30/21

TC COMPETITIVE ACCESS PULL BOX

EXISTING

OVERHEAD LINES
(SERVICING THE

MOBILE HOME

PARK) ALONG

MAROKAL LANE

WILL NOT BE

UNDERGROUNDED

ONLY THIS

SECTION OF

EXISTING

OVERHEAD LINES

ALONG PROSPECT

AVENUE WILL BE

UNDERGROUNDED
Utility Plan
Exhibit C
Exhibit C
Aerial Utility Map

Marrokal Lane
Exhibit D
Exhibit D
Prospect Avenue
Site Plan
Exhibit E

1 Memorandum of Understanding
Between
the San Diego County Sheriff's Department
and
the City of Santee
For the Sheriff’s Safe Santee Program
Parties
This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is made between the County of San Diego Sheriff's Department (“SHERIFF”) and the City of Santee, a California municipal corporation and charter city (“CITY”). The parties to this MOU may be referred to herein collectively as the "Parties" or individually as a "Party".

Recitals
WHEREAS, the SHERIFF has created a video-sharing program, known as the Safe Santee program, that allows local businesses and residents to share live video footage with the SHERIFF in order to facilitate the monitoring of various locations throughout the City of Santee (“PROGRAM”); and
WHEREAS, the City desires to cooperate with the SHERIFF in implementing the PROGRAM.

THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and promises to set forth below, the Parties hereto agree as follows:

1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein by this reference.

2. Responsibility of SHERIFF: SHERIFF agrees to manage PROGRAM. This includes accessing live video footage from local businesses and residents that choose to voluntarily share live video footage. Video recordings may be voluntarily collected from the individual or business if SHERIFF believes that the video has evidentiary value on an investigation.

3. Responsibility of CITY: CITY authorizes SHERIFF to utilize CITY logo for PROGRAM.

CITY acknowledges that SHERIFF will manage PROGRAM within CITY.

4. Administration of MOU: Each Party identifies the following individual to serve as the authorized administrative representative for that Party. Any Party may change its administrative representative by notifying the other Party in writing of such change. Any such change shall become effective upon the receipt of such written notice by the other Party to this MOU. Notice of the authorized representative shall be sent to each Party as follows:
2 Sheriff Representative City Representative
Captain Michael Rand
Captain
2751 Alpine Blvd.

Alpine, CA 91901
Telephone: 619-956-4002
Email Address: [email protected]
Marlene Best
City Manager
10601 Magnolia Avenue
Santee, California 92071
Telephone:619-258-4100 x. 295
Email Address: [email protected]

5. Representation: The SHERIFF represents that it is operating the PROGRAM in compliance with all applicable federal, State, County, and local laws, rules, and regulations, current and hereinafter enacted.

6. Public Records Act: SHERIFF and CITY are public agencies subject to the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”). If either SHERIFF or CITY are subject to a CPRA request from a third party for records related to the PROGRAM, SHERIFF will be solely responsible for responding to the CPRA request for records in SHERIFF's possession and producing the relevant records. As it relates to SHERIFF documents, SHERIFF shall determine, at is sole discretion, whether information requested is or is not subject to disclosure under the CPRA. As it relates to documents solely in the possession of CITY, CITY will determine whether information requested is or is not subject to disclosure under the CPRA and produce the relevant records, after consulting with SHERIFF if necessary.

7. Indemnity: SHERIFF hereby agrees to defend and indemnify the CITY, its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against CITY, to the extent arising out of the acts or omissions of SHERIFF in the performance of this MOU. At its sole discretion, CITY may participate at its own expense in the defense of any claim, action or proceeding, but such participation shall not relieve SHERIFF of any obligation imposed by this MOU. CITY shall notify SHERIFF promptly of any claim, action or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. This provision shall in no way modify or supersede the defense and indemnification provisions of Section VI of the Agreement between the City of Santee, the County of San Diego, and the San Diego County Sheriff for General and Specialized Law Enforcement and Traffic Services.

8. Governing Law: This MOU shall be governed, interpreted, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

9. Third Party Beneficiaries Excluded: This MOU is intended solely for the benefit of the SHERIFF and CITY. Any benefit to any third party is incidental and does not confer on any third party to this MOU any rights whatsoever regarding the performance of this MOU. Any attempt to enforce provisions of this MOU by third Parties is specifically prohibited.
3 10. Amendments to MOU: Any party may propose amendments to this MOU by providing written notice of such amendments to the other Party. This MOU may only be amended by a written amendment signed by all Parties.

11. Severability: If any terms or provisions of this MOU or the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall, to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this MOU, or the application of such term and provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and every other term and provision of this MOU shall be valid and enforced to the maximum extent permitted by law.

12. Full Agreement: This MOU represents the full and entire agreement between the Parties and supersedes any prior written or oral agreements that may have existed.

13. Scope of MOU: This MOU only applies to the PROGRAM described herein and does not set forth any additional current or future obligations or agreements between the Parties, except that the Parties may by written amendment amend the scope of this MOU.

14. Term: This MOU shall become effective on the date all the Parties have signed this MOU and shall continue for five (5) years.

15. Termination For Convenience. Any party may, by written notice stating the extent and effective date, terminate this MOU for convenience in whole or in part, with a 30-day advance notice to the respective Parties.

16. Counterparts: This MOU may be executed in any number of separate counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which when taken togethershall constitute one and the same instrument.

17. Representations and Warranties: Each of the Parties to this MOU represents and warrants that it has the full right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and perform the Party’s respective obligations hereunder and that such obligations shall be binding upon such Party without the requirement of the approval or consent of any other person or entity in connection herewith.

Remainder of this page is intentionally left blank
4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this MOU is entered into by the SHERIFF and CITY by and through the signature of the Parties’ authorized representative(s), all as set forth below.

COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO SHERIFF'S

DEPARTMENT,
a public agency
By:

Date:

CITY OF SANTEE,
a California Charter City
By:

Date:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP,
By:

Shawn Hagerty
City Attorney

RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE

ADOPTING THE CITY OF SANTEE VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
CONTAINING “VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED” THRESHOLDS OF

SIGNIFICANCE FOR PURPOSES OF ANALYZING TRANSPORTATION

IMPACTS UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq. [“State CEQA Guidelines”]) encourage public agencies to develop and publish generally applicable “thresholds of significance” to be used in determining the significance of a project’s environmental effects; and
WHEREAS, State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(a) defines a threshold of significance as “an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant”; and WHEREAS, State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(b) requires that thresholds of significance must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulations, developed through a public review process, and be supported by substantial evidence; and WHEREAS, pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.7(c), when adopting thresholds of significance, a public agency may consider thresholds of significance adopted or recommended by other public agencies provided that the decision of the agency is supported by substantial evidence; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill 743, enacted in 2013 and codified in Public Resources Code section 21099, required changes to the State CEQA Guidelines regarding the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects; and WHEREAS, in 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (“OPR”) proposed, and the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted, new State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 that identifies vehicle miles traveled (“VMT”) – meaning the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project – as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impacts; and WHEREAS, as a result, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA; and
WHEREAS, State CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 went into effect on July 1, 2020; and
WHEREAS, the City of Santee, following a public hearing process, wishes to adopt the VMT Analysis Guidelines, which set forth the thresholds of significance for determining the significance of transportation impacts and screening criteria; and WHEREAS, on April 27, 2022, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this Resolution, at which all persons interested were given an opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTEE:

SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. In its capacity as lead agency, the City of Santee City Council has evaluated the proposed VMT Analysis Guidelines to determine whether the VMT Analysis Guidelines are subject to environmental review under Public Resources Code, section 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”). The City Council for the City of Santee hereby finds and determines that the VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a project within the meaning of Public Resources Code, section 21065 and State CEQA Guidelines, section 15378. The VMT Analysis Guidelines would not lead to a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the physical environment. The VMT Analysis Guidelines are an administrative activity of the City, providing guidance to property owners, project developers, applicants, and proponents for determining the significance of transportation impacts of land use projects under CEQA. The VMT Analysis Guidelines do not approve any specific development and would not lead to any particular physical change to the environment.

Thus, the VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a project under Public Resources Code, section 21065 and State CEQA Guidelines, section 15378(b)(5). For these reasons, the VMT Analysis Guidelines are not subject to further environmental review under CEQA.

SECTION 3. Based upon substantial evidence set forth in the record of proceedings, including but not limited to the April 27, 2022 City Council Staff Report on the VMT Analysis Guidelines, the City of Santee hereby adopts the VMT Analysis Guidelines for measuring project transportation impacts under CEQA, which are attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution.

SECTION 5. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at City Hall for the City of Santee, located at 10601 Magnolia Avenue, Santee, California 92071. The City Clerk is the custodian of the record of proceedings.

SECTION 6. Staff is directed to file a Notice of Exemption with the County of San Diego within five (5) working days of approval of the VMT Analysis Guidelines.

ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Santee, California, at a Regular Meeting thereof held this 27th day of April, 2022, by the following roll call vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

JOHN W. MINTO, MAYOR
ATTEST:

ANNETTE ORTIZ, CMC, CITY CLERK
City of Santee VMT
Analysis Guidelines
April 13, 2022
Prepared by:

Attachment A to Resolution
Table of Contents

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background.............................................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 CEQA Changes Related to Evaluating Transportation Impacts ..........................................................................1

1.3 City General Plan Goals and Policies.............................................................................................................................1

1.4 VMT Guidelines Purpose....................................................................................................................................................2

1.5 SB743 Guidelines Objectives............................................................................................................................................3

1.6 City Review and Outside Agency Coordination........................................................................................................3

2. CEQA Requirements for VMT Analysis.................................................................................... 4

2.1 Overview...................................................................................................................................................................................4

2.2 Metrics and Methodology for Calculating VMT.......................................................................................................4

2.3 VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects ..............................................................................................................................8

2.4 VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects.................................................................................................................15

2.5 VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................................................16

2.6 Cumulative VMT Impacts.................................................................................................................................................17 Appendices
Appendix A: CEQA Transportation Analysis Screening Form Appendix B: Additional VMT Analysis Tools
Appendix C: Screening Criteria and Threshold Evidence
Appendix D: Existing Major Transit Stops and Existing High-Quality Transit Corridors Appendix E: Land Use Designations
Appendix F: Transportation Project Screening
Appendix G: VMT Mitigation Sample Calculation
List of Figures
Figure 1: VMT Analysis Process.................................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2: Santee VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Trends Based on SANDAG Regional Travel Model (ABM2+, Regional Plan 2021).............................................................................................................................. 18 List of Abbreviated Terms
ADT average daily traffic
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
City City of Santee
CSTDM California Statewide Travel Demand Model
EIR environmental impact report
GHG greenhouse gas
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
IX internal-to-external
LOS level of service
MTS Metropolitan Transit System
O-D origin-destination
OPR Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
TAZ transportation analysis zone
TDM transportation demand management
XI external-to-internal
XX external-to-external
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
1 1. Introduction

1.1 Background
The City of Santee’s (City) goal is to achieve a safe, efficient, accessible, and sustainable transportation system that meets the needs of all users. All transportation improvements and mitigation from proposed land development projects should be consistent with City-adopted plans and policies, as well as regional and state legislative and regulatory requirements.

City of Santee requires proposed land development and transportation projects to conduct a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) transportation impact analysis to assess potential impacts in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA VMT analysis). The City of Santee VMT Guidelines (VMT Guidelines) provide guidance for conducting VMT impact analysis.

1.2 CEQA Changes Related to Evaluating Transportation Impacts On September 27, 2013, Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) into law which changes transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance. A key element of this law is the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant transportation impacts under CEQA. The change was to balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

As a result, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) updated the CEQA Guidelines to establish new criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Based on feedback from the public, public agencies, and various organizations, OPR recommended that VMT be the primary metric for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3 (b) (1) Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. Other relevant considerations may include the effects of the project on transit and non-motorized travel.

SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from continuing to analyze local mobility in terms of delay or LOS as part of other plans (e.g., general plans); studies; congestion management plans; or transportation improvement plans, but these metrics may no longer constitute the basis for CEQA transportation impacts as of July 1, 2020.

1.3 City General Plan Goals and Policies
The City’s General Plan (adopted by City Council on October 25, 2017 via Resolution No. 114-2017) forms the foundation upon which all land use decisions in the City are based. The General Plan includes goals and policies that guide the City’s growth, and many of these policies relate to and support the intent of SB 743. The City has also adopted specific greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets and has completed the City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
2 Sustainable Santee Plan: The City’s Roadmap to Greenhouse Gas Reductions that identifies policies and programs designed to meet those targets. Among other things, approaches for reducing GHGs in the transportation sector address vehicle efficiency and low-carbon fuels, as well as measures designed to reduce annual VMT. VMT-reduction measures include alternatives to passenger vehicle travel, land use policies that incentivize compact development, and incentives and disincentives aimed at changing individual behavior through transportation demand management (TDM) practices.

SB743-Related General Plan Policies
The General Plan goals and policies that are most consistent with the intent of SB 743 are those regarding planned improvements, including districts that contain a mix of uses, an accessible and integrated multimodal network, and improvements that enhance connectivity to major transit stations1 . For example,
promoting integrated transportation and land use decisions that enhance smart growth development, requiring sidewalks along all classified streets designated on the Circulation Plan, requiring larger new developments to provide connections to existing and proposed bicycle routes, and encouraging employers to offer incentives to their employees to promote carpooling and other alternative modes are among the existing City’s policies that align with SB 743.

1.4 VMT Guidelines Purpose
The purpose of the VMT Analysis Guidelines is to provide thresholds of significance and analysis methodologies for analyzing the significance of transportation impacts under CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.3 and 15064.7. A threshold of significance is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant. The intent of the VMT Guidelines is to provide consistency in significance determinations to integrate environmental review with other environmental program planning and regulation.

The City may update the VMT Analysis Guidelines on an as-needed basis to reflect the state of practice methodologies and changes in CEQA requirements. As such, City staff will continually review the guidelines for applicability and coordinate with other jurisdictions and professionals to ensure the most recent guidance and best practices are being applied for project evaluation.

The VMT Analysis Guidelines are not binding on any decision maker and should not be substituted for the use of independent professional judgment and evaluation of evidence in the record. The City also reserves the right to request further, project-specific information in its evaluation that may not be identified or described in this document.
1 Based on OPR Technical Advisory on evaluating transportation impacts in CEQA (2018), Major transit station is defined as a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
3 1.5 SB743 Guidelines Objectives
The following objectives are intended to provide consistency between local, regional, and state policies in forecasting, describing, and analyzing the effects of land development on transportation and circulation for all transportation modes and users:
• Provide clear direction to applicants and consultants to better meet expectations, increase the efficiency of the review process, and minimize delays.
• Provide scoping procedures and recommendations for early coordination during the planning/ discretionary phases of a land development project.
• Provide guidance in determining when, what type, and how to prepare VMT transportation impact analysis.
• Help achieve consistency, uniformity, and accuracy in the preparation of VMT transportation impact analysis.
• Provide consistency and equity in the identification of mitigation measures for the transportation impacts generated by land development.
• Assist City staff in developing objective recommendations and project conditions of approval as part of the land development discretionary review process.

1.6 City Review and Outside Agency Coordination
VMT analysis studies will be reviewed by appropriate City of Santee staff. If a project will affect another agency or jurisdiction, such as the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), or neighboring cities, coordination with that agency or jurisdiction may be required and will be identified during the scoping process. City of Santee staff can provide guidance and contact information for other agencies or jurisdictions.

To assist the City with the review process, each applicant should submit a Scoping Agreement (Appendix A) before conducting a VMT analysis study.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
4 2. CEQA Requirements for VMT Analysis

2.1 Overview
In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines, including the incorporation of SB 743 modifications. OPR also published an update to its Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) to assist professional planners, land use officials, and CEQA practitioners. The Technical Advisory provides recommendations on how to evaluate transportation impacts under SB743 that agencies and other entities may use at their discretion. The Technical Advisory recommends the use of VMT as the preferred CEQA transportation metric. SB743 includes the following two legislative intent statements:

1. Ensure that the environmental impacts of traffic, such as noise, air pollution, and safety concerns, continue to be properly addressed and mitigated through the California Environmental Quality Act.

2. More appropriately balance the needs of congestion management with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of GHG emissions.

VMT is a metric that accounts for the number of vehicle trips generated and the length or distance of those trips. VMT does not directly measure traffic operations but instead is a measure of network use or efficiency, especially if expressed as a function of population or employment (e.g., VMT/capita). VMT tends to increase as land use density decreases and travel becomes more reliant on the use of the automobile due to the long distances between origins and destinations. VMT can also serve as a proxy for impacts related to energy use, air pollution emissions, GHG emissions, safety, and roadway maintenance.

The relationship between VMT and energy or emissions is based on fuel consumption. The traditional use of VMT in environmental impact analysis is to estimate mobile air pollution emissions, GHGs, and energy consumption, and the type of VMT metric reported for these additional impact areas typically differs from the metrics used for the transportation analysis.

2.2 Metrics and Methodology for Calculating VMT
In general, transportation VMT analysis for CEQA should be conducted using the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model. The model outputs can be used to produce VMT/capita, VMT/employee, and Total VMT.

There may be circumstances under which other tools and techniques should be used to perform VMT analysis. There are unique land uses that are not appropriately modeled using the SANDAG model, such as uses that have the majority of their activity on the weekends (the SANDAG Model produces weekday results) or projects that generate less than 2,4002 average daily trips (ADT). The applicant’s traffic 2 The ITE San Diego Task Force Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region, May 2019 recommend that projects with an estimated ADT of 2,400 or more run SANDAG model to calculate VMT impact.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
5 consultant should coordinate with City staff if a VMT estimate tool other than the SANDAG Model is proposed for use. Use of a tool other than the SANDAG Model should be discussed and approved by City staff in advance.

Appendix B includes additional tools that produce VMT forecasts or test VMT reduction strategies. Big data may also be used to validate model outputs.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
6 Summary of Metrics by Project Type
The following summarizes the appropriate metric for various types of projects. Detailed definitions of the metrics follow.
• Residential: VMT/capita
• General Employment: Work Tour VMT/employee (office and other miscellaneous employment) • Industrial Employment: Work Tour VMT/employee
• Regional Retail, Regional Recreational, or Regional Public Facilities: Change in total VMT (using the boundary method)
• Mixed-Use: Each project component is evaluated per the appropriate metric based on land use type (e.g., residential, employment, and retail)
• Transportation Project: Change in total VMT (using the boundary method) • Unique circumstances may require alternate metrics
VMT per Capita
VMT/capita is established by summing up the total daily VMT generated by residents of a geographic area and dividing it by the population of that geographic area. Total daily VMT includes all trip tours made by residents: home-based and non-home-based trip tours (i.e., all VMT for a resident for the entire day regardless of trip purpose or origin/destination). To analyze the VMT/capita for a proposed project, the total daily VMT generated by project residents is divided by the project resident population.

SANDAG has a procedure to produce VMT/capita; however, the SANDAG procedure to produce this metric only includes VMT generated within the SANDAG region by residents of the SANDAG region. For example, if a resident of San Diego County shops in Riverside County, the trip from their home to the shopping would only be included up to the County boundary. If a project is expected to produce consistent travel outside of the SANDAG region, the VMT outside of the region should be included in the analysis. To account for VMT generated by residents of the SANDAG region traveling outside of the region, the SANDAG model data should be appended with the VMT that occurs by SANDAG region residents outside of the region. Steps necessary to include VMT from all trips that enter or exit the SANDAG region are explained in the ITE White Paper: A Proposed Methodology for Adjustments to SANDAG Model-Produced VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Due to VMT Generated Outside the San Diego Region3.
3 ITE White Paper: A Proposed Methodology for Adjustments to SANDAG Model-Produced VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Due to VMT Generated Outside the San Diego Region, https://sandiegoite.org/tcm-task-force, March 22, 2021
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
7 Work Tour VMT per Employee
Work Tour VMT/employee is established by summing the total daily work related VMT generated by resident employees4 of a geographic area divided by the number of employees of that geographic area.

Total daily work related VMT includes all trip tours made by employees that are associated with work (, for example a worker’s commute trips and trips to/from lunch or other work related destinations). To analyze the Work Tour VMT/employee for a proposed project, the total daily work related VMT produced by the project’s employees is divided by the total number of employees. Note that “work tour VMT/employee” is simply called VMT/employee throughout this guidelines document.

The procedure developed by SANDAG to calculate VMT/employee by TAZ only accounts for VMT generated within the SANDAG region by employees who are also residents of the SANDAG region.

Employees that live outside of the region and travel into the SANDAG region for work are not accounted for because of the nature of the procedures used in the SANDAG model. If a project is expected to generate employees that live outside of the SANDAG region, or if directed by City staff, VMT associated with employees that live outside of SANDAG region can be accounted for using a manual method and adding the VMT to the SANDAG model output. Steps necessary to include VMT from all trips that enter or exit the SANDAG region are explained in the ITE White Paper: A Proposed Methodology for Adjustments to SANDAG Model-Produced VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Due to VMT Generated Outside the San Diego Region5.

Total VMT
Total VMT can be calculated by either of two methods – the Boundary Method or the Origin-Destination Method.

Boundary Method
Total daily VMT (Boundary Method) within a given area can be measured by multiplying the daily volume on every roadway segment by the length of every roadway segment within the area. This is called Boundary Method VMT. Examples of Total VMT (Boundary Method) are VMT within the SANDAG region, VMT within a defined planning area, or VMT within the market area to be served by the project.

This metric is used to analyze regional retail, service, recreational, regional public facilities, and transportation infrastructure projects.

Origin-Destination Method
Total daily VMT (Origin-Destination Method) within a given area can be calculated directly from model outputs by multiplying the origin-destination (O-D) trip matrix by the final assignment skims (O-D 4 Resident employees both live and work in the SANDAG region. 5 ITE White Paper: A Proposed Methodology for Adjustments to SANDAG Model-Produced VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Due to VMT Generated Outside the San Diego Region, https://sandiegoite.org/tcm-task-force, March 22, 2021
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
8 Method VMT). The total VMT value should be appended to include VMT from all trips that enter or exit the SANDAG region.

This metric is used to evaluate a regional project if that project is expected to draw trips from outside the region (e.g., an amusement park). In addition, the origin-destination method for calculating VMT is commonly used with analysis of other CEQA resource areas such as air quality, energy, and GHG.

2.3 VMT Analysis for Land Use Projects

2.3.1 Screening Criteria for CEQA VMT Analysis
The requirements to prepare a detailed transportation VMT analysis apply to all discretionary land development projects that are not exempt from CEQA, except those that meet at least one of the transportation screening criteria described below. A project that meets at least one of the screening criteria below would be presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact due to project characteristics and/or location. If evidence suggest that the project might have a significant impact despite meeting the below screening criteria, City staff reserves the discretion to request VMT analysis.

Appendix C provides context and justification/rationale for the screening criteria

1. Projects Located in a Transit-Accessible Area
Projects located within a half-mile radius of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a highquality transit corridor6 may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A map of existing major transit stops and existing stops along high-quality transit corridors is provided in Appendix D.

The presumption of a less-than-significant impact near these transit stops may not be appropriate if the project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio of less than 0.75
• Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City’s Municipal Code.
• Is inconsistent with SANDAG’s most recent Sustainable Communities Strategy or the land use growth assumption accommodated by the Land Use Element portion of the General Plan • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units
• Does not have basic walking and biking access to transit (e.g., sidewalks connecting to transit stops)
6 Major transit stop: a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. High quality transit corridor: a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute periods.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
9 2. Small Projects
Projects generating 500 or fewer net new daily vehicle trips may be presumed to have a less-thansignificant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Trips are based on the number of vehicle trips calculated using SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region or ITE trip generation rates with any alternative modes/location-based adjustments applied.

For information regarding the process for establishing the small project screening criteria see Appendix C.

3. Projects in a VMT-Efficient Area
A VMT-efficient area is any area within the City with an average VMT/capita or VMT/employee below the thresholds as compared to the baseline City/Regional VMT per capita for the TAZ that the project is located within. VMT efficient areas could be accessed through SANDAG’s SB743 VMT Webmaps7. Note that the TAZ maps consider the minimum amount of data necessary as a population of 300 residents or 500 employees per TAZ. If minimum data is not available in the desired TAZ, census tract data may be used for comparison. Image below demonstrate a snapshot of the SB743 VMT Webmap that shows VMT/Capita for Residents on a TAZ level using the 2016 Baseline Model.

Residential projects located within a VMT-efficient area may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A VMT-efficient area for residential projects is any area with an average VMT/capita 15% below the baseline City average for the TAZ that the project is located within.

General Employment projects located within a VMT-efficient area may be presumed to have a lessthan-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A VMT-efficient area for employment projects (excluding industrial employment projects) is any area with an average VMT/employee 15% below the baseline regional average for the TAZ that the project is located within. 7 San Diego Region SB743 VMT Maps (arcgis.com):
https://sandag.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=bb8f938b625c40cea14c825835519a2b City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
10 Industrial Employment projects located within a VMT-efficient area may be presumed to have a lessthan-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. A VMT-efficient area for industrial employment projects is any area with an average VMT/employee at or below the baseline regional average for the TAZ that the project is located within.

Mixed-Use projects located within a VMT-efficient area for each of its land uses may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Refer to the appropriate section for each land use included as a part of the mixed-use project to determine the definition of a VMT-efficient area for each land use.

4. Locally-Serving Retail Projects
Local serving retail generally improves the convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle travel. Local serving retail projects less than 50,000 square feet that are expected to draw approximately 75% of customers from the local area (roughly 3-miles) are presumed to have a less than significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. Retail projects that are between 50,000 square feet and 125,000 square feet with similar customer attraction (approximately 75% from local area) may also be presumed locally-serving; however, the city may require the applicant to provide a market analysis as evidence that the project is locally serving. Retail projects that are more than 125,000 square foot are required to conducted a VMT analysis unless the applicant provides market surveys to demonstrate that at least 75% of customers are attracted from the local population.

5. Locally-Serving Public Facilities
Public facilities that serve the surrounding community or public facilities that are passive use may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary. The following are considered locally serving public facilities:
• Transit centers
• Public schools
• Libraries
• Post offices
• Park-and-ride lots
• Police and fire facilities
• Parks and trailheads
• Government offices
• Passive public uses, including communication and utility buildings, water sanitation, and waste management
• Other public uses as shown in Appendix E or determined by City staff City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
11 6. Redevelopment Projects with Lower Total VMT
A redevelopment project may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary if the proposed project’s total project VMT is less than the existing land use’s total VMT and the CEQA action includes closing the existing land use.

7. Infill affordable housing
California’s Public Resources Code (PRC) §21061.3 defines infill as:
“Infill site” means a site in an urbanized area that meets either of the following criteria:
(a) The site has not been previously developed for urban uses and both of the following apply:
(1) The site is immediately adjacent to parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses, or at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses, and the remaining 25 percent of the site adjoins parcels that have previously been developed for qualified urban uses. (2) No parcel within the site has been created within the past 10 years unless the parcel was created as a result of the plan of a redevelopment agency. (b) The site has been previously developed for qualified urban uses.

Based on the ITE 11th Edition of the Trip Generation Manual, the affordable housing trip generation rate is approximately 30% lower than the multi-family (low-rise) rate. Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing balance, in turn, shortening commutes and reducing VMT. This suggests that it is possible to presume a blended affordable and market-rate residential project as having less than significant VMT impact.

City of Santee presumes deed-restricted affordable housing projects that meet the following conditions meet the City’s screening criteria and would not require a VMT analysis. • Is an infill project (note that most of the City of Santee is presumed to be an infill location); • Consists of a minimum of 52% affordable housing;
• Is within ½ mile radius of a transit stop or station; and • Project-provided parking does not exceed parking required by the City’s Municipal Code.

2.3.2 VMT Thresholds of Significance
Projects that DO NOT meet the above screening criteria must include a detailed evaluation of the VMT produced by the project. The significant thresholds and specific VMT metrics used to measure VMT are described by land use type below.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
12 • Residential: 15% below the City average VMT/capita • General Employment: 15% below the regional average VMT/employee • Industrial Employment: At or below regional average VMT/employee • Mixed-Use: Each project component is evaluated per the appropriate metric based on land use type (e.g., residential, employment, and retail)
• Regional Retail, Regional Recreational, or Regional Public Facilities: A net increase in total regional VMT using the boundary method
Appendix E provides land use designations to the primary land use categories above as well as unique project types and which land use category is appropriate for VMT analysis purposes.

Specific Plans or General Plan Amendments: The land use plan should be compared to the region overall. Comparison to the region is appropriate because large land use plans can have an effect on regional VMT (akin to how a regional retail project affects regional VMT). The significance thresholds described above apply to specific plans or General Plan Amendments. In addition, plan buildout/cumulative analysis is needed.

2.3.3 VMT Analysis Procedures
Projects that are not screened out must provide a detailed evaluation of the VMT produced by the project. In addition, Figure 1 displays how to conduct transportation VMT analysis by project type.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
13 Figure 1: VMT Analysis Process
Residential Projects
For projects that generate fewer than 2,400 daily unadjusted8 driveway trips: Identify the location of the project on the City’s VMT/capita map. The project’s VMT/capita will be considered the same as the VMT/capita of the TAZ as shown on the VMT/capita map. Compare the project’s VMT/capita to the threshold to determine if the impact is significant, or, if desired or requested by the City, input the project into the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model to determine the project’s VMT/capita. 8 Unadjusted trips is defined as total number of generated trips before any credits are taken for internal capture, alternative modes, or other credits.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
14 For projects that generate 2,400 or greater daily unadjusted driveway trips: Larger projects will typically be analyzed using a custom model run by inputting the project into the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model. To perform the analysis, all project land uses should be inputted, and the VMT/capita should be determined using the same method/scripts that SANDAG utilizes to calculate the VMT/capita threshold. Note that there may be some circumstances where the use of screening maps or other sketch modeling tools are appropriate for larger projects, especially if the project has the same characteristics of the land uses that are already contained in the TAZ where the project is located or if the project is unique in nature and project specific travel behavior information is available.

Employment Projects (Non-Industrial and Industrial)
For projects that generate fewer than 2,400 daily unadjusted driveway trips: Identify the location of the project on the City’s VMT/employee map. The project’s VMT/employee will be considered the same as the VMT/capita of the TAZ as shown on the VMT/employee map. Compare the project’s VMT/employee to the threshold to determine if the impact is significant, or, if desired or requested by the City, input the project into the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model to determine the project’s VMT/employee.

For projects that generate 2,400 or greater daily unadjusted driveway trips: Larger projects will typically be analyzed using a custom model run by inputting the project into the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model. To perform the analysis, all project land uses should be inputted, and the VMT/employee should be determined using the same method/scripts that SANDAG utilizes to calculate the VMT/employee threshold. There may be some circumstances where the use of screening maps or other sketch modeling tools are appropriate for larger projects, especially if the project has the same characteristics of the land uses that are already contained in the TAZ where the project is located or if the project is unique in nature and project specific travel behavior information is available.

Regional Retail Projects
Calculate the change to area VMT using the SANDAG Travel Demand Model (or other appropriate sketch models as coordinated with City Staff). To calculate the change in area VMT, the regional retail component of the project should be inputted into the travel demand model. The “with project regional retail” area VMT produced by the model run is compared to the “no project” area VMT.

If specific data exists about the travel behavior for the project such as big data9 or a detailed market study, this information may be used to conduct the VMT analysis because it typically provides more specificity than the SANDAG Travel Demand Model.

Mixed-Use Projects
Evaluate each project component per the appropriate metric based on land use type (e.g., residential, employment, and retail) as described above.
9 Big data is referred to the use of crowdsourced data such as GPS or Location-Based data collected from smartphones, connected vehicles, or similar data sources to estimate number of trips, trip length, duration, etc.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
15 Other Projects
Input the project into the SANDAG Regional Travel Demand Model for SANDAG to provide the project’s applicable VMT metric. To perform the analysis, all project land uses should be inputted, and the VMT metric that is appropriate based on the land use type should be determined using the methodology described in Section 2.2.

VMT Reductions
If the project includes transportation demand management (TDM) measures, the reduction in VMT due to each measure should be calculated and can be applied to the project VMT analysis. See Section 2.5 for resources for determining the reduction in VMT due to TDM measures.

The VMT reductions associated with project feature TDM should be applied to the appropriate metrics based on the project land uses. If the project does not include any TDM, then no reduction is taken.

The resulting VMT values should be compared to the appropriate threshold (described previously under VMT Thresholds of Significance) to determine whether the project results in a significant CEQA transportation impact due to VMT.

2.4 VMT Analysis for Transportation Projects
Projects that result in an increase in additional motor vehicle capacity (such as constructing a new roadway or adding more vehicle travel lanes to an existing roadway) have the potential to increase vehicle travel, referred to as “induced vehicle travel.”
Appendix F contains a list of transportation projects that, absent substantial evidence to the contrary, do not require an induced travel/VMT analysis since they typically do not cause substantial or measurable increases in VMT.

For all other projects, a VMT analysis must be done. To calculate the change in area VMT (boundary method), the project should be inputted into the travel demand model. The “with project” area VMT produced by the model run is compared to the “no project” area VMT. A net increase in area VMT indicates that the project has a significant impact.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
16 2.5 VMT Reduction and Mitigation Measures
To mitigate VMT impacts, the project
applicant must reduce VMT, which can
be done by either reducing the number
of automobile trips generated by the
project or by reducing the distance that
people drive. The following strategies
are available to achieve this:

1. Modify the project’s builtenvironment characteristics to reduce VMT generated by the
project.

2. Implement TDM measures to
reduce VMT generated by the
project.

Strategies that reduce single-occupant automobile trips or reduce travel distances are called TDM strategies. There are several resources for determining the reduction in VMT due to TDM measures, such as the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (“CAPCOA”) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (2021) (GHG Reduction Handbook) and the SANDAG Mobility Management Guidebook/VMT Reduction Calculator Tool. Both resources include equations that address the diminishing value or decreased effectiveness of TDM measures when those measures are used in combination. The equations below should be used by applicants to accurately quantify the effectiveness of a proposed TDM program.

Step 1: Calculate VMT Reduction under each sub-sector (A,B,C, …):

PA = 1 – [(1 − S1) ∗ (1 – S2) ∗ (1 – S3) ∗ …]
PA Combined VMT reduction for sub-sector A
S1,2,3,… VMT reduction from each individual strategy in sub-sector A Step 2: Calculate combined effectiveness of all sub-sectors:

PTOTAL = 1 – [(1 − PA) ∗ (1 – PB) ∗ (1 – PC) ∗ …]
PA,B,C,… Combined VMT reduction for each sub-sector from Step 1 Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse
Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing
Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing
Health and Equity
SANDAG Mobility Management
Guidebook, which includes
recommendations of VMTreducing measures.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
17 For a TDM Program consisting of many measures, care must be taken to verify that the calculated VMT reductions account for maximums allowed within each sub-sector and combined effectiveness across multiple sub-sectors. In addition, Projects that are in urban areas have a higher limit of effectiveness (i.e., they can result in higher VMT reductions) than those in suburban areas. Therefore, TDM measures must be selected based on the project’s size, location, and land uses for varying levels of implementation.

Note that the GHG Reduction Handbook also identifies measures appropriate at the project/site level and plan/community level to be combined separately. It is not appropriate to combine measures from the two categories together. The project/site level measures are appropriate for use for most applicants. If a plan/community level measure is desired, the applicant/consultant should coordinate with City staff.

Special attention should also be given to ensuring that measures are not double-counted through the transportation analysis process. For example, if a project identifies telecommuting as a reduction strategy, care should be taken to identify the level of telecommuting that has already been assumed as part of the travel demand model through coordination with SANDAG modeling staff or review of SANDAG model documentation available on SANDAG’s website.

An example VMT reduction calculation is provided showing quantified TDM measures for a sample mixed-use development project in Appendix G.

2.6 Cumulative VMT Impacts
Because VMT is a composite metric that will continue to be generated over time, a key consideration for cumulative scenarios is whether the rate of VMT generation gets better or worse in the long term. If the rate is trending down over time consistent with expectations for air pollutants and GHGs, then the project-level analysis may suffice. However, the trend direction must be supported using substantial evidence. Review of the SANDAG Regional Travel Model reveals that VMT/capita and VMT/employee are anticipated to trend down over time. . Figure 2 demonstrates VMT/capita and VMT/employee trends based on the latest SANDAG Regional Travel Model (ABM2+, 2021 Regional Plan) and shows that both metrics trend down over time. Therefore; if a project is consistent with the assumptions in the SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan, the existing conditions project-level analysis is sufficient to determine cumulative impacts.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
18 Figure 2: Santee VMT/Capita and VMT/Employee Trends Based on SANDAG Regional Travel Model (ABM2+, Regional Plan 2021)
Residents
Year 2016
VMT/Capita = 20.8
Year 2025
VMT/Capita = 19.5
Year 2035
VMT/Capita = 18.9
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
19 Year 2050
VMT/Capita = 18.8
Employees
Year 2016
VMT/Employee = 19.2
Year 2025
VMT/Employee = 17.9
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
20 Year 2035
VMT/Employee = 16.8
Year 2050
VMT/Employee = 16.1
If a project is not consistent with the assumptions in the SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan, a cumulative analysis may be necessary. A project effect on VMT under cumulative conditions would be considered significant if the cumulative VMT/capita or VMT/employee under the future year “plus project” condition exceeds the base year thresholds identified under section 2.3.2.

Please note that the cumulative “no project” condition shall reflect the adopted Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS); as such, if a project is consistent with the regional RTP/SCS, then the cumulative impacts shall be considered less than significant.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix A: CEQA Transportation
Analysis Screening Form
CEQA Transportation Analysis Screening

Last revision 4/13/2022
A
The Project Information Form (PIF) is to be completed by the applicant. The PIF is subject to change as new project information arises.

General Project Information and Description
Owner/Applicant Information
Name:

Address:

Phone Number:

Email:

Project Information
Project Name:

Project Address:

APN:

Land Use Designation: Zoning Designation:

CEQA Transportation Analysis Screening
To determine if your project is screened from VMT analysis, review the Project Type Screening and the Project Location Screening tables below. If no “Yes” is checked for any project type or land use applicable to your project, the project is not screened out and must complete VMT analysis in accordance with the analysis requirements outline in the City of Santee SB 743 Guidelines. Trip generation should be supported by a memo prepared by a traffic engineer.

Project Type Screening

1. Select the Screening Criteria that applies to your project

2. Answer the questions for each screening criteria that applies to your project (if “Yes” is indicated in any land use category below, then that land use (or a portion of the land use) is screened from CEQA Transportation Analysis) Note: All responses must be documented and supported by substantial evidence.

Screened
Out
Not
Screened
Out
Yes No

1. Project located in a transit accessible area
a. Is the project in a transit priority area or within ½ mile of a stop along a high-quality transit corridor, and has the following project characteristics?
i. Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of more than 0.75
ii. Includes no more than the minimum parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than
required by the jurisdiction
iii. Is consistent with the City of Santee General Plan iv. Does not replace affordable residential units with
moderate- or high-income residential units.
v. Have basic walking and biking access to transit

2. Small Project
a. The project generates 500 or fewer net new daily vehicle trips CEQA Transportation Analysis Screening

Last revision 4/13/2022
A

3. Projects in VMT-Efficient area (Provide SANDAG screening map showing project location)
a. Residential Projects: Is the project located in a VMT-efficient area (15% or more below the baseline citywide average) using the SANDAG screening maps for VMT/Capita?
b. Employment Projects: Is the project located in a VMT-efficient area (15% or more below the baseline citywide average) using the SANDAG screening maps for VMT/Employee?
c. Industrial Projects: Is the project located in a VMT-efficient area (at or below the baseline citywide average) using the SANDAG screening maps for VMT/Employee?
d. Mixed-use Projects: refer to the appropriate section for each landuse included as part of the mixed-use project

4. Locally Serving Retail Projects
a. Is the project less than 125 ksf and serving the local community?The City may request a market capture study that identifies local market capture to the City’s satisfaction. (for Retail Projects above 50 ksf, market studies may be required to demonstrate that at least 75% of customers are local customers)

5. Locally Serving Public Facility or Community Purpose Facility a. Is the project a public facility or Community Purpose Facility that serves the local community? (see section 2.3 of VMT analysis guidelines for a list of public facilities)

6. Redevelopment Project
a. Is the proposed project’s total project VMT less than the existing land use’s total VMT? And the CEQA action includes closing the existing land use?

7. Infill affordable housing
a. Is the proposed project a deed restricted affordable housing project that meet the following criteria?
i. Is an infill project;
ii. Consists of a minimum of 52% affordable housing;
iii. Is within ½ mile radius of a transit stop or station; and iv. Project provided parking does not exceed parking
required by the City of Santee
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix B: Additional VMT Analysis
Tools
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Other VMT Analysis Tools
California Statewide Travel Demand Model (CSTDM)
The CSTDM was developed by Caltrans and produces passenger travel demand forecasts. Details about the model may be found at the following website.
• http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/statewide_modeling/cstdm.html In addition, Caltrans has produced VMT output data of the CSTDM by traffic analysis zone (TAZ) for purposes of SB 743 implementation, and that data may be accessed at the following website. • http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/omsp/SB743.html
As a statewide model, the level of detail for local project applications may not be sufficient to produce reasonable results, as the model was not validated at a local scale. The TAZs are large; therefore, the resulting VMT outputs would have limited sensitivity to small scale land use projects and the influences of land use context.

California Household Travel Survey (CHTS) Data
The CHTS is distributed by Caltrans to gather data needed to update the statewide database of household travel behavior. This database is used to model and forecast travel throughout the State of California. The last CHTS started in 2010 and ended in 2013.

CHTS data provides residential trip length by trip purpose. This data can be used to determine the homebased VMT/Resident. In order to complete this calculation, the average trip length in the project’s census tract is multiplied by the number of expected residents.

As CHTS data is inherently associated with residences, a VMT/Employee or VMT/Service Population can’t be calculated using this data source.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Data Sources Summary
Table 1 below identifies which of the VMT data sources produce data for each VMT efficiency metric.

Table 1: VMT Data Source Features at a Glance
Features CSTDM
SANDAG Travel
Model (Current
SB743 Information)*
CHTS
Accounts for External Trips X - X
Can Calculate VMT/Service Population X X -
Can Calculate VMT/Resident X X
X
(Home-based trips ONLY)
Can Calculate VMT/Employee X X
Can be updated manually with new data - - X
Notes: *The SANDAG model does have external trips; however, the step in the modeling process that was used to develop the current VMT/Resident and Employee VMT/Employee results was not able to utilize the external trips portion of the model. Additional modeling or an alternate process would be needed to incorporate the external trips.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2018
Big Data
Big data is defined as data gathered from cell phones and other devices that is used to reveal patterns, trends, and associations of travel. It can be useful in validating data source information, including trip lengths and origins and destinations (O/D). Data provided by companies such as StreetLight Data, Teralytics, and INRIX can be used to determine the validity of results produced by the Caltrans or SANDAG travel models or CHTS data analysis. It is recommended that big data is used in combination with a VMT data source. Big data can provide the existing VMT conditions; however, it should not on its own be used to establish a VMT threshold because it is not a tool that can be used to estimate a project’s VMT or effect on VMT. As described previously, the threshold and project analysis must be established using the same VMT tool and methodology.

For the City of Santee, this validation process could determine that due to the unique nature of City communities, using the SANDAG model without modification for these unique features would create unrealistic VMT results. For example, big data can be used to help understand commute patterns from Riverside County, Orange County, and Imperial County.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix C: Screening Criteria and
Threshold Evidence
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Screening Criteria and Threshold Evidence
This appendix provides context and justification/rationale for the screening criteria and thresholds for performing transportation VMT CEQA impact analysis.

Screening Criteria
Development projects are presumed to have less-than-significant impacts to the transportation system, and therefore would not be required to conduct a VMT analysis, if any of the following criteria are satisfied.

1. Projects Located in a Transit-Accessible Area
Projects located within a half mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor10 may be presumed to have a less-than-significant impact. The presumption of a lessthan-significant impact near these transit stops may not be appropriate if the project:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio of less than 0.75
• Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the City
• Is inconsistent with SANDAG’s most recent Sustainable Communities Strategy or the land use growth assumption accommodated by the Land Use Element portion of the General Plan • Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units
• Does not have basic walking and biking access to transit (e.g., sidewalks connecting to transit stops)
Evidence – Projects located within a half mile of an existing major transit stop or a half mile from stops along high-quality transit corridors can help reduce VMT by increasing capacity for transit-supportive residential and/or employment densities in low VMT areas. The increased density that is associated with projects in a transit-accessible area can increase transit ridership and therefore justify enhanced transit service, which would in turn increase the number of destinations that are accessible by transit and further increase transit ridership and decrease VMT.
10 “Major transit stop” means a site containing an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods. (See Public Resources Code § 21064.3.) “High-quality transit corridor” means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. (See Public Resources Code § 21155(b).) City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Additionally, CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b) states, “Generally, projects within one-half mile of either an existing major transit stop or a stop along an existing high quality transit corridor should be presumed to cause a less than significant transportation impact.”

2. Small Projects
Projects generating 500 or fewer net new daily vehicle trips may be presumed to have a less-thansignificant impact absent substantial evidence to the contrary.

Evidence – According to findings from the CEQA & Climate Change white paper (Evaluating and addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act , CAPCOA, January 2008), small developments that generate less than 900 MTCO2 per year are considered to have de minimis impact on the GHG Emissions.

In April 2020, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) published updated project screening levels and determined that projects estimated to generate less than 1,100 MT MTCO2 per year would not result in a significant, cumulative impact (SMAQMD 2020). This threshold was developed to demonstrate compliance with the statewide reduction targets in 2030 and the threshold was determined by SMAQMD to capture 98 percent of total GHG emissions.

The CAPCOA screening level threshold of 900 MT CO2e is more conservative than the SMAQMD screening level; therefore, the CAPCOA threshold is in line with the post-2020 reduction goals established by SB 32. Thus, for the purposes of this analysis, the 900 MTCO2 per year screening level was used in accordance with CAPCOA guidance. The screening level does not indicate impact significance; rather, it is intended to be used to screen out smaller projects that do not generate substantial amounts of GHG emissions and allows regulatory and discretionary actions to focus on the more significant sources of GHG emissions. Projects that emit less than 900 MTCO2 per year would not likely be considered cumulatively considerable and would not interfere with the ability of the state to achieve its GHG reduction targets.

Based on the 2019 Sustainable Santee Plan, approximately 60% of all GHG emissions are associated with the transportation sector. It is therefore assumed that GHG emissions from the transportation sector associated to a development to be assumed as de minimis is estimated at approximately 540 MTCO2 per year. Based on outputs from the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), it is estimated that a project generating approximately 1,000 trips per day results in nearly 540 MTCO2 per year related to transportation sector (see table for details). To be more conservative, the City of Santee has selected 500 daily trips as the threshold to screen out a project as a small development.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Trips Average Trip Length (mile)
City of Santee ABM 2+
GHG Grams (g)
per year
GHG Metric Tons (MT)
per year
100 5.65 54,073,500 54.07
200 5.65 108,147,000 108.15
300 5.65 162,220,500 162.22
400 5.65 216,294,000 216.29
500 5.65 270,367,500 270.37
600 5.65 324,441,000 324.44
700 5.65 378,514,500 378.51
800 5.65 432,588,000 432.59
900 5.65 486,661,500 486.66
1,000 5.65 540,735,000 540.74
1,100 5.65 594,808,500 594.81
1,200 5.65 648,882,000 648.88

1. Average Trip Length (ATL) for the City of Santee per SANDAG Regional Travel Model 2021 ABM 2+ Regional Travel Model

2. GHG Grams per year = [ Trips x ATL x 260 days x 355 CO2 g/VMT ] + [ Trips x 260 days x 74 CO2 g/trip ]

3. Per California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2020.4.0, May 2021:

Source: San Diego County 2019 Annual CO2 Running ≈ 355 g/VMT for Light Duty Passenger (LDA) travel Source: San Diego County 2019 Annual CO2 Starting ≈ 74 g/trip for Light Duty Passenger (LDA) starting

4. 900 MTCO2/year is assumed as de minimis amount of GHG produced by small developments (CEQA & Climate Change - Evaluating and addressing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Projects Subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CAPCOA, January 2008)

5. Based on the Sustainable Santee Plan (December 2019) nearly 60% of the GHG Emissions are generated by the on-road transportation sector. The de minimis amount of GHG from the on-road transportation sector is calculated as: [ 900 MTCO2/year x 60% ] = 540 MTCO2/year, the amount is estimated to be generated by approximately 1,000 daily trips.

3. Projects in a VMT-Efficient Area
If a residential development is located in an area where VMT/capita is 15% or more below the city average, or a general employment development is located in an area where VMT/employee is 15% or more below the regional average, or an industrial employment development is located in an area where the VMT per employee is at or below the regional average, the project is presumed to result in a lessthan-significant CEQA impact.

Evidence – This presumption is consistent with the Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018) (OPR Technical Advisory), which provides that, “re sidential and office pr ojects t hat locate i n areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with data from a travel survey or travel demand model can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.”
Evidence – Purely industrial uses are desired to be located in less VMT-efficient, higher-VMT areas in the City of Santee. Placing these land intensive uses in areas with less efficient VMT allows land in efficient VMT areas to be more effectively utilized as high density residential and commercial uses. This threshold City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
will encourage industrial uses to develop in locations appropriate for industrial and agricultural uses, further reducing other potential impacts to sensitive land uses, leaving infill and more VMT-efficient areas available for more dense uses.

Specifically, the OPR Technical Advisory states, “Of land use projects, residential, office, and retail projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT. For that reason, OPR recommends the quantified thresholds described above for purposes of analysis and mitigation. Lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types.”

4. Locally-Serving Retail Projects
Locally serving retail generally improves the convenience of shopping close to home and has the effect of reducing vehicle travel. The 125,000 square foot of total gross floor area threshold for local serving retail is consistent with the upper square footage threshold of the Neighborhood Shopping Center land use from the SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region.

The Neighborhood Shopping Center land use is by definition locally serving.

Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory states, “Because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips,11 estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts.” Local serving retail generally shortens trips as longer trips from regional retail are redistributed to new local retail.

5. Locally-Serving Public Facilities
Community-purpose facilities serve the community and either produce very low VMT or divert existing trips from established local facilities. A replacement/remodel of an existing local serving public facility with no net increase in VMT would not require a VMT analysis for CEQA.

Evidence – Similar to locally serving retail, locally serving community-purpose facilities would redistribute trips and would not create new trips.12 Thus, similar to locally serving retail, trips are generally shortened as longer trips from a regional facility are redistributed to the locally serving public facility.

6. Redevelopment Projects with Lower Total VMT
A redevelopment project that demonstrates that the total project VMT is less than the existing land use’s total VMT is not required to complete a VMT analysis.
11 Lovejoy, et al., Measuring the Impacts of Local Land-Use Policies on Vehicle Miles of Travel: The Case of the First Big-Box Store in Davis, California, Journal of Transport and Land Use, 2013. 12 Lovejoy, et al., Measuring the Impacts of Local Land-Use Policies on Vehicle Miles of Travel: The Case of the First Big-Box Store in Davis, California, Journal of Transport and Land Use, 2013.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Evidence – Consistent with the OPR Technical Advisory, “[w]here a project replaces existing VMTgenerating 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 a residential or office project leads to a net increase in VMT, then the project’s VMT/capita (residential) or VMT/employee (office) should be compared to thresholds recommended. Per capita and per employee VMT are efficiency metrics, and, as such, apply only to the proposed project without regard to the VMT generated by the previously existing land use.
“If the project leads to a net increase in provision of locally-serving retail, transportation impacts from the retail portion of the development should be presumed to be less than significant. If the project consists of regionally-serving retail, and increases overall VMT compared to existing uses, then the project would lead to a significant transportation impact.” – OPR Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (December 2018).

7. Infill affordable housing
Residents of affordable residential projects typically generate less VMT than residents in market rate residential projects. This pattern is particularly evident in affordable residential projects near transit13. In recognition of this effect, and in accordance with the OPR Technical Advisory, deed-restricted affordable housing projects that meet the following conditions meet the City’s screening criteria and would not require a VMT analysis.
• Is an infill project;
• Consists 52% affordable housing or more;
• Is within ½ mile radius of a transit stop or station; and • Project-provided parking does not exceed parking required by the City of Santee Municipal Code.

The City has discretion to review the project’s characteristics to confirm that the screening criteria is appropriate and may disallow use of screening criteria if the project characteristics do not meet the screening criteria definitions.

Evidence – Affordable residential projects generate fewer trips than market rate residential projects14. This research also supports the assumption that the rate of vehicle ownership is expected to be less for people that qualify for affordable housing.
13 Newmark and Hass, “Income, Location Efficiency, and VMT: Affordable Housing as a Climate Strategy,” The California Housing Partnership, 2015.
14 Newmark and Hass, “Income, Location Efficiency, and VMT: Affordable Housing as a Climate Strategy,” The California Housing Partnership (2015).

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Additionally, the OPR Technical Advisory states, “Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT.” A recent study15 by Fehr & Peers was conducted to determine the difference in trip rates between affordable housing units and market-rate units within the County of San Diego. According to ITE Trip Generation Manual 11th edition, a Multi-Family unit (Low rise and not close to rail transit, category 220) generates an average of 6.74 trips per day and an affordable housing unit (category 223) generates an average of 4.81 trips per day. Because the OPR recommended threshold is 15% below average, it is reasonable to use 15% below average trip generation rate for market-rate Multi-Family (Low rise) calculated at 5.73 trips per unit as impact threshold. The blend of affordable housing and market rate housing that results in a trip generation rate of 5.73 trips/unit is 52% affordable and 48% market rate. 15 Fehr & Peers, Affordable Housing and SB 743 VMT – Screening Considerations, Memorandum prepared for the County of San Diego dated December 3, 2018.
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/advance/SB743/County%20of%20San%20Diego%20Trip%2 0Generation%20at%20Affordable%20Housing%20Developments%20Final%2012032021.pdf City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Thresholds
If a project is required to complete a VMT analysis, the project’s impacts to the transportation system would be significant if the VMT would exceed any of the thresholds below.

Residential
Threshold – 15% below the City Average VMT/capita
Evidence – The O PR Technical Advisory provides t hat, “residential development that would generate vehicle travel that is 15 or more percent below the existing residential VMT per capita, measured against the region or city, may indicate a less-than-significant transportation impact.” General Employment
Threshold – 15% below the Regional Average VMT/employee Evidence – The O PR Technical Advisory provides t hat, “office projects that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing VMT per employee for the region may indicate a significant transportation impact.”
Industrial Employment
Threshold – At or below regional average VMT/employee
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory states, “ Of land use projects, residential, office, and retail projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT. For that reason, OPR recommends the quantified thresholds described above for purposes of analysis and mitigation. Lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types.” Purely industrial uses are desired to be located in locations that are less dense and not within urban areas, which typically have higher VMT/employee. Industrial land uses are land intensive; therefore, placing industrial land uses in less urban areas characterized by having higher VMT/employee allows land in efficient VMT areas to be more effectively utilized as high density residential and commercial uses. This threshold is consistent with achieving an overall reduction in Regional VMT as it recognizes that industrial uses, which are relatively lower total VMT generating uses, are most appropriate in areas that have a lower potential to reduce VMT because it results in more available land within areas with a high potential to achieve VMT reductions for more dense development.

Regional Retail, Regional Recreational, or Regional Public Facilities Threshold – A net increase in total regional VMT using the boundary method City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Evidence – The OPR Technical Advisory states, “Because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips, estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts… Regional-serving retail development… which can lead to substitution of longer trips for shorter ones, may tend to have a significant impact. Where such development decreases VMT, lead agencies should consider the impact to be less than significant.” Regional Retail within the City of Santee will be analyzed consistent with the OPR Technical Advisory.

Regional Retail uses that attract customers from the region and beyond are defined in the SANDAG (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region as “Regional Shopping Center,” and “Super Regional Shopping Center.”
The recommendations for regional retail uses can also be applied to regional recreational and regional public facilities since these types of facilities operate in a similar way from a transportation/customer attraction perspective.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix D: Existing Major Transit
Stops and Existing High-Quality
Transit Corridors
High-Quality Transit Corridors and
Transit Stops
City of Santee VMT Guidelines
City of Santee
Transit Priority Area
Hight Quality Transit Route
Other Transit Routes
High Quality Transit Stop
Other Transit Stops
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix E: Land Use Designations
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Table E1 provides a list of unique project types and the land use type they should be considered under for SB 743 screening and analysis.

Table E1: Land Use Categories
Land Use Category for SB 743 Analysis for all Project Types

1. Residential Projects
• Estate, Urban, or Rural
• Single Family Detached
• Condominium
• Apartment
• Transitional Housing
• Military Housing (off-base, multi-family)
• Mobile Home
• Retirement Community
• Congregate/Recuperative Care Facility

2. General Employment Projects
• Agriculture
• Hospital: General
• Hospital: Convalescent/Nursing
• Industrial/Business Park (commercial included)
• Science Research & Development
• Hotel (with convention facilities/restaurant)
• Motel
• Resort Hotel
• Business Hotel
• Military
• Standard Commercial Office
• Large (High-Rise) Commercial Office
• Office Park
• Single Tenant Office
• Corporate Headquarters (without commercial)
• Government Offices (Use is primarily office with
employees; no substantial in-person service)
• Medical/Dental

3. Industrial Employment Projects
• Industrial Park (no commercial)
• Industrial Plant (multiple shifts)
• Manufacturing/Assembly
• Warehousing
• Storage

4. Regional Retail Projects (includes Recreational Uses): Not Locally-Serving • Super Regional Shopping Center
• Regional Shopping Center
• Community Shopping Center
• Parks: Amusement
• Golf Course (includes driving ranges)
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Table E1: Land Use Categories
Land Use Category for SB 743 Analysis for all Project Types

5. Retail Projects (includes Recreational Uses): May qualify for locally-serving based on size/market study • Bars/Wine Bars
• Car Wash
• Gasoline
• Auto Sales (Dealer & Repair)
• Auto Repair Center
• Auto Parts Sales
• Quick Lube
• Tire Store
• Neighborhood Shopping Center
• Commercial Shops
• Mixed Use: Commercial (with supermarket)/
Residential: consider each land use type
separately for screening
• Bowling Center
• Multi-purpose (miniature golf, video arcade,
batting cage, etc.)
• Racquetball/Health Club
• Tennis Courts
• Sports Facilities (indoor/outdoor)
• Theaters (multiplex with matinee)
• Restaurant
• Financial (Bank or Savings & Loan)

6. Regional Public Facilities: Generally Not Locally-Serving • Airport: Commercial
• Airport: General Aviation
• Airport: Heliports
• Regional House of Worship/Cemetery
• University (4 years)
• Junior College (2 years)
• High School: Private
• Middle/Junior High School: Private
• Elementary School: Private
• Parks: Regional (developed)
• Parks: State
• Bus Depot
• Truck Terminal
• Landfill & Recycling Center

7. Locally-Serving Public Facilities
• High School: Public
• Middle/Junior High School: Public
• Elementary School: Public
• Day Care (Public or Private)
• Library
• Park: City
• Park: Neighborhood/County
• Post Office
• Department of Motor Vehicles
• Government Offices (Providing primarily inperson customer service) • Transit Station (light rail with parking)
• Park & Ride Lots
• House of Worship/Cemetery
* Land use designations match the categories in SANDAG’s (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix F: Transportation Project
Screening
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Transportation Project Screening Criteria
The following complete list is provided in the OPR Technical Advisory (December 2018, Pages 20-21) and refined for the City of Santee for transportation projects that, “would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis.”
• Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity
• Roadside safety devices or hardware installation, such as median barriers and guardrails • Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes
• Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left-turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes
• Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets, provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit • Closing gaps in the transportation network in conformance with the Mobility Element of the General Plan where the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit.
• Conversion of existing general purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel • Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles • Reduction in number of through lanes
• Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority (TSP) features
• Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs, and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Installation of roundabouts, or traffic circles
• Traffic signal modifications and new traffic signals where warrants are met by existing levels of traffic and the project improves accessibility for active transportation.

City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
• Installation or reconfiguration 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 operation with no net increase in number of traffic lanes
• Removal or relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces • Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs) • Addition of traffic wayfinding signage
• Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity • Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way
• Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve nonmotorized travel • Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure • Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
Appendix G: VMT Mitigation Sample
Calculation
City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines
April 2022
VMT Mitigation Sample Calculation
The following provides a sample TDM calculation (it is not intended to demonstrate the only measures that would be available to projects). For this example, each VMT reduction strategy is calculated individually then combined in the equation to determine the overall VMT reduction. The direct sum of all strategies results in a total of (2% + 1% + 4% + 1% = ) 8.0%; however, the overall VMT reduction is calculated at 7.8% using the multiplicative formula to account for the fact that some strategies could be redundant or duplicative in nature.
• Trip Reduction Program
o T-9 : Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program = 2% o T-10: Provide End-of-Trip bicycle facilities = 1%
o Combined sub-sector %VMT reduction = 1 − (1 − 2%) × (1 − 1%) = 𝟐. 𝟗% • Parking or Road Pricing/Management
o T-15: Limit Residential Parking Supply = 4%
o T-16: Unbundle residential parking cost from property cost = 1% o Combined sub-sector %VMT reduction = 1 − (1 − 4%) × (1 − 1%) = 𝟒. 𝟗% Total VMT Reduction = 1 − [(1 − 𝟐. 𝟗%) × (1 − 𝟒. 𝟗%)] = 𝟕. 𝟖% 1 STAFF REPORT

CITY OF SANTEE VMT ANALYSIS GUIDELINES
APRIL 27, 2022
Background
California Senate Bill 743 was passed by the legislature and signed into law in the fall of 2013. This legislation led to a change in the way that transportation impacts are measured under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Starting on July 1, 2020, level of service (LOS) based on automobile delay may no longer be used as the performance measure to determine the transportation impacts of projects under CEQA.

Instead, an alternative metric that supports the goals of the SB 743 legislation will be required. Although there is no requirement to use any specific metric in the law, the use of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as a metric is recommended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR).

Each public agency is encouraged to develop and publish thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects.

Thresholds of significance to be adopted for use as part of the lead agency's environmental review process must be adopted by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation, and be supported by substantial evidence. Staff is proposing new screening criteria and thresholds of significance for transportation impacts for adoption by resolution. The proposed VMT thresholds and guidelines largely follow OPRs guidelines with minor deviations as explained in this staff report.

The use of VMT for evaluating transportation impact is to satisfy CEQA requirements.

The City will continue to require development projects to conduct LOS analysis for general plan compliance purposes and to provide necessary improvements to the City’s transportation system so that city streets continue to function at an acceptable level of service.

Discussion
Policy Background
California Senate Bill (SB) 743 initiated a significant departure from past policy and national practice regarding analysis of transportation impacts. SB 743 was a response to state emissions targets established in various senate bills and executive orders, such as Senate Bill 32 and Executive Order B-30-15. These legislative mandates set aggressive greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets, and they established unique emissions benchmarks for various years in the future.

SB 743 directed the OPR to develop criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects to align with statewide emission reduction goals.

Specifically, the criteria, as stated in SB 743, shall promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. Measures of vehicular capacity or traffic delay (Level of Service or LOS) is no longer to be considered a measure of transportation impact on the environment, according to SB 743. 2 OPR identified the use of VMT as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impact that aligns with the goals of SB 743. VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project or a geographical region over a given period of time. The California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted revisions to the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15000 et seq.) based on OPR’s recommendations in December 2018. According to the adopted guidelines, the use of VMT to determine transportation impacts went into effect on July 1, 2020.

What are the State CEQA Guidelines?
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) generally requires state and local government agencies to inform decision makers and the public about the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects, and to reduce those environmental impacts to the extent feasible. The State CEQA Guidelines are administrative regulations governing implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq.). The State CEQA Guidelines reflect the requirements set forth in the Public Resources Code, as well as court decisions interpreting the statute and practical planning considerations. Among other things, the State CEQA Guidelines explain how to determine whether an activity is subject to environmental review, what steps are involved in the environmental review process, and the required content of environmental documents.

What is a Threshold of Significance?
A threshold of significance for a given environmental impact defines the level of effect above which the impacts are considered significant, and below which impacts are considered less than significant. Thresholds of significance may be defined either as quantitative or qualitative standards, or sets of criteria, whichever is most applicable to each specific type of environmental impact. For example, quantitative criteria are often applied to traffic, air quality, and noise impacts, while aesthetics impacts are typically evaluated using qualitative thresholds. Screening criteria may also be used to determine a project’s environmental impact.

Screening criteria are certain project characteristics that, if exhibited by a proposed project, allow presumption of no significant impact without having to perform a detailed analysis.

Lead Agencies, such as Santee, have discretion to formulate their own significance thresholds including screening criteria. Setting thresholds requires the Lead Agency to make a judgment about how to distinguish significant impacts from lessthan-significant impacts based on substantial evidence. Substantial evidence means that a fair argument, based on enough relevant information and reasonable inferences, can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.
3 How is VMT evaluated?
Evaluation of vehicle miles traveled can be completed using various methods. To achieve the state’s long-term goals, the recommended methodology for evaluating residential and office projects is through the efficiency metrics of VMT per capita and VMT per employee. For residential projects, VMT per capita represents the average VMT per resident associated with a project. For general employment projects, VMT per employee represents the average VMT per employee associated with a project. These metrics are independent of project size and an indication of how efficient a project’s VMT characteristics are. For residential and general employment projects, a project’s VMT per capita or VMT per employee must be compared to the corresponding average for a larger geographical area or citywide average.

The recommended methodology for evaluating retail and other types of projects is the change in total VMT on the roadway network. The threshold is based on the change in VMT in the affected area.

Screening criteria may be applied to evaluate project VMT. For example, a project may be presumed to not have a significant impact if it is near transit, comprised of certain percentage of affordable housing, or can be considered a small project.

Any project that does not meet screening criteria is subject to completing a detailed VMT analysis and must compare its project VMT to the appropriate threshold of significance.

If a project is determined to have a significant transportation impact, the project can apply VMT reduction measures, or mitigation measures, to lower its calculated VMT values. Typically, VMT is reduced by implementing strategies that reduce the number of automobile trips generated or reducing the distance that people drive.

Measures that reduce single occupant automobile trips are called Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies which may include such measures as ride-sharing programs, transit passes, and telecommuting.

OPR’s Technical Advisory
OPR’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Attachment 1) contains recommendations regarding evaluation of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures, and also provides substantial evidence for its recommendations.

OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is fifteen percent (15%) below that of existing development may be a reasonable threshold. For residential projects, a proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent (15%) below existing regional or citywide VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. For general employment projects, a proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent (15%) below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact. Retail projects may have a significant transportation impact if there is a net increase in total VMT in the affected area.
4 The Technical Advisory lists examples of potential mitigation measures and alternatives to reducing VMT, but selection of particular measures is left to the discretion of the agency and no recommendations are provided regarding calculation of the VMT reductions associated with particular measures.

The Technical Advisory is provided as a resource for lead agencies to use at their discretion, and it is intended to assist lead agencies in selecting thresholds of significance for evaluating particular projects. However, lead agencies may consider alternative thresholds of significance provided they are supported by substantial evidence.

Transportation Projects
OPR’s Technical Advisory also contains guidance on the analysis of transportation projects, and it states that for roadway capacity projects lead agencies have discretion to choose which metric to use to evaluate transportation impacts.

However, as required by SB 743, criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. Transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and maintenance projects can generally be presumed to have a less than significant impact, and the OPR Technical Advisory contains a list of project types that may be screened out from completing a VMT analysis.

The effect of a project on vehicle travel should be estimated based on total change in VMT over the region where driving patterns are expected to change, and it should account for a project’s growth-inducing impacts such as induced travel.

OPR’s Technical Advisory states that a threshold of significance for transportation projects should be based on the three main goals of SB 743 stated above. It also requires the analysis to address direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the project, and near-term and long-term effects of the project.

Proposed VMT Screening Criteria and Guidelines
City staff have developed City-specific VMT screening criteria and analysis guidelines (Attachment A of the resolution – City of Santee VMT Analysis Guidelines, referred to as “VMT Analysis Guidelines”), which comply with CEQA recommendations for thresholds of significance, to encourage consistency in VMT analysis across projects, and to balance recommendations presented in OPR with City of Santee values. The VMT Analysis Guidelines are based largely on recommendations presented in OPR’s Technical Advisory, with some refinements to reflect regional and local conditions. The VMT Analysis Guidelines contain background on the use of VMT to evaluate transportation impacts, screening criteria, methodologies for evaluating VMT for individual projects, thresholds of significance, and guidance on VMT mitigation.

For large projects (over 2,400 average daily trips), a model run of the regional travel demand model operated by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is used to determine the project’s VMT/capita or VMT/employee. For smaller projects (under 2,400 average daily trips), VMT/capita and VMT/employee are also based on the regional travel demand model. However, rather than using an individual model run for each 5 project, VMT/capita and VMT/employee are determined from maps prepared by SANDAG using output from the model. The VMT analysis maps show VMT/capita and VMT/employee for each traffic analysis zone (TAZ) in the city. TAZ’s are geographical areas of varying sizes set up in the regional travel demand model.

The assumption for small projects is that project VMT/capita or VMT/employee can be estimated based on the average VMT/capita or VMT/employee for the TAZ in which it is located. The analysis maps are available through SANDAG web page.

The VMT Analysis Guidelines contain guidance on methods for calculating VMT reductions for mitigation measures, as well as appropriate applications of each mitigation measure. Generally, projects may choose to use methodologies described in California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (“CAPCOA”) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (2021) (GHG Reduction Handbook) or the SANDAG Mobility Management Guidebook/VMT Reduction Calculator Tool. Other methodologies may be used to quantify VMT reductions provided there is substantial evidence to justify the calculated reduction.

Tables 1 and 2, below, summarize the screening criteria and CEQA thresholds proposed in the VMT Analysis Guidelines. As you will see, most of the screening criteria come directly from OPR; an explanation for those areas that deviate are identified. Additional support and explanation are provided in the VMT Analysis Guidelines. Projects identified in the Screening Criteria column are screen out, meaning they are presumed to cause less than significant impact, and no VMT analysis is required.

Table 1: Proposed Screening Criteria
Screening Criteria Substantial Evidence
Projects that generate less than 500 ADT
are screened out
Provided substantial evidence based on
GHG production
Residential, general employment or retail
uses located within one-half mile of a
major transit stop or a stop along a highquality transit corridor OPR recommendation
Projects in a VMT-efficient area OPR recommendation
Locally serving retail uses OPR recommendation
Locally serving public facility Adopted by City of San Diego and City of Carlsbad, locally serving public
facilities will have similar effect as
locally serving retail
Redevelopment projects that result in a
net overall decrease in VMT for the site
OPR recommendation
Infill affordable housing OPR recommendation
Certain transportation projects OPR Guidelines and the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the
San Diego Region (Attachment 1 and 2)
6 Table 2: Proposed Thresholds of Significance
Threshold of Significance Substantial Evidence
Residential Projects: A significant
transportation impact occurs if the project
VMT per capita exceeds a level 15% below
the City average VMT per capita
OPR recommendation
General Employment Projects: A significant
transportation impact occurs if the project
VMT per employee exceeds a level 15%
below the regional average VMT per
employee
OPR recommendation
Regional Retail Projects: A significant
transportation impact occurs if the project
results in a net increase in total regional
VMT
OPR recommendation
Industrial Projects: A significant
transportation impact occurs if the project
VMT per employee exceeds the average
regional VMT per employee
OPR recommendation
Transportation Projects: A significant
transportation impact occurs if the project
creates a net VMT increase in the affected
area
Guidelines for Transportation Impact
Studies in the San Diego Region
(Attachment 2); OPR did not give a
specific recommendation
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7(b) requires “thresholds of significance to be adopted for general use as part of the lead agency’s environmental review process by ordinance, resolution, rule or regulation, and developed through a public review process and supported by substantial evidence.” The City is meeting the requirement for public review by providing notice of the City Council public hearing.

The VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a project within the meaning of Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15378. The VMT Analysis Guidelines would not lead to a direct or a reasonably foreseeable indirect change in the physical environment. The VMT Analysis Guidelines are an administrative activity of the City.

Specifically, the VMT Analysis Guidelines provide guidance to property owners, project developers, applicants, and proponents for determining the significance of transportation impacts of land use projects under CEQA. The VMT Analysis Guidelines do not approve any specific development and would not lead to any particular physical change to the environment. Thus, the VMT Analysis Guidelines are not a project under Public Resources Code section 21065 and CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). For these 7 reasons, the VMT Analysis Guidelines are not subject to further environmental review under CEQA.

Recommendation
Staff recommends City Council adopt the Resolution adopting the VMT Analysis Guidelines along with the proposed thresholds contained therein.

Attachments

1. Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impact in CEQA

2. Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region

ON EVALUATING TRANSPORTATION

IMPACTS IN CEQA

TECHNICAL ADVISORY
December 2018
Contents
A. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1 B. Background ....................................................................................................................................... 2 C. Technical Considerations in Assessing Vehicle Miles Traveled......................................................... 4

1. Recommendations Regarding Methodology ................................................................................ 4 D. General Principles to Guide Consideration of VMT .......................................................................... 7 E. Recommendations Regarding Significance Thresholds.................................................................... 8

1. Screening Thresholds for Land Use Projects...............................................................................12

2. Recommended Numeric Thresholds for Residential, Office, and Retail Projects.......................15

3. Recommendations Regarding Land Use Plans............................................................................18

4. Other Considerations..................................................................................................................19 F. Considering the Effects of Transportation Projects on Vehicle Travel ...........................................19

1. Recommended Significance Threshold for Transportation Projects..........................................22

2. Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects .............................................................23 G. Analyzing Other Impacts Related to Transportation ......................................................................25 H. VMT Mitigation and Alternatives....................................................................................................26 Appendix 1. Considerations About Which VMT to Count .......................................................................29 Appendix 2. Induced Travel: Mechanisms, Research, and Additional Assessment Approaches ............32 1 | Page
December 2018
A. Introduction
This technical advisory is one in a series of advisories provided by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) as a service to professional planners, land use officials, and CEQA practitioners. OPR issues technical assistance on issues that broadly affect the practice of land use planning and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 et seq.). (Gov. Code, § 65040, subds. (g), (l), (m).) The purpose of this document is to provide advice and recommendations, which agencies and other entities may use at their discretion. This document does not alter lead agency discretion in preparing environmental documents subject to CEQA. This document should not be construed as legal advice.

Senate Bill 743 (Steinberg, 2013), which was codified in Public Resources Code section 21099, required changes to the guidelines implementing CEQA (CEQA Guidelines) (Cal. Code Regs., Title 14, Div. 6, Ch. 3, § 15000 et seq.) regarding the analysis of transportation impacts. As one appellate court recently explained: “During the last 10 years, the Legislature has charted a course of long-term sustainability based on denser infill development, reduced reliance on individual vehicles and improved mass transit, all with the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Section 21099 is part of that strategy . . . .” (Covina Residents for Responsible Development v. City of Covina (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 712, 729.) Pursuant to Section 21099, the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must “promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Id., subd. (b)(1); see generally, adopted CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.3, subd. (b) [Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts].) To that end, in developing the criteria, OPR has proposed, and the California Natural Resources Agency (Agency) has certified and adopted, changes to the CEQA Guidelines that identify vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as the most appropriate metric to evaluate a project’s transportation impacts. With the California Natural Resources Agency’s certification and adoption of the changes to the CEQA Guidelines, automobile delay, as measured by “level of service” and other similar metrics, generally no longer constitutes a significant environmental effect under CEQA. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(3).)

This advisory contains technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures. Again, OPR provides this Technical Advisory as a resource for the public to use at their discretion. OPR is not enforcing or attempting to enforce any part of the recommendations contained herein. (Gov. Code, § 65035 [“It is not the intent of the Legislature to vest in the Office of Planning and Research any direct operating or regulatory powers over land use, public works, or other state, regional, or local projects or programs.”].) This December 2018 technical advisory is an update to the advisory it published in April 2018. OPR will continue to monitor implementation of these new provisions and may update or supplement this advisory in response to new information and advancements in modeling and methods. 2 | Page
December 2018
B. Background
VMT and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction. Senate Bill 32 (Pavley, 2016) requires California to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and Executive Order B16-12 provides a target of 80 percent below 1990 emissions levels for the transportation sector by 2050.

The transportation sector has three major means of reducing GHG emissions: increasing vehicle efficiency, reducing fuel carbon content, and reducing the amount of vehicle travel. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has provided a path forward for achieving these emissions reductions from the transportation sector in its 2016 Mobile Source Strategy. CARB determined that it will not be possible to achieve the State’s 2030 and post-2030 emissions goals without reducing VMT growth. Further, in its 2018 Progress Report on California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, CARB found that despite the State meeting its 2020 climate goals, “emissions from statewide passenger vehicle travel per capita [have been] increasing and going in the wrong direction,” and “California cannot meet its [long-term] climate goals without curbing growth in single-occupancy vehicle activity.”1 CARB also found that “[w]ith emissions from the transportation sector continuing to rise despite increases in fuel efficiency and decreases in the carbon content of fuel, California will not achieve the necessary greenhouse gas emissions reductions to meet mandates for 2030 and beyond without significant changes to how communities and transportation systems are planned, funded, and built.”2

Thus, to achieve the State’s long-term climate goals, California needs to reduce per capita VMT. This can occur under CEQA through VMT mitigation. Half of California’s GHG emissions come from the transportation sector3
, therefore, reducing VMT is an effective climate strategy, which can also result in co-benefits.
4 Furthermore, without early VMT mitigation, the state may follow a path that meets GHG targets in the early years, but finds itself poorly positioned to meet more stringent targets later. For example, in absence of VMT analysis and mitigation in CEQA, lead agencies might rely upon verifiable offsets for GHG mitigation, ignoring the longer-term climate change impacts resulting from land use development and infrastructure investment decisions. As stated in CARB’s 2017 Scoping Plan:
“California’s future climate strategy will require increased focus on integrated land use planning to support livable, transit-connected communities, and conservation of agricultural and other lands. Accommodating population and economic growth through travel- and energy-efficient land use provides GHG-efficient growth, reducing GHGs from both transportation and building energy use. GHGs can be further reduced at the project level through implementing energyefficient construction and travel demand management approaches.”5 (Id. at p. 102.)

1 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2018) 2018 Progress Report on California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, pp. 4, 5, available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2018-11/Final2018Report_SB150_112618_02_Report.pdf. 2 Id., p. 28. 3 See https://ca50million.ca.gov/transportation/ 4 Fang et al. (2017) Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Only the Beginning: A Literature Review of the Co-Benefits of Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled. 5 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 102, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. 3 | Page
December 2018
In light of this, the 2017 Scoping Plan describes and quantifies VMT reductions needed to achieve our long-term GHG emissions reduction goals, and specifically points to the need for statewide deployment of the VMT metric in CEQA:
“Employing VMT as the metric of transportation impact statewide will help to ensure GHG reductions planned under SB 375 will be achieved through on-the-ground development, and will also play an important role in creating the additional GHG reductions needed beyond SB 375 across the State. Implementation of this change will rely, in part, on local land use decisions to reduce GHG emissions associated with the transportation sector, both at the project level, and in long-term plans (including general plans, climate action plans, specific plans, and transportation plans) and supporting sustainable community strategies developed under SB 375.”6

VMT and Other Impacts to Health and Environment. VMT mitigation also creates substantial benefits (sometimes characterized as “co-benefits” to GHG reduction) in both in the near-term and the longterm. Beyond GHG emissions, increases in VMT also impact human health and the natural environment.

Human health is impacted as increases in vehicle travel lead to more vehicle crashes, poorer air quality, increases in chronic diseases associated with reduced physical activity, and worse mental health.

Increases in vehicle travel also negatively affect other road users, including pedestrians, cyclists, other motorists, and many transit users. The natural environment is impacted as higher VMT leads to more collisions with wildlife and fragments habitat. Additionally, development that leads to more vehicle travel also tends to consume more energy, water, and open space (including farmland and sensitive habitat). This increase in impermeable surfaces raises the flood risk and pollutant transport into waterways.7
VMT and Economic Growth. While it was previously believed that VMT growth was a necessary component of economic growth, data from the past two decades shows that economic growth is possible without a concomitant increase in VMT. (Figure 1.) Recent research shows that requiring development projects to mitigate LOS may actually reduce accessibility to destinations and impede economic growth.8,9

6 Id. at p. 76. 7 Fang et al. (2017) Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions Is Only the Beginning: A Literature Review of the Co-Benefits of Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled, available at https://ncst.ucdavis.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2017/03/NCST-VMT-Co-Benefits-White-Paper_Fang_March-2017.pdf. 8 Haynes et al. (Sept. 2015) Congested Development: A Study of Traffic Delays, Access, and Economic Activity in Metropolitan Los Angeles, available at http://www.its.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/sites/6/2015/11/Haynes_Congested-Development_1-Oct-2015_final.pdf. 9 Osman et al. (Mar. 2016) Not So Fast: A Study of Traffic Delays, Access, and Economic Activity in the San Francisco Bay Area, available at http://www.its.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/sites/6/2016/08/Taylor-Not-so-Fast-04-01-2016_final.pdf. 4 | Page
December 2018
Figure 1. Kooshian and Winkelman (2011) VMT and Gross Domestic Product (GDP), 1960-2010.

C. Technical Considerations in Assessing Vehicle Miles Traveled Many practitioners are familiar with accounting for VMT in connection with long-range planning, or as part of the CEQA analysis of a project’s greenhouse gas emissions or energy impacts. This document provides technical information on how to assess VMT as part of a transportation impacts analysis under CEQA. Appendix 1 provides a description of which VMT to count and options on how to count it.

Appendix 2 provides information on induced travel resulting from roadway capacity projects, including the mechanisms giving rise to induced travel, the research quantifying it, and information on additional approaches for assessing it.

1. Recommendations Regarding Methodology
Proposed Section 15064.3 explains that a “lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled . . . .” CEQA generally defers to lead agencies on the choice of methodology to analyze impacts. (Santa Monica Baykeeper v. City of Malibu (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1538, 1546; see Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 409 [“the issue is not whether the studies are irrefutable or whether they could have been better” … rather, the “relevant issue is only whether the studies are sufficiently credible to be considered” as part of the lead agency’s overall evaluation].) This section provides suggestions to lead agencies regarding methodologies to analyze VMT associated with a project.

Vehicle Types. Proposed Section 15064.3, subdivision (a), states, “For the purposes of this section, ‘vehicle miles traveled’ refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel attributable to a project.” Here, the term “automobile” refers to on-road passenger vehicles, specifically cars and light trucks. Heavy-duty truck VMT could be included for modeling convenience and ease of calculation (for example, where models or data provide combined auto and heavy truck VMT). For an apples-to-apples 5 | Page
December 2018
comparison, vehicle types considered should be consistent across project assessment, significance thresholds, and mitigation.

Residential and Office Projects. Tour- and trip-based approaches10 offer the best methods for assessing VMT from residential/office projects and for comparing those assessments to VMT thresholds. These approaches also offer the most straightforward methods for assessing VMT reductions from mitigation measures for residential/office projects. When available, tour-based assessment is ideal because it captures travel behavior more comprehensively. But where tour-based tools or data are not available for all components of an analysis, a trip-based assessment of VMT serves as a reasonable proxy.

Models and methodologies used to calculate thresholds, estimate project VMT, and estimate VMT reduction due to mitigation should be comparable. For example:
• A tour-based assessment of project VMT should be compared to a tour-based threshold, or a trip-based assessment to a trip-based VMT threshold.
• Where a travel demand model is used to determine thresholds, the same model should also be used to provide trip lengths as part of assessing project VMT. • Where only trip-based estimates of VMT reduction from mitigation are available, a trip-based threshold should be used, and project VMT should be assessed in a trip-based manner.

When a trip-based method is used to analyze a residential project, the focus can be on home-based trips. Similarly, when a trip-based method is used to analyze an office project, the focus can be on home-based work trips.

When tour-based models are used to analyze an office project, either employee work tour VMT or VMT from all employee tours may be attributed to the project. This is because workplace location influences overall travel. For consistency, the significance threshold should be based on the same metric: either employee work tour VMT or VMT from all employee tours.

For office projects that feature a customer component, such as a government office that serves the public, a lead agency can analyze the customer VMT component of the project using the methodology for retail development (see below).

Retail Projects. Generally, lead agencies should analyze the effects of a retail project by assessing the change in total VMT11 because retail projects typically re-route travel from other retail destinations. A retail project might lead to increases or decreases in VMT, depending on previously existing retail travel patterns.

10 See Appendix 1, Considerations About Which VMT to Count, for a description of these approaches. 11 See Appendix 1, Considerations About Which VMT to Count, “Assessing Change in Total VMT” section, for a description of this approach.
6 | Page
December 2018
Considerations for All Projects. Lead agencies should not truncate any VMT analysis because of jurisdictional or other boundaries, for example, by failing to count the portion of a trip that falls outside the jurisdiction or by discounting the VMT from a trip that crosses a jurisdictional boundary. CEQA requires environmental analyses to reflect a “good faith effort at full disclosure.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15151.) Thus, where methodologies exist that can estimate the full extent of vehicle travel from a project, the lead agency should apply them to do so. Where those VMT effects will grow over time, analyses should consider both a project’s short-term and long-term effects on VMT.

Combining land uses for VMT analysis is not recommended. Different land uses generate different amounts of VMT, so the outcome of such an analysis could depend more on the mix of uses than on their travel efficiency. As a result, it could be difficult or impossible for a lead agency to connect a significance threshold with an environmental policy objective (such as a target set by law), inhibiting the CEQA imperative of identifying a project’s significant impacts and providing mitigation where feasible.

Combining land uses for a VMT analysis could streamline certain mixes of uses in a manner disconnected from policy objectives or environmental outcomes. Instead, OPR recommends analyzing each use separately, or simply focusing analysis on the dominant use, and comparing each result to the appropriate threshold. Recommendations for methods of analysis and thresholds are provided below.

In the analysis of each use, a mixed-use project should take credit for internal capture.

Any project that includes in its geographic bounds a portion of an existing or planned Transit Priority Area (i.e., the project is within a ½ mile of an existing or planned major transit stop or an existing stop along a high quality transit corridor) may employ VMT as its primary metric of transportation impact for the entire project. (See Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subds. (a)(7), (b)(1).) Cumulative Impacts. A project’s cumulative impacts are based on an assessment of whether the “incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21083, subd. (b)(2); see CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(1).) When using an absolute VMT metric, i.e., total VMT (as recommended below for retail and transportation projects), analyzing the combined impacts for a cumulative impacts analysis may be appropriate. However, metrics such as VMT per capita or VMT per employee, i.e., metrics framed in terms of efficiency (as recommended below for use on residential and office projects), cannot be summed because they employ a denominator. A project that falls below an efficiency-based threshold that is aligned with long-term goals and relevant plans has no cumulative impact distinct from the project impact. Accordingly, a finding of a less-than-significant project impact would imply a less than significant cumulative impact, and vice versa. This is similar to the analysis typically conducted for greenhouse gas emissions, air quality impacts, and impacts that utilize plan compliance as a threshold of significance. (See Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 219, 223; CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (h)(3).)
7 | Page
December 2018
D. General Principles to Guide Consideration of VMT
SB 743 directs OPR to establish specific “criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects[.]” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1).) In establishing this criterion, OPR was guided by the general principles contained within CEQA, the CEQA Guidelines, and applicable case law.

To assist in the determination of significance, many lead agencies rely on “thresholds of significance.” The CEQA Guidelines define a “threshold of significance” to mean “an identifiable quantitative, qualitative12 or performance level of a particular environmental effect, non-compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.7, subd. (a) (emphasis added).) Lead agencies have discretion to develop and adopt their own, or rely on thresholds recommended by other agencies, “provided the decision of the lead agency to adopt such thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.” (Id. at subd. (c); Save Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 1059, 1068.) Substantial evidence means “enough relevant information and reasonable inferences from this information that a fair argument can be made to support a conclusion, even though other conclusions might also be reached.” (Id. at § 15384 (emphasis added); Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1099, 1108-1109.)
Additionally, the analysis leading to the determination of significance need not be perfect. The CEQA Guidelines describe the standard for adequacy of environmental analyses:

An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15151 (emphasis added).)
These general principles guide OPR’s recommendations regarding thresholds of significance for VMT set forth below.

12 Generally, qualitative analyses should only be conducted when methods do not exist for undertaking a quantitative analysis.
8 | Page
December 2018
E. Recommendations Regarding Significance Thresholds
As noted above, lead agencies have the discretion to set or apply their own thresholds of significance. (Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 218-223 [lead agency had discretion to use compliance with AB 32’s emissions goals as a significance threshold]; Save Cuyama Valley v. County of Santa Barbara (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th at p. 1068.) However, Section 21099 of the Public Resources Code states that the criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote: (1) reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; (2) development of multimodal transportation networks; and (3) a diversity of land uses. It further directed OPR to prepare and develop criteria for determining significance. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1).) This section provides OPR’s suggested thresholds, as well as considerations for lead agencies that choose to adopt their own thresholds.

The VMT metric can support the three statutory goals: “the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.” (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099, subd. (b)(1), emphasis added.) However, in order for it to promote and support all three, lead agencies should select a significance threshold that aligns with state law on all three. State law concerning the development of multimodal transportation networks and diversity of land uses requires planning for and prioritizing increases in complete streets and infill development, but does not mandate a particular depth of implementation that could translate into a particular threshold of significance.

Meanwhile, the State has clear quantitative targets for GHG emissions reduction set forth in law and based on scientific consensus, and the depth of VMT reduction needed to achieve those targets has been quantified. Tying VMT thresholds to GHG reduction also supports the two other statutory goals.

Therefore, to ensure adequate analysis of transportation impacts, OPR recommends using quantitative VMT thresholds linked to GHG reduction targets when methods exist to do so.

Various legislative mandates and state policies establish quantitative greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. For example:
• Assembly Bill 32 (2006) requires statewide GHG emissions reductions to 1990 levels by 2020 and continued reductions beyond 2020.
• Senate Bill 32 (2016) requires at least a 40 percent reduction in GHG emissions from 1990 levels by 2030.

• Pursuant to Senate Bill 375 (2008), the California Air Resources Board GHG emissions reduction targets for metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to achieve based on land use patterns and transportation systems specified in Regional Transportation Plans and Sustainable Community Strategies (RTP/SCS). Current targets for the State’s largest MPOs call for a 19 percent reduction in GHG emissions from cars and light trucks from 2005 emissions levels by 2035.
• Executive Order B-30-15 (2015) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
9 | Page
December 2018
• Executive Order S-3-05 (2005) sets a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
• Executive Order B-16-12 (2012) specifies a GHG emissions reduction target of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 specifically for transportation.
• Executive Order B-55-18 (2018) established an additional statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and maintaining net negative emissions thereafter. It states, “The California Air Resources Board shall work with relevant state agencies to develop a framework for implementation and accounting that tracks progress toward this goal.”
• Senate Bill 391 requires the California Transportation Plan to support 80 percent reduction in GHGs below 1990 levels by 2050.
• The California Air Resources Board Mobile Source Strategy (2016) describes California’s strategy for containing air pollutant emissions from vehicles, and quantifies VMT growth compatible with achieving state targets.
• The California Air Resources Board’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target describes California’s strategy for containing GHG emissions from vehicles, and quantifies VMT growth compatible with achieving state targets.

Considering these various targets, the California Supreme Court observed:

Meeting our statewide reduction goals does not preclude all new development. Rather, the Scoping Plan … assumes continued growth and depends on increased efficiency and conservation in land use and transportation from all Californians. (Center for Biological Diversity v. California Dept. of Fish & Wildlife, supra, 62 Cal.4th at p. 220.) Indeed, the Court noted that when a lead agency uses consistency with climate goals as a way to determine significance, particularly for long-term projects, the lead agency must consider the project’s effect on meeting long-term reduction goals. (Ibid.) And more recently, the Supreme Court stated that “CEQA requires public agencies . . . to ensure that such analysis stay in step with evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes.” (Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Assn. of Governments (2017) 3 Cal.5th 497, 504.)
Meeting the targets described above will require substantial reductions in existing VMT per capita to curb GHG emissions and other pollutants. But targets for overall GHG emissions reduction do not translate directly into VMT thresholds for individual projects for many reasons, including:
• Some, but not all, of the emissions reductions needed to achieve those targets could be accomplished by other measures, including increased vehicle efficiency and decreased fuel carbon content. The CARB’s First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan explains:
10 | Page
December 2018
“Achieving California’s long-term criteria pollutant and GHG emissions goals will require four strategies to be employed: (1) improve vehicle efficiency and develop zero emission technologies, (2) reduce the carbon content of fuels and provide market support to get these lower-carbon fuels into the marketplace, (3) plan and build communities to reduce vehicular GHG emissions and provide more transportation options, and (4) improve the efficiency and throughput of existing transportation systems.”13 CARB’s 2018 Progress Report on California’s Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act states on page 28 that “California cannot meet its climate goals without curbing growth in single-occupancy vehicle activity.” In other words, vehicle efficiency and better fuels are necessary, but insufficient, to address the GHG emissions from the transportation system. Land use patterns and transportation options also will need to change to support reductions in vehicle travel/VMT. • New land use projects alone will not sufficiently reduce per-capita VMT to achieve those targets, nor are they expected to be the sole source of VMT reduction. • Interactions between land use projects, and also between land use and transportation projects, existing and future, together affect VMT.
• Because location within the region is the most important determinant of VMT, in some cases, streamlining CEQA review of projects in travel efficient locations may be the most effective means of reducing VMT.
• When assessing climate impacts of some types of land use projects, use of an efficiency metric (e.g., per capita, per employee) may provide a better measure of impact than an absolute numeric threshold. (Center for Biological Diversity, supra.) Public Resources Code section 21099 directs OPR to propose criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts. In this Technical Advisory, OPR provides its recommendations to assist lead agencies in selecting a significance threshold that may be appropriate for their particular projects. While OPR’s Technical Advisory is not binding on public agencies, CEQA allows lead agencies to “consider thresholds of significance . . . recommended by other public agencies, provided the decision to adopt those thresholds is supported by substantial evidence.” (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.7, subd. (c).) Based on OPR’s extensive review of the applicable research, and in light of an assessment by the California Air Resources Board quantifying the need for VMT reduction in order to meet the State’s long-term climate goals, OPR recommends that a per capita or per employee VMT that is fifteen percent below that of existing development may be a reasonable threshold.

Fifteen percent reductions in VMT are achievable at the project level in a variety of place types.14 Moreover, a fifteen percent reduction is consistent with SB 743’s direction to OPR to select a threshold that will help the State achieve its climate goals. As described above, section 21099 states that the

13 California Air Resources Board (May 2014) First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 46 (emphasis added).
14 CAPCOA (2010) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, p. 55, available at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf. 11 | Page
December 2018
criteria for determining significance must “promote the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.” In its document California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals15, CARB assesses VMT reduction per capita consistent with its evidence-based modeling scenario that would achieve State climate goals of 40 percent GHG emissions reduction from 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent GHG emissions reduction levels from 1990 by 2050. Applying California Department of Finance population forecasts, CARB finds per-capita light-duty vehicle travel would need to be approximately 16.8 percent lower than existing, and overall per-capita vehicle travel would need to be approximately 14.3 percent lower than existing levels under that scenario. Below these levels, a project could be considered low VMT and would, on that metric, be consistent with 2017 Scoping Plan Update assumptions that achieve climate state climate goals.

CARB finds per capita vehicle travel would need to be kept below what today’s policies and plans would achieve.

CARB’s assessment is based on data in the 2017 Scoping Plan Update and 2016 Mobile Source Strategy.

In those documents, CARB previously examined the relationship between VMT and the state’s GHG emissions reduction targets. The Scoping Plan finds:
“While the State can do more to accelerate and incentivize these local decisions, local actions that reduce VMT are also necessary to meet transportation sector-specific goals and achieve the 2030 target under SB 32. Through developing the Scoping Plan, CARB staff is more convinced than ever that, in addition to achieving GHG reductions from cleaner fuels and vehicles, California must also reduce VMT. Stronger SB 375 GHG reduction targets will enable the State to make significant progress toward needed reductions, but alone will not provide the VMT growth reductions needed; there is a gap between what SB 375 can provide and what is needed to meet the State’s 2030 and 2050 goals.”16
Note that, at present, consistency with RTP/SCSs does not necessarily lead to a less-than-significant VMT impact.17 As the Final 2017 Scoping Plan Update states, VMT reductions are necessary to achieve the 2030 target and must be part of any strategy evaluated in this Plan. Stronger SB 375 GHG reduction targets will enable the State to make significant progress toward this goal, but alone will not provide all of the VMT growth reductions that will be needed. There is a gap between what SB 375 can provide and what is needed to meet the State’s 2030 and 2050 goals.”18

15 California Air Resources Board (forthcoming) California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping PlanIdentified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals. 16 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 101. 17 California Air Resources Board (Feb. 2018) Updated Final Staff Report: Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets, Figure 3, p. 35, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/sb375_target_update_final_staff_report_feb2018.pdf. 18 California Air Resources Board (Nov. 2017) California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, p. 75. 12 | Page
December 2018
Also, in order to capture the full effects of induced travel resulting from roadway capacity projects, an RTP/SCS would need to include an assessment of land use effects of those projects, and the effects of those land uses on VMT. (See section titled “Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects” below.) RTP/SCSs typically model VMT using a collaboratively-developed land use “vision” for the region’s land use, rather than studying the effects on land use of the proposed transportation investments.

In summary, achieving 15 percent lower per capita (residential) or per employee (office) VMT than existing development is both generally achievable and is supported by evidence that connects this level of reduction to the State’s emissions goals.

1. Screening Thresholds for Land Use Projects
Many agencies use “screening thresholds” to quickly identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. (See e.g., CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063(c)(3)(C), 15128, and Appendix G.) As explained below, this technical advisory suggests that lead agencies may screen out VMT impacts using project size, maps, transit availability, and provision of affordable housing.

Screening Threshold for Small Projects
Many local agencies have developed screening thresholds to indicate when detailed analysis is needed.

Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day19 generally may be assumed to cause a less-thansignificant transportation impact.

Map-Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects Residential and office projects that locate in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below threshold VMT (see recommendations below). Because new development in such

19 CEQA provides a categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,000 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15301, subd. (e)(2).) Typical project types for which trip generation increases relatively linearly with building footprint (i.e., general office building, single tenant office building, office park, and business park) generate or attract an additional 110-124 trips per 10,000 square feet.

Therefore, absent substantial evidence otherwise, it is reasonable to conclude that the addition of 110 or fewer trips could be considered not to lead to a significant impact. 13 | Page
December 2018
locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis.

Figure 2. Example map of household VMT that could be used to delineate areas eligible to receive streamlining for VMT analysis. (Source: City of San José, Department of Transportation, draft output of City Transportation Model.)
Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Stations Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop20 or an existing stop

20 Pub. Resources Code, § 21064.3 (“‘Major transit stop’ means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.”).
14 | Page
December 2018
along a high quality transit corridor21 will have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. This presumption would not apply, however, if project-specific or location-specific information indicates that the project will still generate significant levels of VMT. For example, the presumption might not be appropriate if the project:
● Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75
● Includes more parking for use by residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction (if the jurisdiction requires the project to supply parking) ● Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy (as determined by the lead agency, with input from the Metropolitan Planning Organization) ● Replaces affordable residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units
A project or plan near transit which replaces affordable residential units22 with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units may increase overall VMT because the increase in VMT of displaced residents could overwhelm the improvements in travel efficiency enjoyed by new residents.23 If any of these exceptions to the presumption might apply, the lead agency should conduct a detailed VMT analysis to determine whether the project would exceed VMT thresholds (see below).

Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT.
24,25 Further, “… low-wage workers in particular would be more likely to choose a residential location close to their workplace, if one is available.”26 In areas where existing jobshousing match is closer to optimal, low income housing nevertheless generates less VMT than market-

21 Pub. Resources Code, § 21155 (“For purposes of this section, a high-quality transit corridor means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.”).
22 Including naturally-occurring affordable residential units. 23 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, Chapter 4, pp. 159-160, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf. 24 Karner and Benner (2016) The convergence of social equity and environmental sustainability: Jobshousing fit and commute distance (“[P]olicies that advance a more equitable distribution of jobs and housing by linking the affordability of locally available housing with local wage levels are likely to be associated with reduced commuting distances”).
25 Karner and Benner (2015) Low-wage jobs-housing fit: identifying locations of affordable housing shortages.
26 Karner and Benner (2015) Low-wage jobs-housing fit: identifying locations of affordable housing shortages.
15 | Page
December 2018
rate housing.
27,28 Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT. Evidence supports a presumption of less than significant impact for a 100 percent affordable residential development (or the residential component of a mixed-use development) in infill locations. Lead agencies may develop their own presumption of less than significant impact for residential projects (or residential portions of mixed use projects) containing a particular amount of affordable housing, based on local circumstances and evidence. Furthermore, a project which includes any affordable residential units may factor the effect of the affordability on VMT into the assessment of VMT generated by those units.

2. Recommended Numeric Thresholds for Residential, Office, and Retail Projects
Residential development that would generate vehicle travel that is 15 or more percent below the existing residential VMT per capita, measured against the region or city, may indicate a less-thansignificant transportation impact. In MPO areas, development measured against city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the population or number of units specified in the SCS for that city because greater-than-planned amounts of development in areas above the region-based threshold would undermine the VMT containment needed to achieve regional targets under SB 375.

For residential projects in unincorporated county areas, the local agency can compare a residential project’s VMT to (1) the region’s VMT per capita, or (2) the aggregate population-weighted VMT per capita of all cities in the region. In MPO areas, development in unincorporated areas measured against aggregate city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the population or number of units specified in the SCS for that city because greater-than-planned amounts of development in areas above the regional threshold would undermine achievement of regional targets under SB 375.

27 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf. 28 CAPCOA (2010) Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, pp. 176-178, available at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf.

Recommended threshold for residential projects: A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing VMT per capita may indicate a significant transportation impact. Existing VMT per capita may be measured as regional VMT per capita or as city VMT per capita. Proposed development referencing a threshold based on city VMT per capita (rather than regional VMT per capita) should not cumulatively exceed the number of units specified in the SCS for that city, and should be consistent with the SCS.
16 | Page
December 2018
These thresholds can be applied to either household (i.e., tour-based) VMT or home-based (i.e., tripbased) VMT assessments. 29 It is critical, however, that the agency be consistent in its VMT measurement approach throughout the analysis to maintain an “apples-to-apples” comparison. For example, if the agency uses a home-based VMT for the threshold, it should also be use home-based VMT for calculating project VMT and VMT reduction due to mitigation measures.

Office projects that would generate vehicle travel exceeding 15 percent below existing VMT per employee for the region may indicate a significant transportation impact. In cases where the region is substantially larger than the geography over which most workers would be expected to live, it might be appropriate to refer to a smaller geography, such as the county, that includes the area over which nearly all workers would be expected to live.

Office VMT screening maps can be developed using tour-based data, considering either total employee VMT or employee work tour VMT. Similarly, tour-based analysis of office project VMT could consider either total employee VMT or employee work tour VMT. Where tour-based information is unavailable for threshold determination, project assessment, or assessment of mitigation, home-based work trip VMT should be used throughout all steps of the analysis to maintain an “apples-to-apples” comparison.

Because new retail development typically redistributes shopping trips rather than creating new trips, 30 estimating the total change in VMT (i.e., the difference in total VMT in the area affected with and without the project) is the best way to analyze a retail project’s transportation impacts.

By adding retail opportunities into the urban fabric and thereby improving retail destination proximity, local-serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT. Thus, lead agencies generally may presume such development creates a less-than-significant transportation impact. Regional-serving retail development, on the other hand, which can lead to substitution of longer trips for shorter ones, may tend to have a significant impact. Where such development decreases VMT, lead agencies should consider the impact to be less-than-significant.

Many cities and counties define local-serving and regional-serving retail in their zoning codes. Lead agencies may refer to those local definitions when available, but should also consider any project-

29 See Appendix 1 for a description of these approaches. 30 Lovejoy, et al. (2013) Measuring the impacts of local land-use policies on vehicle miles of travel:

The case of the first big-box store in Davis, California, The Journal of Transport and Land Use.

Recommended threshold for retail projects: A net increase in total VMT may indicate a significant transportation impact.

Recommended threshold for office projects: A proposed project exceeding a level of 15 percent below existing regional VMT per employee may indicate a significant transportation impact. 17 | Page
December 2018
specific information, such as market studies or economic impacts analyses that might bear on customers’ travel behavior. Because lead agencies will best understand their own communities and the likely travel behaviors of future project users, they are likely in the best position to decide when a project will likely be local-serving. Generally, however, retail development including stores larger than 50,000 square feet might be considered regional-serving, and so lead agencies should undertake an analysis to determine whether the project might increase or decrease VMT.

Mixed-Use Projects
Lead agencies can evaluate each component of a mixed-use project independently and apply the significance threshold for each project type included (e.g., residential and retail). Alternatively, a lead agency may consider only the project’s dominant use. In the analysis of each use, a project should take credit for internal capture. Combining different land uses and applying one threshold to those land uses may result in an inaccurate impact assessment.

Other Project Types
Of land use projects, residential, office, and retail projects tend to have the greatest influence on VMT.

For that reason, OPR recommends the quantified thresholds described above for purposes of analysis and mitigation. Lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types. In developing thresholds for other project types, or thresholds different from those recommended here, lead agencies should consider the purposes described in section 21099 of the Public Resources Code and regulations in the CEQA Guidelines on the development of thresholds of significance (e.g., CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.7).

Strategies and projects that decrease local VMT but increase total VMT should be avoided. Agencies should consider whether their actions encourage development in a less travel-efficient location by limiting development in travel-efficient locations.

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 should apply.

As described above, a project or plan near transit which replaces affordable31 residential units with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income residential units may increase overall VMT, because

31 Including naturally-occurring affordable residential units. 18 | Page
December 2018
displaced residents’ VMT may increase.
32 A lead agency should analyze VMT for such a project even if it otherwise would have been presumed less than significant. The assessment should incorporate an estimate of the aggregate VMT increase experienced by displaced residents. That additional VMT should be included in the numerator of the VMT per capita assessed for the project.

If a residential or office project leads to a net increase in VMT, then the project’s VMT per capita (residential) or per employee (office) should be compared to thresholds recommended above. Per capita and per employee VMT are efficiency metrics, and, as such, apply only to the existing project without regard to the VMT generated by the previously existing land use.

If the project leads to a net increase in provision of locally-serving retail, transportation impacts from the retail portion of the development should be presumed to be less than significant. If the project consists of regionally-serving retail, and increases overall VMT compared to with existing uses, then the project would lead to a significant transportation impact.

RTP/SCS Consistency (All Land Use Projects)
Section 15125, subdivision (d), of the CEQA Guidelines provides that lead agencies should analyze impacts resulting from inconsistencies with regional plans, including regional transportation plans. For this reason, if a project is inconsistent with the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS), the lead agency should evaluate whether that inconsistency indicates a significant impact on transportation. For example, a development may be inconsistent with an RTP/SCS if the development is outside the footprint of development or within an area specified as open space as shown in the SCS.

3. Recommendations Regarding Land Use Plans
As with projects, agencies should analyze VMT outcomes of land use plans across the full area over which the plan may substantively affect travel patterns, including beyond the boundary of the plan or jurisdiction’s geography. And as with projects, VMT should be counted in full rather than split between origin and destination. (Emissions inventories have sometimes spit cross-boundary trips in order to sum to a regional total, but CEQA requires accounting for the full impact without truncation or discounting).

Analysis of specific plans may employ the same thresholds described above for projects. A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective thresholds recommended above. Where the lead agency tiers from a general plan EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15152 and 15166, the lead agency generally focuses on the environmental impacts that are specific to the later project and were not analyzed as significant impacts in the prior EIR. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21068.5; Guidelines, § 15152, subd. (a).) Thus, in analyzing the later project, the lead agency

32 Chapple et al. (2017) Developing a New Methodology for Analyzing Potential Displacement, Chapter 4, pp. 159-160, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/research/apr/past/13-310.pdf. 19 | Page
December 2018
would focus on the VMT impacts that were not adequately addressed in the prior EIR. In the tiered document, the lead agency should continue to apply the thresholds recommended above.

Thresholds for plans in non-MPO areas may be determined on a case-by-case basis.

4. Other Considerations
Rural Projects Outside of MPOs
In rural areas of non-MPO counties (i.e., areas not near established or incorporated cities or towns), fewer options may be available for reducing VMT, and significance thresholds may be best determined on a case-by-case basis. Note, however, that clustered small towns and small town main streets may have substantial VMT benefits compared to isolated rural development, similar to the transit oriented development described above.

Impacts to Transit
Because criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote “the development of multimodal transportation networks” pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21099, subd. (b)(1), lead agencies should consider project impacts to transit systems and bicycle and pedestrian networks. For example, a project that blocks access to a transit stop or blocks a transit route itself may interfere with transit functions. Lead agencies should consult with transit agencies as early as possible in the development process, particularly for projects that are located within one half mile of transit stops.

When evaluating impacts to multimodal transportation networks, lead agencies generally should not treat the addition of new transit users as an adverse impact. An infill development may add riders to transit systems and the additional boarding and alighting may slow transit vehicles, but it also adds destinations, improving proximity and accessibility. Such development also improves regional vehicle flow by adding less vehicle travel onto the regional network.

Increased demand throughout a region may, however, cause a cumulative impact by requiring new or additional transit infrastructure. Such impacts may be adequately addressed through a fee program that fairly allocates the cost of improvements not just to projects that happen to locate near transit, but rather across a region to all projects that impose burdens on the entire transportation system, since transit can broadly improve the function of the transportation system.

F. Considering the Effects of Transportation Projects on Vehicle Travel Many transportation projects change travel patterns. A transportation project which leads to additional vehicle travel on the roadway network, commonly referred to as “induced vehicle travel,” would need to quantify the amount of additional vehicle travel in order to assess air quality impacts, greenhouse gas emissions impacts, energy impacts, and noise impacts. Transportation projects also are required to 20 | Page
December 2018
examine induced growth impacts under CEQA. (See generally, Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21065 [defining “project” under CEQA as an activity as causing either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change], 21065.3 [defining “project-specific effect” to mean all direct or indirect environmental effects], 21100, subd. (b) [required contents of an EIR].) For any project that increases vehicle travel, explicit assessment and quantitative reporting of the amount of additional vehicle travel should not be omitted from the document; such information may be useful and necessary for a full understanding of a project’s environmental impacts. (See Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000, 21001, 21001.1, 21002, 21002.1 [discussing the policies of CEQA].) A lead agency that uses the VMT metric to assess the transportation impacts of a transportation project may simply report that change in VMT as the impact. When the lead agency uses another metric to analyze the transportation impacts of a roadway project, changes in amount of vehicle travel added to the roadway network should still be analyzed and reported. 33 While CEQA does not require perfection, it is important to make a reasonably accurate estimate of transportation projects’ effects on vehicle travel in order to make reasonably accurate estimates of GHG emissions, air quality emissions, energy impacts, and noise impacts. (See, e.g., California Clean Energy Com. v. City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 210 [EIR failed to consider project’s transportation energy impacts]; Ukiah Citizens for Safety First v. City of Ukiah (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 256, 266.) Appendix 2 describes in detail the causes of induced vehicle travel, the robust empirical evidence of induced vehicle travel, and how models and research can be used in conjunction to quantitatively assess induced vehicle travel with reasonable accuracy.

If a project would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel, the lead agency should conduct an analysis assessing the amount of vehicle travel the project will induce. Project types that would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in vehicle travel generally include:
• Addition of through lanes on existing or new highways, including general purpose lanes, HOV lanes, peak period lanes, auxiliary lanes, or lanes through grade-separated interchanges Projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis, include:
• Rehabilitation, maintenance, replacement, safety, and repair projects designed to improve the condition of existing transportation assets (e.g., highways; roadways; bridges; culverts; Transportation Management System field elements such as cameras, message signs, detection, or signals; tunnels; transit systems; and assets that serve bicycle and pedestrian facilities) and that do not add additional motor vehicle capacity
• Roadside safety devices or hardware installation such as median barriers and guardrails

33 See, e.g., California Department of Transportation (2006) Guidance for Preparers of Growth-related, Indirect Impact Analyses, available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/Growthrelated_IndirectImpactAnalysis/GRI_guidance06May_files/gri_guidance.pdf. 21 | Page
December 2018
• Roadway shoulder enhancements to provide “breakdown space,” dedicated space for use only by transit vehicles, to provide bicycle access, or to otherwise improve safety, but which will not be used as automobile vehicle travel lanes
• Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes
• Addition of roadway capacity on local or collector streets provided the project also substantially improves conditions for pedestrians, cyclists, and, if applicable, transit • Conversion of existing general purpose lanes (including ramps) to managed lanes or transit lanes, or changing lane management in a manner that would not substantially increase vehicle travel
• Addition of a new lane that is permanently restricted to use only by transit vehicles • Reduction in number of through lanes
• Grade separation to separate vehicles from rail, transit, pedestrians or bicycles, or to replace a lane in order to separate preferential vehicles (e.g., HOV, HOT, or trucks) from general vehicles • Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic control devices, including Transit Signal Priority (TSP) features
• Installation of traffic metering systems, detection systems, cameras, changeable message signs and other electronics designed to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow • Installation of roundabouts or traffic circles
• Installation or reconfiguration 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 operation with no net increase in number of traffic lanes
• Removal or relocation of off-street or on-street parking spaces • Adoption or modification of on-street parking or loading restrictions (including meters, time limits, accessible spaces, and preferential/reserved parking permit programs) • Addition of traffic wayfinding signage
• Rehabilitation and maintenance projects that do not add motor vehicle capacity • Addition of new or enhanced bike or pedestrian facilities on existing streets/highways or within existing public rights-of-way
• Addition of Class I bike paths, trails, multi-use paths, or other off-road facilities that serve nonmotorized travel • Installation of publicly available alternative fuel/charging infrastructure • Addition of passing lanes, truck climbing lanes, or truck brake-check lanes in rural areas that do not increase overall vehicle capacity along the corridor 22 | Page
December 2018

1. Recommended Significance Threshold for Transportation Projects As noted in Section 15064.3 of the CEQA Guidelines, lead agencies for roadway capacity projects have discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requirements, to choose which metric to use to evaluate transportation impacts. This section recommends considerations for evaluating impacts using vehicle miles traveled. Lead agencies have discretion to choose a threshold of significance for transportation projects as they do for other types of projects. As explained above, Public Resources Code section 21099, subdivision (b)(1), provides that criteria for determining the significance of transportation impacts must promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses. (Id.; see generally, adopted CEQA Guidelines, § 15064.3, subd. (b) [Criteria for Analyzing Transportation Impacts].) With those goals in mind, OPR prepared and the Agency adopted an appropriate transportation metric.

Whether adopting a threshold of significance, or evaluating transportation impacts on a case-by-case basis, a lead agency should ensure that the analysis addresses:
• Direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the transportation project (CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subds. (d), (h))
• Near-term and long-term effects of the transportation project (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15063, subd. (a)(1), 15126.2, subd. (a))
• The transportation project’s consistency with state greenhouse gas reduction goals (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21099)34
• The impact of the transportation project on the development of multimodal transportation networks (Pub. Resources Code, § 21099)
• The impact of the transportation project on the development of a diversity of land uses (Pub.

Resources Code, § 21099)
The CARB Scoping Plan and the CARB Mobile Source Strategy delineate VMT levels required to achieve legally mandated GHG emissions reduction targets. A lead agency should develop a project-level threshold based on those VMT levels, and may apply the following approach:

1. Propose a fair-share allocation of those budgets to their jurisdiction (e.g., by population);

34 The California Air Resources Board has ascertained the limits of VMT growth compatible with California containing greenhouse gas emissions to levels research shows would allow for climate stabilization. (See The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target (p. 78, p. 101); Mobile Source Strategy (p. 37).) CARB’s Updated Final Staff Report on Proposed Update to the SB 375 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Targets illustrates that the current Regional Transportation Plans and Sustainable Communities Strategies will fall short of achieving the necessary on-road transportation-related GHG emissions reductions called for in the 2017 Scoping Plan (Figure 3, p. 35). Accordingly, OPR recommends not basing GHG emissions or transportation impact analysis for a transportation project solely on consistency with an RTP/SCS. 23 | Page
December 2018

2. Determine the amount of VMT growth likely to result from background population growth, and subtract that from their “budget”;

3. Allocate their jurisdiction’s share between their various VMT-increasing transportation projects, using whatever criteria the lead agency prefers.

2. Estimating VMT Impacts from Transportation Projects
CEQA requires analysis of a project’s potential growth-inducing impacts. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21100, subd. (b)(5); CEQA Guidelines, § 15126.2, subd. (d).) Many agencies are familiar with the analysis of growth inducing impacts associated with water, sewer, and other infrastructure. This technical advisory addresses growth that may be expected from roadway expansion projects.

Because a roadway expansion project can induce substantial VMT, incorporating quantitative estimates of induced VMT is critical to calculating both transportation and other impacts of these projects.

Induced travel also has the potential to reduce or eliminate congestion relief benefits. An accurate estimate of induced travel is needed to accurately weigh costs and benefits of a highway capacity expansion project.

The effect of a transportation project on vehicle travel should be estimated using the “change in total VMT” method described in Appendix 1. This means that an assessment of total VMT without the project and an assessment with the project should be made; the difference between the two is the amount of VMT attributable to the project. The assessment should cover the full area in which driving patterns are expected to change. As with other types of projects, the VMT estimation should not be truncated at a modeling or jurisdictional boundary for convenience of analysis when travel behavior is substantially affected beyond that boundary.

Transit and Active Transportation Projects
Transit and active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and therefore are presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on transportation. This presumption may apply to all passenger rail projects, bus and bus rapid transit projects, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure projects. Streamlining transit and active transportation projects aligns with each of the three statutory goals contained in SB 743 by reducing GHG emissions, increasing multimodal transportation networks, and facilitating mixed use development.

Roadway Projects
Reducing roadway capacity (for example, by removing or repurposing motor vehicle travel lanes) will generally reduce VMT and therefore is presumed to cause a less-than-significant impact on transportation. Generally, no transportation analysis is needed for such projects. 24 | Page
December 2018
Building new roadways, adding roadway capacity in congested areas, or adding roadway capacity to areas where congestion is expected in the future, typically induces additional vehicle travel. For the types of projects previously indicated as likely to lead to additional vehicle travel, an estimate should be made of the change in vehicle travel resulting from the project.

For projects that increase roadway capacity, lead agencies can evaluate induced travel quantitatively by applying the results of existing studies that examine the magnitude of the increase of VMT resulting from a given increase in lane miles. These studies estimate the percent change in VMT for every percent change in miles to the roadway system (i.e., “elasticity”). 35 Given that lead agencies have discretion in
choosing their methodology, and the studies on induced travel reveal a range of elasticities, lead agencies may appropriately apply professional judgment in studying the transportation effects of a particular project. The most recent major study, estimates an elasticity of 1.0, meaning that every percent change in lane miles results in a one percent increase in VMT.36 This method would not be suitable for rural (non-MPO) locations in the state which are neither congested nor projected to become congested. It also may not be suitable for a new road that provides new connectivity across a barrier (e.g., a bridge across a river) if it would be expected to substantially shorten existing trips. If it is likely to be substantial, the trips-shortening effect should be examined explicitly.

The effects of roadway capacity on vehicle travel can also be applied at a programmatic level. For example, in a regional planning process the lead agency can use that program-level analysis to

35 See U.C. Davis, Institute for Transportation Studies (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely to Relieve Traffic Congestion; Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy Brief, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf. 36 See Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US cities, available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376.

To estimate VMT impacts from roadway expansion projects:

1. Determine the total lane-miles over an area that fully captures travel behavior changes resulting from the project (generally the region, but for projects affecting interregional travel look at all affected regions).

2. Determine the percent change in total lane miles that will result from the project.

3. Determine the total existing VMT over that same area.

4. Multiply the percent increase in lane miles by the existing VMT, and then multiply that by the elasticity from the induced travel literature:
[% increase in lane miles] x [existing VMT] x [elasticity] = [VMT resulting from the project] 25 | Page
December 2018
streamline later project-level analysis. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15168.) A program-level analysis of VMT should include effects of the program on land use patterns, and the VMT that results from those land use effects. In order for a program-level document to adequately analyze potential induced demand from a project or program of roadway capacity expansion, lead agencies cannot assume a fixed land use pattern (i.e., a land use pattern that does not vary in response to the provision of roadway capacity). A proper analysis should account for land use investment and development pattern changes that react in a reasonable manner to changes in accessibility created by transportation infrastructure investments (whether at the project or program level).

Mitigation and Alternatives
Induced VMT has the potential to reduce or eliminate congestion relief benefits, increase VMT, and increase other environmental impacts that result from vehicle travel.37 If those effects are significant, the lead agency will need to consider mitigation or alternatives. In the context of increased travel that is induced by capacity increases, appropriate mitigation and alternatives that a lead agency might consider include the following:
• Tolling new lanes to encourage carpools and fund transit improvements • Converting existing general purpose lanes to HOV or HOT lanes • Implementing or funding off-site travel demand management • Implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) strategies to improve passenger throughput on existing lanes
Tolling and other management strategies can have the additional benefit of preventing congestion and maintaining free-flow conditions, conferring substantial benefits to road users as discussed above.

G. Analyzing Other Impacts Related to Transportation
While requiring a change in the methodology of assessing transportation impacts, Public Resources Code section 21099 notes that this change “does not relieve a public agency of the requirement to analyze a project’s potentially significant transportation impacts related to air quality, noise, safety, or any other impact associated with transportation.” OPR expects that lead agencies will continue to address mobile source emissions in the air quality and noise sections of an environmental document and the corresponding studies that support the analysis in those sections. Lead agencies should continue to address environmental impacts of a proposed project pursuant to CEQA’s requirements, using a format that is appropriate for their particular project.

37 See National Center for Sustainable Transportation (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely to Relieve Traffic Congestion, available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/researchreports/reports/2015/10-12-2015- NCST_Brief_InducedTravel_CS6_v3.pdf; see Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US cities, available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376. 26 | Page
December 2018
Because safety concerns result from many different factors, they are best addressed at a programmatic level (i.e., in a general plan or regional transportation plan) in cooperation with local governments, metropolitan planning organizations, and, where the state highway system is involved, the California Department of Transportation. In most cases, such an analysis would not be appropriate on a projectby-project basis. Increases in traffic volumes at a particular location resulting from a project typically cannot be estimated with sufficient accuracy or precision to provide useful information for an analysis of safety concerns. Moreover, an array of factors affect travel demand (e.g., strength of the local economy, price of gasoline), causing substantial additional uncertainty. Appendix B of OPR’s General Plan Guidelines summarizes research which could be used to guide a programmatic analysis under CEQA.

Lead agencies should note that automobile congestion or delay does not constitute a significant environmental impact (Pub. Resources Code, §21099(b)(2)), and safety should not be used as a proxy for road capacity.

H. VMT Mitigation and Alternatives
When a lead agency identifies a significant impact, it must identify feasible mitigation measures that could avoid or substantially reduce that impact. (Pub. Resources Code, § 21002.1, subd. (a).) Additionally, CEQA requires that an environmental impact report identify feasible alternatives that could avoid or substantially reduce a project’s significant environmental impacts.

Indeed, the California Court of Appeal recently held that a long-term regional transportation plan was deficient for failing to discuss an alternative which could significantly reduce total vehicle miles traveled.

In Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments, et al. (2017) 17 Cal.App.5th 413, the court found that omission “inexplicable” given the lead agency’s “acknowledgment in its Climate Action Strategy that the state’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from on-road transportation will not succeed if the amount of driving, or vehicle miles traveled, is not significantly reduced.” (Cleveland National Forest Foundation, supra, 17 Cal.App.5th at p. 436.) Additionally, the court noted that the project alternatives focused primarily on congestion relief even though “the [regional] transportation plan is a long-term and congestion relief is not necessarily an effective longterm strategy.” (Id. at p. 437.) The court concluded its discussion of the alternatives analysis by stating:
“Given the acknowledged long-term drawbacks of congestion relief alternatives, there is not substantial evidence to support the EIR’s exclusion of an alternative focused primarily on significantly reducing vehicle trips.” (Ibid.)
Several examples of potential mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce VMT are described below.

However, the selection of particular mitigation measures and alternatives are left to the discretion of the lead agency, and mitigation measures may vary, depending on the proposed project and significant impacts, if any. Further, OPR expects that agencies will continue to innovate and find new ways to reduce vehicular travel.
27 | Page
December 2018
Potential measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled include, but are not limited to:
• Improve or increase access to transit.
• Increase access to common goods and services, such as groceries, schools, and daycare. • Incorporate affordable housing into the project.
• Incorporate neighborhood electric vehicle network.
• Orient the project toward transit, bicycle and pedestrian facilities. • Improve pedestrian or bicycle networks, or transit service. • Provide traffic calming.
• Provide bicycle parking.
• Limit or eliminate parking supply.
• Unbundle parking costs.
• Provide parking cash-out programs.
• Implement roadway pricing.
• Implement or provide access to a commute reduction program. • Provide car-sharing, bike sharing, and ride-sharing programs. • Provide transit passes.
• Shifting single occupancy vehicle trips to carpooling or vanpooling, for example providing ridematching services. • Providing telework options.
• Providing incentives or subsidies that increase the use of modes other than single-occupancy vehicle.
• Providing on-site amenities at places of work, such as priority parking for carpools and vanpools, secure bike parking, and showers and locker rooms.
• Providing employee transportation coordinators at employment sites. • Providing a guaranteed ride home service to users of non-auto modes.

Notably, because VMT is largely a regional impact, regional VMT-reduction programs may be an appropriate form of mitigation. In lieu fees have been found to be valid mitigation where there is both a commitment to pay fees and evidence that mitigation will actually occur. (Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 140-141; Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359; Kings County Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692, 727–728.) Fee programs are particularly useful to address cumulative impacts. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15130, subd. (a)(3) [a “project’s incremental contribution is less than cumulatively considerable if the project is required to implement or fund its fair share of a mitigation measure or measures designed to alleviate the cumulative impact”].) The mitigation program must undergo CEQA evaluation, either on the program as a whole, or the in-lieu fees or other mitigation must be evaluated on a project-specific basis. (California Native Plant Society v. County of El Dorado (2009) 170 Cal.App.4th 1026.) That CEQA evaluation could be part of a larger program, such as a regional transportation plan, analyzed in a Program EIR. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15168.)
28 | Page
December 2018
Examples of project alternatives that may reduce vehicle miles traveled include, but are not limited to:
• Locate the project in an area of the region that already exhibits low VMT. • Locate the project near transit.
• Increase project density.
• Increase the mix of uses within the project or within the project’s surroundings. • Increase connectivity and/or intersection density on the project site. • Deploy management strategies (e.g., pricing, vehicle occupancy requirements) on roadways or roadway lanes.
29 | Page
December 2018
Appendix 1. Considerations About Which VMT to Count
Consistent with the obligation to make a good faith effort to disclose the environmental consequences of a project, lead agencies have discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate project impacts.38 A lead agency can evaluate a project’s effect on VMT in numerous ways. The purpose of this document is to provide technical considerations in determining which methodology may be most useful for various project types.

Background on Estimating Vehicle Miles Traveled
Before discussing specific methodological recommendations, this section provides a brief overview of modeling and counting VMT, including some key terminology.

Here is an illustrative example of some methods of estimating vehicle miles traveled. Consider the following hypothetical travel day (all by automobile):

1. Residence to Coffee Shop

2. Coffee Shop to Work

3. Work to Sandwich Shop

4. Sandwich Shop to Work

5. Work to Residence

6. Residence to Store

7. Store to Residence
Trip-based assessment of a project’s effect on travel behavior counts VMT from individual trips to and from the project. It is the most basic, and traditionally the most common, method of counting VMT. A trip-based VMT assessment of the residence in the above example would consider segments 1, 5, 6 and

7. For residential projects, the sum of home-based trips is called home-based VMT.

A tour-based assessment counts the entire home-back-to-home tour that includes the project. A tourbased VMT assessment of the residence in the above example would consider segments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in one tour, and 6 and 7 in a second tour. A tour-based assessment of the workplace would include segments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. Together, all tours comprise household VMT.

38 The California Supreme Court has explained that when an agency has prepared an environmental impact report:
[T]he issue is not whether the [lead agency’s] studies are irrefutable or whether they could have been better. The relevant issue is only whether the studies are sufficiently credible to be considered as part of the total evidence that supports the [lead agency’s] finding[.]
(Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 409; see also Eureka Citizens for Responsible Gov’t v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357, 372.) 30 | Page
December 2018
Both trip- and tour-based assessments can be used as measures of transportation efficiency, using denominators such as per capita, per employee, or per person-trip.

Trip- and Tour-based Assessment of VMT
As illustrated above, a tour-based assessment of VMT is a more complete characterization of a project’s effect on VMT. In many cases, a project affects travel behavior beyond the first destination. The location and characteristics of the home and workplace will often be the main drivers of VMT. For example, a residential or office development located near high quality transit will likely lead to some commute trips utilizing transit, affecting mode choice on the rest of the tour.

Characteristics of an office project can also affect an employee’s VMT beyond the work tour. For example, a workplace located at the urban periphery, far from transit, can require an employee to own a car, which in turn affects the entirety of an employee’s travel behavior and VMT. For this reason, when estimating the effect of an office development on VMT, it may be appropriate to consider total employee VMT if data and tools, such as tour-based models, are available. This is consistent with CEQA’s requirement to evaluate both direct and indirect effects of a project. (See CEQA Guidelines, § 15064, subd. (d)(2).)
Assessing Change in Total VMT
A third method, estimating the change in total VMT with and without the project, can evaluate whether a project is likely to divert existing trips, and what the effect of those diversions will be on total VMT.

This method answers the question, “What is the net effect of the project on area VMT?” As an illustration, assessing the total change in VMT for a grocery store built in a food desert that diverts trips from more distant stores could reveal a net VMT reduction. The analysis should address the full area over which the project affects travel behavior, even if the effect on travel behavior crosses political boundaries.

Using Models to Estimate VMT
Travel demand models, sketch models, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to calculate and estimate VMT (see Appendix F of the preliminary discussion draft). To the extent possible, lead agencies should choose models that have sensitivity to features of the project that affect VMT.

Those tools and resources can also assist in establishing thresholds of significance and estimating VMT reduction attributable to mitigation measures and project alternatives. When using models and tools for those various purposes, agencies should use comparable data and methods, in order to set up an “apples-to-apples” comparison between thresholds, VMT estimates, and VMT mitigation estimates.

Models can work together. For example, agencies can use travel demand models or survey data to estimate existing trip lengths and input those into sketch models such as CalEEMod to achieve more 31 | Page
December 2018
accurate results. Whenever possible, agencies should input localized trip lengths into a sketch model to tailor the analysis to the project location. However, in doing so, agencies should be careful to avoid double counting if the sketch model includes other inputs or toggles that are proxies for trip length (e.g., distance to city center). Generally, if an agency changes any sketch model defaults, it should record and report those changes for transparency of analysis. Again, trip length data should come from the same source as data used to calculate thresholds to be sure of an “apples-to-apples” comparison.

Additional background information regarding travel demand models is available in the California Transportation Commission’s “2010 Regional Transportation Plan Guidelines,” beginning at page 35. 32 | Page
December 2018
Appendix 2. Induced Travel: Mechanisms, Research, and Additional Assessment Approaches Induced travel occurs where roadway capacity is expanded in an area of present or projected future congestion. The effect typically manifests over several years. Lower travel times make the modified facility more attractive to travelers, resulting in the following trip-making changes:
● Longer trips. The ability to travel a long distance in a shorter time increases the attractiveness of destinations that are farther away, increasing trip length and vehicle travel. ● Changes in mode choice. When transportation investments are devoted to reducing automobile travel time, travelers tend to shift toward automobile use from other modes, which increases vehicle travel.
● Route changes. Faster travel times on a route attract more drivers to that route from other routes, which can increase or decrease vehicle travel depending on whether it shortens or lengthens trips.
● Newly generated trips. Increasing travel speeds can induce additional trips, which increases vehicle travel. For example, an individual who previously telecommuted or purchased goods on the internet might choose to accomplish those tasks via automobile trips as a result of increased speeds.
● Land Use Changes. Faster travel times along a corridor lead to land development farther along that corridor; that new development generates and attracts longer trips, which increases vehicle travel. Over several years, this induced growth component of induced vehicle travel can be substantial, making it critical to include in analyses.

Each of these effects has implications for the total amount of vehicle travel. These effects operate over different time scales. For example, changes in mode choice might occur immediately, while land use changes typically take a few years or longer. CEQA requires lead agencies to analyze both short-term and long-term effects.

Evidence of Induced Vehicle Travel. A large number of peer reviewed studies39 have demonstrated a causal link between highway capacity increases and VMT increases. Many provide quantitative estimates of the magnitude of the induced VMT phenomenon. Collectively, they provide high quality evidence of the existence and magnitude of the induced travel effect.

39 See, e.g., Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy Brief, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf; National Center for Sustainable Transportation (Oct. 2015) Increasing Highway Capacity Unlikely to Relieve Traffic Congestion, available at
http://www.dot.ca.gov/research/researchreports/reports/2015/10-12-2015- NCST_Brief_InducedTravel_CS6_v3.pdf.
33 | Page
December 2018
Most of these studies express the amount of induced vehicle travel as an “elasticity,” which is a multiplier that describes the additional vehicle travel resulting from an additional lane mile of roadway capacity added. For example, an elasticity of 0.6 would signify an 0.6 percent increase in vehicle travel for every 1.0 percent increase in lane miles. Many of these studies distinguish “short run elasticity” (increase in vehicle travel in the first few years) from “long run elasticity” (increase in vehicle travel beyond the first few years). Long run elasticity is larger than short run elasticity, because as time passes, more of the components of induced vehicle travel materialize. Generally, short run elasticity can be thought of as excluding the effects of land use change, while long run elasticity includes them. Most studies find a long run elasticity between 0.6 and just over 1.0, 40 meaning that every increase in lanes
miles of one percent leads to an increase in vehicle travel of 0.6 to 1.0 percent. The most recent major study finds the elasticity of vehicle travel by lanes miles added to be 1.03; in other words, each percent increase in lane miles results in a 1.03 percent increase in vehicle travel. 41 (An elasticity greater than 1.0
can occur because new lanes induce vehicle travel that spills beyond the project location.) In CEQA analysis, the long-run elasticity should be used, as it captures the full effect of the project rather than just the early-stage effect.

Quantifying Induced Vehicle Travel Using Models. Lead agencies can generally achieve the most accurate assessment of induced vehicle travel resulting from roadway capacity increasing projects by applying elasticities from the academic literature, because those estimates include vehicle travel resulting from induced land use. If a lead agency chooses to use a travel demand model, additional analysis would be needed to account for induced land use. This section describes some approaches to undertaking that additional analysis.

Proper use of a travel demand model can capture the following components of induced VMT:
• Trip length (generally increases VMT)
• Mode shift (generally shifts from other modes toward automobile use, increasing VMT) • Route changes (can act to increase or decrease VMT)
• Newly generated trips (generally increases VMT)
o Note that not all travel demand models have sensitivity to this factor, so an off-model estimate may be necessary if this effect could be substantial.

However, estimating long-run induced VMT also requires an estimate of the project’s effects on land use. This component of the analysis is important because it has the potential to be a large component of

40 See Boarnet and Handy (Sept. 2014) Impact of Highway Capacity and Induced Travel on Passenger Vehicle Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions, California Air Resources Board Policy Brief, p. 2, available at https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/policies/hwycapacity/highway_capacity_brief.pdf. 41 Duranton and Turner (2011) The Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US cities, available at http://www.nber.org/papers/w15376.
34 | Page
December 2018
the overall induced travel effect. Options for estimating and incorporating the VMT effects that are caused by the subsequent land use changes include:

1. Employ an expert panel. An expert panel could assess changes to land use development that would likely result from the project. This assessment could then be analyzed by the travel demand model to assess effects on vehicle travel. Induced vehicle travel assessed via this approach should be verified using elasticities found in the academic literature.

2. Adjust model results to align with the empirical research. If the travel demand model analysis is performed without incorporating projected land use changes resulting from the project, the assessed vehicle travel should be adjusted upward to account for those land use changes. The assessed VMT after adjustment should fall within the range found in the academic literature.

3. Employ a land use model, running it iteratively with a travel demand model. A land use model can be used to estimate the land use effects of a roadway capacity increase, and the traffic patterns that result from the land use change can then be fed back into the travel demand model. The land use model and travel demand model can be iterated to produce an accurate result.

A project which provides new connectivity across a barrier, such as a new bridge across a river, may provide a shortened path between existing origins and destinations, thereby shortening existing trips. In rare cases, this trip-shortening effect might be substantial enough to reduce the amount of vehicle travel resulting from the project below the range found in the elasticities in the academic literature, or even lead a net reduction in vehicle travel overall. In such cases, the trip-shortening effect could be examined explicitly.

Whenever employing a travel demand model to assess induced vehicle travel, any limitation or known lack of sensitivity in the analysis that might cause substantial errors in the VMT estimate (for example, model insensitivity to one of the components of induced VMT described above) should be disclosed and characterized, and a description should be provided on how it could influence the analysis results. A discussion of the potential error or bias should be carried into analyses that rely on the VMT analysis, such as greenhouse gas emissions, air quality, energy, and noise.

GUIDELINES FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES

IN THE SAN DIEGO REGION
May 2019
Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region Page i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This technical paper was prepared by members of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, San Diego Section, Transportation Capacity and Mobility Task Force, SB 743 Subcommittee.

PRINCIPAL AUTHORS
Erik Ruehr, VRPA Technologies (Subcommittee Chair)
Katy Cole, Fehr and Peers
Mychal Loomis, Kimley-Horn and Associates
KC Yellapu, Linscott, Law & Greeenspan, Engineers
Justin Rasas, LOS Engineering
ADDITIONAL SB 743 SUBCOMMITTEE MEMBERS
Andrew Martin, Ascent Environmental Jacob Armstrong, San Diego County Alyssa Begley, Caltrans Kimberly Dodson, Caltrans
Roger Sanchez-Rangel, Caltrans Monique Chen, Chen Ryan Associates Phuong Nguyen, Chen Ryan Associates Craig Williams, City of Carlsbad Scott Barker, City of Chula Vista Claudia Brizuela, City of San Diego Meghan Cedeno, City of San Diego Maureen Gardiner, City of San Diego George Ghossain, City of San Diego Ann Gonsalves, City of San Diego Samir Hajjiri, City of San Diego Nic Abboud, City of San Marcos Minjie Mei, City of Santee Meghan Macias, EPD Solutions Sarah Brandenberg, Fehr and Peers Amy Jackson, Kimley- Horn and Associates Larry Hofreiter, Port of San Diego Cara Hilgesen, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers Mike Calandra, SANDAG Walter Musial, Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers Keith Greer, SANDAG Dawn Wilson, Michael Baker International Sandipan Bhattacharjee, Translutions David Wong-Toi

Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1.0 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1-1

2.0 Purpose of Guidelines .......................................................................................................................... 2-1

3.0 Project Coordination and Staff Consultation ..................................................................................... 3-1 PART I – CEQA TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

4.0 Individual Land Development Projects and Specific Plans ............................................................... 4-1

5.0 Community Plans and General Plans ................................................................................................. 5-1

6.0 Transportation Projects ....................................................................................................................... 6-1 PART II – LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

7.0 Roadway ................................................................................................................................................ 7-1

8.0 Transit .................................................................................................................................................... 8-1

9.0 Bicycle .................................................................................................................................................. 9-1

10.0 Pedestrian ........................................................................................................................................... 10-1

APPENDICES

APPENDIX
A. Local Transportation Analysis Screen Check
B. Ramp Meter Analysis
C. Level of Service (LOS) Definitions
Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region Page iii

LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION—FIGURE # PAGE
Figure 4–1 Transportation Impact Study Flow Chart – Individual Projects and Specific Plans ................... 4-2 Figure 6–1 Transportation Impact Study Flow Chart – Transportation Projects .......................................... 6-2 Figure 7–1 Flow Chart for LTA Roadway Analysis ..................................................................................... 7-2

LIST OF TABLES
SECTION—TABLE # PAGE
Table 7–1 Thresholds for Roadway Improvements ................................................................................... 7-6 Table 7–2 Roadway Classifications, Level of Service, and Average Daily Traffic...................................... 7-7 Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region