HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-02-23 - AGENDA REPORTS - TRAVEL DEMAND TRIP REDUCTION (2)PUBLIC HEARING
DATE:
SUBJECT:
DEPARTMENT:
BACKGROUND
AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented by:
Lynn M. Harris }v& i
February 23, 1993
Travel Demand Management/Trlp Reduction Ordinance (TDMlTRO)
Community Development
At its meeting on January 19,1993, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval
of the Transportation Demand Management/Trip Reduction Ordinance (TDM/TRO) before you. This
ordinance is essentially the same as the model approved by the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission (LACTC) as part of the Congestion Management Program (CMP). The City is required
to adopt an ordinance that substantially conforms to the model ordinance by April 1, 1993. If the
City fails to do this, the City could forfeit state gas tax subventions of several million dollars per
year for transportation and transit Improvements.
The TDM/TRO encourages carpooling, vanpooling, transit ridership and non -motorized
transportation. The LACTC's model ordinance was developed with extensive participation from
local governments and the private sector. Mayor Heldt was a member of the Policy. Advisory
Committee for the CMP, and staff served on the Technical Advisory Group. The model ordinance
focuses on 'TDM -friendly" design standards for non-residential development, as well as
consultation with transit operators. The LACTC believes that their approach will minimize
Implementation costs and promote transportation alternatives..
The LACTC encourages jurisdictions to adopt the model ordinance as written, as the LACTC will
grant approval of the ordinance without further review. The City could adopt a more stringent
ordinance and/or one that employs different approaches, but this would require a detailed review
by the LACTC and could delay adoption. The Planning Commission, In their motion of approval,
stated that the ordinance is a "de minimis" attempt to address the Issue and that It be approved
solely to prevent financial disaster and under duress. Staff pointed out, prior to the adoption of the
motion, that many of the Commission's goals for more Innovative solutions would be satisfied
through another component of the Congestion Management Program, namely the requirement for
a Transportation Impact Analysis for all projects requiring an EIR.
Recommendation:
1) Adopt the negative declaration prepared for the project with the finding that the project will
not have a significant effect upon the environment.
2) Adopt the Travel Demand Management/Trip Reduction Ordinance, Ordinance No. 93-05.
Attachments: Ordinance No. 93-5 and Negative Declaration
y�-� Agenda Item:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ORDINANCE 93-5 WHICH
ESTABLISHES TRIP REDUCTION AND TRAVEL DEMAND MEASURES FOR NEW
NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS OF 25,000 SQ. FT.
AND GREATER AND TO CONSIDER ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
FOR THIS PROJECT
PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
A Public Hearing on -Ordinance No: -93-5 which establishes -trip, reduction and
travel demand measures for new non-residential development projects of 25,000
square feet and greater, will be heard by the City Council. This ordinance
also establishes transit review requirements for development projects. The
ordinance will apply to non-residential projects requiring an Environmental
Impact.Report (EIR). The City has prepared the ordinance to satisfy certain
local government requirements of the Congestion Management Program' of Los
Angeles County as mandated by the State legislature.
The hearing will be, held by the City Council in the City Hall Council
Chambers,- 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, Santa Clarita, the 23rd day of
February, 1993, at or after 6:30 p.m. to consider this ordinance and
environmental documentation prepared for this project.
The initial study and Negative Declaration prepared for this project is
available for public review beginning at 4:00 p.m. on February 2, 1993 .at the
Valencia.Library, 23743 Valencia Blvd., Santa Clarita, and City Hall Dept. of
Community Development, 23920 Valencia Blvd., Ste. 300, Santa Clarita. Further
information may be obtained by contacting the Community Development Department
at (805) 255-4330.
Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be heard on
this matter at that time. If you wish to challenge this order in court, you
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing described in this. notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to the public hearing.
Date: January 28, 1993
Donna M. Grindey, CMC
City Clerk
Publish Date: February 1, 1993
0 ORDINANCE NO. 93-5
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA ADOPTING TRIP REDUCTION
AND TRAVEL DEMAND MEASURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTIONS 65089 AND 65089.3
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has found that the lack of an Integrated
transportation system and the Increase in the number of vehicles are causing traffic congestion that
each day results in hundreds of thousands of hours lost In traffic, tons of pollutants released into
the air, and millions of dollars of added costs to the motoring public; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature has adopted legislation requiring the preparation and
Implementation of a Congestion Management Program ("CMP") by county transportation
commissions or other public agencies of every county that Includes an urbanized area; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority ("MTA'j Is responsible for the
preparation of the CMP for Los Angeles County ("County"); and
WHEREAS, the CMP must contain a trip reduction and travel demand management element
that promotes alternative transportation methods, such as carpools, vanpools, transit; bicycles,
walking and park-and-ride lots, Improvement In the balance between )obs and housing, and other
strategies, including flexible work hours, telecommuting and parking management programs; and
WHEREAS, the County and every city within the County Is required by state law to adopt
and Implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance as an Important element
of the Congestion Management Program to Improve both congestion and air quality; and
WHEREAS, MTA must determine annually whether the County and cities within the County
are conforming to the CMP, Including the requirement to adopt and Implement a TDM ordinance;
and
WHEREAS, because the CMP is an evolving program which will be developed Incrementally,
as experience is gained through Its Implementation, this TDM ordinance may be amended or
superseded from time to time, as necessary to meet congestion and air quality goals;
WHEREAS, the State Clean AlrAct requires regions to attain a 1.5 vehicle occupancy during
the commute period by the year 1999;
WHEREAS, this ordinance Is Intended to comply with the CMP's requirements for a TDM
ordinance. The requirements of South Coast Air Quality Management District ("District") Regulation
XV, are separate from this ordinance, and administrated by the Air District. Nothing herein is
Intended, nor shall It be construed, to limit or otherwise preclude employers from offering or
providing additional Inducements to use alternatives to single -occupant vehicles to their employees
necessary to meet Regulation XV requirements; and
WHEREAS, In order to use the existing and planned transportation Infrastructure more
efficiently, maintain or Improve traffic levels of service, and lower motor vehicle emissions, It Is the
policy of the City of Santa Clarita to minimize the number of peak period vehicle trips generated by
additional development, promote the use of alternative transportation, Improve air quality and
participate in regional and countywide efforts to Improve transportation demand management;
WHEREAS, a duly noticed hearing was held by the Planning Commission on January 19,
1993 at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarfta, at which time
evidence was heard on the draft Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Measure Ordinance.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted a motion recommending
approval of the Trip Reduction and Travel Demand Measure Ordinance to the City Council.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarlta does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1.. DEFINITIONS. The following words or phrases shall have the following
meanings when used in this ordinance:
A. "Alternative Transportation" means the use of modes of transportation other than the
single passenger motor vehicle, Including but not Iimfted to carpools, vanpools,
buspools, public transit, walking and bicycling.
B. "Applicable Development" means any development project that Is determined to meet
or exceed the project size threshold criteria contained In Section 3 of this ordinance.
C. "Buspool" means a vehicle carrying sixteen or more passengers commuting on
regular basis to and from work with a fixed route, according to a fixed schedule.
D. "Carpool" means a vehicle carrying two to six persons commuting together to and from
work on a.regular basis.
E. "The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)," a statute that requires all
jurisdictions In the State of California to evaluate the .extent of environmental
degradation posed by proposed development.
F. "Developer". shall mean the builder who is responsible for the planning, design and
construction of an applicable development project. A developer may be responsible
for Implementing the provisions of this Ordinance as determined by the property
owner.
G. "Development" means the construction or addition of new building square footage.
Additions to buildings which existed prior to the adoption of this ordinance and which
exceed the thresholds defined In Section 3 shall comply with the applicable
requirements but shall not be added cumulatively with existing square footage; existing
square footage shall be exempt from these requirements. All calculations shall be
based on gross square footage.
H. "Employee Parking Area" means the portion of total required parking at a development
used by onsite employees. Unless specified in the City Zoning/Buliding Code,
employee parking shall be calculated as follows:
Percent of Total Required
Type of Use Parking Devoted to Employees
Commercial 30%
Offlce/Professtonal 85%
Industrial/Manufacturing 90%
• I. "Preferential Parking" means parking spaces designated or assigned, through use of
a sign or painted space markings for carpool and vanpool vehicles carrying commute
passengers on a regular basis that are provided in a location more convenient to a
place of employment than parking spaces provided for single occupant vehicles.
J. "Property Owner" means the legal owner of a development who serves as the lessor
to a tenant. The Property Owner shall be responsible for complying with the provisions
of the ordinance either directly or by delegating such responsibility as appropriate to
a tenant and/or his agent.
K. "South Coast Air Quality Management District" (SCAQMD) is the regional authority
appointed by the California State Legislature to meet federal standards and otherwise
Improve air quality in the South Coast Air Basin (the non -desert portions of Los
Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties).
L. "Tenant" means the lessee of facility space at an applicable development project.
M. "Transportation Demand Management (TDM)" means the alteration of travel behavior,
usually on the part of commuters, through programs of Incentives, services, and
policies. TDM addresses aftematives to single occupant vehicles such as carpooling
and vanpooling, and changes In work schedules that move trips out of the peak period
or eliminate them altogether (as Is the case in telecommuting or compressed work
weeks).
N. 'Trip Reduction" means reduction in the number of work-related trips made by single
occupant vehicles.
O. "Vanpool" means a vehicle carrying seven or more persons commuting together to and
from work on a regular basis, usually In a vehicle with a seating arrangement designed
to carry seven to fifteen adult passengers, and on a prepaid subscription basis.
P. "Vehicle" means any motorized form of transportation, Including but not limited to
automobiles, vans, buses and motorcycles.
SECTION 2. REVIEW OF TRANSIT IMPACTS. Prior to approval of any development project
for which an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be prepared pursuant to the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or based on a local determination, regional and
municipal fixed -route transit operators providing service to the project shall be Identified and
consulted. Projects for which a Notice of Preparation (NOP) for a Draft EIR has been circulated
pursuant to the provisions of CEQA prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be exempted
from Its provisions. The "Transit Impact Review Worksheet", contained in the Los Angeles County
Congestion Management Program Manual, or similar worksheets, shall be used In assessing
Impacts. Pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, transit operators shall be sent a NOP for all
contemplated EIR's and shall, as part of the NOP process, be given opportunity to comment on the
Impacts of the project, to Identify recommended transit service or capital Improvements which may
be required as a result of the project, and to recommend mitigation measures which minimize
automobile trips on the CMP network. 'Impacts and recommended mitigation measures Identified
by the transit operator shall be evaluated In the Draft Environmental Impact Report prepared for the
project. Related mitigation measures adopted shall be monitored through the mitigation monitoring
requirements of CEQA.
. Phased development projects, development projects subject to a development agreement, or
development projects requiring subsequent approvals, need not repeat this process as long as no
significant changes are made to the project. it shall remain the discretion of the lead agency to
determine when a project Is substantially the same and therefore covered by a previously certified
EIR.
SECTION 3. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND AND TRIP REDUCTION MEASURES
A. APPLICABILITY OF
Prior to approval of any development project, the applicant shall make provision for,
as a minimum, all of the following applicable transportation demand management and
trip reduction measures.
This ordinance shall not apply to projects for which a development application has
been deemed "complete" by the City pursuant to Government Code Section 65943, or
for which a Notice of Preparation for a DEIR has been circulated or for which an
application for a building permit has been received, prior to the effective date of this
ordinance.
All facilities and Improvements constructed or otherwise required shall be maintained
In a state of good repair.
B. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
• 1. Non -Residential development of 25,000 square feet or more of building
Improvements shall provide the following to the satisfaction of the City:
a: A bulletin board, display case, or kiosk displaying transportation information
located where the greatest number of employees are likely- to see it.
Information in the area shall Include, but is not limited to, the following:
(1) Current maps, routes and schedules for public transit routes serving
the site;
(2) Telephone numbers for referrals on transportation Information
Including numbers for the regional ridesharing agency and local transit
operators;
(3) Ridesharing promotional material supplied by commuter -oriented
organizations;
(4) Bicycle route and facility information, Including regional/local bicycle
maps and bicycle safety Information, and a bicycle storage area.
(5) A listing of facilities available for carpoolers, vanpoolers, bicyclists,
transit riders and pedestrians at the site.
1" 1
LJ
2. Non-Residentlal development of 50,000 square feet or more of building
Improvements shall comply with Section 3.B(1) above and shall provide all
of the following measures to the satisfaction of the City:
a. Not less than 10% of employee parking area, shall be.located as close
as Is practical to the employee entrance(s), and shall be reserved for
use by potential carpoolNanpool vehicles, without displacing
handicapped and customer parking needs. This preferential
carpool/vanpool parking area shall be identified on the site plan upon
application for building permit,'to the satisfaction of City. A statement
that preferential carpooVvanpool spaces for employees are available
and a description of the method for obtaining such spaces must be
Included on the required transportation information board. Spaces will
be signed/striped as demand warrants; provided that at all times at
least one space for projects of 50,000 square feet to 100,000 square
feet and two spaces for projects over 100,000 square feet will be
signed/striped for carpool/vanpool vehicles.
b. Preferential parking spaces reserved for vanpools must be accessible
to vanpool vehicles. When located within a parking structure, a
minimum vertical interior clearance of 7'2" shall be.provided for those
spaces and accessways to be used by such vehicles. Adequate
turning radii and parking space dimensions shall also be Included In
vanpool parking areas.
C. Bicycle racks, lockers or other secure bicycle parking shall be
provided to accommodate 4 bicycles per the first 50,000 square feet of
building improvements of non-residential development and 1 bicycle
per each additional 50,000 square feet of building Improvements of
non-residential development. Calculations which result In a fraction
of 0.5 or higher shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number. A
bicycle parking facility may also be a fully enclosed space or locker
accessible only to the owner or.operator of the bicycle, which protects
the bike from Inclement weather. Specific facilities and location (e.g.,
provision of racks, lockers, or locked room) shall be to the satisfaction
of the City.
3. Non -Residential development of 100,000 square feet or more of building
Improvements shall comply with Sections 3.13(1) and 3.B(2) above, and shall
provide all of the following measures to the satisfaction of the City:
a. A safe and convenient zone In which vanpool and carpool vehicles
may deliver or board. their passengers.
b. Sidewalks or other designated pathways following direct and safe
routes from the external pedestrian circulation system to each building
In the development.
C. If determined necessary by the City to mitigate the project Impact, bus
stop Improvements must be provided. The City will consult with the
. local bus service providers In determining appropriate Improvements.
When locating bus stops and/or planning building entrances, entrances
. must be designed to provide safe and efficient access to nearby transit
stations/stops.
d. Safe and convenient access from the external circulation system to
bicycle parking facilities onsite.
SECTION 4. MONITORING.
9
a. The applicable provisions of this ordinance shall be Incorporated Into
the conditions of approval for Individual development projects.
Mitigation monitoring programs will be prepared and Implemented for
all projects requiring an Environmental Impact Report, Including the
monitoring of the requirements of this ordinance.
b. Prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the City's Code
Enforcement staff shall verify that the requirements of this ordinance
have been met to the satisfaction of the City.
C. Ongoing monitoring shall be done on a case-by-case basis by Code
Enforcement.
SECTION 5. ENFORCEMENT.
a. The requirements. mandated by this ordinance on new development
shall be included In the conditions of approval and the mitigation
monitoring program for all projects requiring an Environmental Impact
Report.
b. As part of the final Inspection, prior to the Issuance of a Certificate of
Occupancy, the Code Enforcement staff shall verify that the conditions
of approval have been Implemented that satisfy the requirements of
this ordinance.
C. All applicants for development projects are required to sign a notarized
affidavit to confirm the acceptance of conditions of approval.
d. If the City determines that a development Is not In compliance with the
conditions of approval, Including the requirements of this ordinance,
the privileges conferred by the conditions "of approval may be
suspended and/or revoked. All applicable provisions of the City's
Unit led Development Ordinance and the Building Code may be utilized
to enforce the requirements of this ordinance.
0
• SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause
the same to be published as required by law.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 11993.
ATTEST: Mayor
Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) §
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
I, Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance No. was regularly Introduced and placed upon its first reading at a
regular meeting of the City Council on the day of , 1993. That
thereafter, said Ordinance was duly adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council
on the day of . 1993, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT:. COUNCILMEMBERS:
vw=ffemp onHkyn
•
7
Donna M. Grindey, City Clerk .
r.
11
•
PERMITIPROJECT:
APPLICANT:
CITY'OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
)(�roposed . [ I Final
Travel Demand Management/ Trip Reduction Ordinance (TDMITRO)
City of Santa Clarlta
MASTER CASE NO:
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: This Is an ordinance establishing trip reduction and travel
demand management measures for new non-rasldentlal development of 25,000 square feet and
greater and new transit review requirements for projects requiring an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR).
Based on the information Contained In the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant
to the requirements of Section ISM Of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
City of Santa Clarlts
[ X I City Council
[✓I Planning Commission
[ I Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant affect upon the
environment, and that a Negative DeClaratlon shall be adopted pursuant to Seaton 15M of
CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[ X I are not roqulred [ I are attacW
LYNN M. HARRIS
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/COMMUNfTY DEVELOPMENT
Prepared by:.
Reviewed by:
• Approved by:
Public Review Period From: Feb. 2, 1993 To: Feb. 23, 1993
Public Notice Given On: February 1, 1993
By: [X] Legal Advertisement (] Posting of Properties [ J Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
LHS:Ikt:CurrPing:TDMNEGDN
T
•
S
CiTY OF SANTA CLARITA
STAFF REPORT
TO: Chairman Woodrow and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: LynnM.Harris, eputy City Manager, Community Development
PLANNER: Kevin Michel, Senior Planner
DATE: January19, 1993
SUBJECT: DRAFTTRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT/TRIP REDUCTION ORDINANCE
BACKGROUND
At Its meeting on November 16, 1992, the Planning Commission previously viewed the Model
Transportation Demand Management/Trip Reduction Ordinance (TDM/TRO) approved by the Los
Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC) as part of the Congestion Management
Program (CMP). The City is, required to adopt an ordinance that substantially conforms to the
model ordinance. by April 1, 1993. If the City fails to do this, the City could forfeit state gas tax
subventions of several million dollars per year for transportation and transit improvements.
The TDM/TRO encourages carpooling, vanpooling, transit ridership and non -motorized
transportation. The LACTC's model ordinance was developed with extensive participation from
local governments and the private sector. Mayor Heldt was a member of the Policy Advisory
Committee for the CMP, and staff served on the Technical Advisory Group. The model ordinance
focuses on 'TDM -friendly" design standards for non-residential development, as well as
consultation with transit operators. The LACTC believes that their approach will minimize
Implementation costs and promote transportation alternatives.
The LACTC encourages Jurisdictions to adopt the model ordinance as written, as the LACTC will
grant approval of the ordinance without further review. The City could adopt a more stringent
ordinance and/or one that employs different approaches, but this would require a detailed review
by the LACTC and could delay adoption.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The ordinance would apply to all projects requiring EIR's, and Is structured as follows:
1. The City must consult with regional and municipal fixed -route transit operators providing
service to the project to assess Impacts on the transit operator and to Identify mitigation
measures for Inclusion in the EIR.
2. Non-residential development of 25,000 square feet and greater must display transit,
rideshare, and bicycle trail Information in a central location.
3. Non-residential development over 50,000 square feet must comply with no.'s 1 and 2 above,
plus provide preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools and secure bicycle
parking.
4. Non-residential development 100,000 square feet and greater must comply with no.'s 1
Agenda Item: a a� 93
vir. 7T,.� i
through 3, plus provide a passenger loading zone for car-and•vanpool vehicles, convenient
pedestrian pathways, bus stop Improvements, and safe and direct bicycle access.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
As part of the project review, an environmental assessment was prepared to evaluate the Impacts
of the project. it was determined that the project would not cause adverse environmental impacts,
and a draft Negative Declaration was prepared. The City's environmental review was tiered to the
Final EIR approved by the LACTC for the CMP.
INTERDEPARTMENTALANTERAGENCY REVIEW:
The draft model ordinance was distributed to and reviewed by the affected City Departments. The
comments submitted were utilized In designing the City's draft ordinance.
ANALYSIS:
The ordinance would help to Implement a variety of goals Included In the General Plan. Policy 2.1
In the Air Quality Element encourages "...vehicle trip reduction and other TDM programs." Goal
3 and Policy 5.1 of the Circulation Element advocate alternatives to the automobile such as TDM
and transit. In the Land Use Element, Policy 1.8 encourages traffic mitigation measures that
provide a variety of transportation options.
Staff has conducted a public participation effort, Including presentations to the Chamber of
Commerce Transportation _Committee, the Citizen's Transportation Committee, and the TMA
(Transportation Management Association) for the Industrial and Corporate Centers. The general
consensus has been to support the model ordinance as is, with only a minor change suggested to
the language regarding bicycle lockers and storage.
In preparing the model ordinance, the LACTC and participating cities sought to Include standards
and requirements that would be applicable to all non-residential development that requires an EIR.
The ordinance requirements for transportation demand management and trip reduction strategies
can be considered a starting point, and the City will have the opportunity to condition additional
demand reduction measures in project EIR's as mitigation measures.
In addition to the typical mitigation strategies, such as roadway enhancements and traffic signals,
the City can condition projects to mitigate Impacts.by requiring demand and trip reduction
strategies such as telecommuting, shower and locker facllltles; the purchase of vanpool vehicles,
transit subsidies, and other strategies. This will allow a flexible approach.
The Commission expressed Interest In adding a telecommuting requirement. The model ordinance
Is written broadly to apply to retail, commercial, Industrial, office, and Institutional uses.
Telecommuting is a very effective trip reduction mechanism, but It Is not equally applicable to all
types of development, and as such, may be problematical If always required.
Recommendation:
1) Adopt the negative declaration prepared for the project with the finding that the project will
not have a significant effect upon the environment.
2) Direct staff to bring the TDMrrRO as drafted to the City Council for adoption.
1110 mp •r atpn
M
PERMITIPROJECT:
APPLICANT:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[ ] Proposed [ ] Final
Travel Demand Management/ Trip Reduction Ordinance (TDM(TRO)
City of Santa Clarlta
MASTER CASE NO:
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT:' This is an ordinance establishing trip reduction and travel
demand management measures for new non-residential development of 25,000 square feet and
greater and new transit review requirements for projects requiring an Environmental Impact
Report (EIR).
Based on the Information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant
to the requirements of Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the
City of Santa Clarita
[ X ] City Council
[ ] Planning Commission
[ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the
environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of
CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[ X ] are not required [ ] are attached
LYNN M. HARRIS
DEPUTY CITY MANAGER/COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Prepared by:
Reviewed by:
Approved by:
10
Public Review Period From:
(o�( fk ,Q2�z To: 1 109,3
J
Public Notice Given On: 1�YPp�n,�� U . j 9`/I l„/
By: [X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting of Properties [ ] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
LHS:Ikt:CurrPing:TDM N EGDN
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
(Initial Study Form B)
CITY OF SANTA_CLARITA
MASTER CASE NO:
Case Planner: Laura Stotler
Project: Travel Demand ManagemenVTrlp Reduction Ordinance (TDMITRO)
Project Description:
This is an ordinance establishing trip reduction and travel demand management measures for new
non-residential development of 25,000 square feet and greater and transit review requirements for
projects requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The TDM/TRO will become part of the
City's UDC. Provisions of the TDM ordinance are Intended to satisfy certain local government
requirements of the Congestion Management Program of Los Angeles County.
The Los Angeles Transportation Commission adopted the Congestion Management Program on
November -25, 1992. A program EIR was prepared to analyze the effects of overall CMP
Implementation. Trip reduction and travel demand management measures are one feature of the
CMP. The negative declaration Is tiered from the CMP EIR following California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. The negative declaration analyzes Impacts of the TDM/TRO upon
environmental conditions and resources of the City of Santa Clarha. The executive summary of the
Los Angeles County Congestion Management Program DEIR, prepared July 1992, Is attached for
reference (SCH #91121063, SCAG Clearing House #LA -55791 -MT).
Main Features of the TDM/TRO:
For all projects for which an EIR Is required, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) shall be
circulated to all transit operators serving the site.
2. For non-residential projects of 25,000 square feet and greater, the following shall be
required to the satisfaction of the City:
A bulletin board, display case or kiosk with transportation Information such as bus -
schedules and ridesharing Information numbers.
For non-residentlal projects of 50,000 square feet and greater, the following shall be required to the
satisfaction of the City:
Evgrything noted above, plus
Preferential carpool/vanpool parking (minimum one space per 50,000 square feet)
Bicycle parking (minimum 4 spaces per 50,000 square feet)
For non-residential projects of 100,000 square feet and greater, the following shall be required to
the satisfaction of the City:
Everything noted above, plus
CarpoolNanpool loading zones
Walkways from external circulation system to main buildings
Bus stop Improvements as required by the City
Safe bicycle access from the street to bicycle parking areas
Q
CHECKLIST
A. ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
YES
MAYBE NO
1. Earth.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Unstable earth conditions or In changes
In geologic substructures? .......................
[ ]
I ] p(]
b.
Disruptions, displacements, compaction
or overcovering of the soil? ......................
[ ]
[ ] [X]
C.
Change In topography or ground surface
relief features?................................
[ ]
[ 1 [Xl
d.
The destruction, covering or modification of
any unique geologic or physical features? ..........
[ ]
[ ] [X]
e.
Any Increase In wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? ....................
[ ]
[ ] IXl
f.
Exposure of people or property to geologic.
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? .......
[ ]
I ] [X]
g.
Changes in deposition, erosion or siltation? .........
[ ]
[ ] IX]
h.
Other modification of a wash, channel,
creek, or river?................................
[]
I [Xl
I.
Earth movement (cut and/or fill) of 10,000
cubic yards or more? ...........................
[ ]
[ ] [X]
I.
Development and/or grading on a slope
greater than 25% natural grade? ..................
[ ]
[ ] IXl
k.
Development within the Alquist-Prlolo
Special Studies Zone? ..........................
I l
[ 1 [Xl
I.
Other?.......................................
................ .
[]
[1 [Xl
2. Air. Will the proposal result In:
a.
Substantial air emissions or deterioration of
ambient air quality? ............................
[ l
I ] [Xl
b.
The creation of objectionable odors? ...............
[ ]
[ ] [X]
C.
Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change In climate,
either locally or regionally? ......................
[ ]
[ ] [X]
13
-3 -
YES MAYBE NO
d. Other? ...................................... [1 I1 [X]
3. Water. WIII the proposal. result In:
a.
Changes In absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surfacerunoff? ................................
[] I [Xl
b.
Alterations to the course or flow of
flood waters? .................................
[ l [ l [XI
C.
Change In the amount of surface water
In any water body? ..............................
[ ] [ ] IXl
d.
Discharge Into surface waters, or In any
alteration of surface water quality, In-
cluding but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity? ....................
[ ] I ] [Xl
e.
Alteration of the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters? .........................
[ ] [ ] [X]
f.
Change In the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or with-
drawals, or through Interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations? ...................
[ ] ( ] [X]
g.
Substantial reduction In the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? ...............................
[ ] [ l [Xl
h.
Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding? .................
[ ] [ ] [Xl
1. -
Other? .......................................
[] I] IX]
4. Plant Life. WIII the proposal result In:
a.
Change in the diversity of species or number
of any species of plants (Including trees,
shrubs, grasses, crops, and microflora)? ............
[ ] [ ] [X]
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique, ,
rare or endangered species of plants? ..............
[ ] [ ] [X]
C.
Introduction of new species of plants Into
an area, or In a barrier to the normal re -
14
J
-4 -
YES MAYBE NO
plenishment of existing species? .................. [ ] I ] [X]
is
d.
Reduction In acreage of any agricultural
crop? .......................................
[l
[l IX]
5.
Animal
Life. Will the proposal result In:
a.
Change In the diversity of species, or
,
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals Including reptiles, fish and
Insects or mlcrofauna)? .........................
[ ]
[ ] IX]
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals? ............
[ ]
[ ] [X]
C.
Introduction of new species of animals
Into an area, or result In a barrier to
the migration or movement of animals? .............
[ ]
[ ] [X]
d.
Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat and/or migratory routes? ..................
[ ]
[ ] [X]
6.
Noise.
Will the proposal result in:
a.
Increases In existing noise levels? .................
[ ]
[] (X]
b.
Exposure of people to severe or
unacceptable noise levels? ......................
[ ]
[ ] (X]
C.
Exposure of people to severe vibrations? ...........
[ ]
(] (X]
7.
Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
substantial
new light or glare? ..........................
[ ]
[ ] IX]
8.
Land Use. Will the proposal result in:
a.
Substantial alteration of the present
landuse of an area? ............................
L l
I l LXl
b.
A substantial alteration of the
planned land use of an area? .....................
[ ]
[ ] [X]
C.
A use that does not adhere to existing
zoning laws? .................................
I]
[] IXl
d.
A use that does not adhere to established
development criteria? ............................
[ 1
L ] IXl
is
9.
10.
11.
12.
-5-
YES MAYBE NO
Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase In the rate of use of any natural
resources? ....................................[]
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable
naturalresources? ............................. [ ]
Risk of Upset/Man-Made Hazards. WIII the proposal:
a. Involve a risk of an explosion or the release
of hazardous substances (Including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upsetconditions? .............................. []
b. Use, store, transport or dispose of hazard-
ous or toxic materials (including, but not
limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)? ................................... Il
C. Possible Interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan? ....................................... []
d. Otherwise expose people to potential safety
hazards? :.................................... II
Population. WIII the proposal:
-a. Alter the location, distribution;
density, or growth rate of the human
populationof an area? .......................... [ ]
b. Other? ....................................... I1
Housing. Will the proposal:
a. Remove or otherwise affect existing
housing, or create a demand for
additional housing? ............................ [ ]
b. Other? .................................... I1
11 [XI
[ 1 IXI
11 [XI
[ 1 IXI
!&
13.
14.
15.
'_7
6-
YES MAYBE NO
Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal
result In:
a.
Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? ...........................
[ ]
b.
Effects on existing parking.faciiities,
or demand for new parking? .....................
[ ]
C.
Substantial Impact upon existing
transportation systems, Including public
transportation? ................................
[]
d.
Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? ................................
I1
e.
Increase In traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ................
[ ]
f.
A disjointed pattern of roadway
Improvements? ................................
[]
Public
Services. Will the proposal have an effect
upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern-
mental services In any of the following areas:
a.
Fire protection? ...............................
[ ]
b.
Police protection? .............................
[ ]
C.
Schools? ....................................
I1
d.
Parks or other recreational facilities? ...............
[ ]
e.
Maintenance of public facilities,
Including roads? ..............................
(]
f.
Other governmental services? .....................
[ 1
Energy. Will the proposal result In?
a.
Use of substantial amounts of fuel or
energy? .....................................
[]
.7 -
YES MAYBE NO
b. Substantial Increase in demand upon
existing sources of energy, or require
the development of new sources of energy? ......... [ ] [ ] [X]
16.
Utilities. WIII the proposal result In a need
for new systems, or substantial alterations to
the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? ............................ [ l
I ]
IX]
b. Communications systems? ...................... I ]
I 1
IXl
C. Water systems? ................................ [ ]
[ ]
[Xl
d.. Sanitary sewer systems? ........................ I 1
I l
[Xl
e. Storm drainage systems? ........................ [ ]
[ ]
[X]
I. Solid waste and disposal systems? ................ [ ]
[ ]
[X]
g. WIII the proposal result in a disjointed
or Inefficient pattern of delivery system
Improvements for any of the above? ............... [ ]
[ ]
[X]
17.
Human Health. WIII the proposal result In:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)? ............ [ ]
[ ]
[X]
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards? ..................................... [1
I
IX]
18.
Aesthetics. WIII the proposal result In:
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or
view open to the public? ........................ [ ]
[ ]
[X]
b. WIII the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site
open to public view? ........................... [ 1
I 1
IXl
C. Will the visual Impact of the proposal
be detrimental to the surrounding area? ............ [ ]
[I
[X]
19.
Recreation. WIII the proposal result In an
Impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? ............................ [ ]
[ ]
[X]
E
YES MAYBE NO
20. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result In the alteration
of or the destruction of a prehistoric or
historic archaeological site? ................., ...
[ ]
I I IXI
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or
historic building, structure, or object? ..............
I I
I I [XI
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would affect
unique ethnic cultural values? ....................
I 1
[ j [XI
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ..........................
[ l
I I [XI
Iq
B. IMPACTS and DISCUSSION
1. EARTH
The proposed-TDMITRO would not create earth Impacts to geology, solls, or erosion other than
those Impacts presently associated with development. Any grading or movement of earth would
be completed as a result of the development project, not as a result of the requirements of this
ordinance.
Under this ordinance, travel demand management (TDMITRO) features would be required for
developments of 25,000 sq. ft. or greater. These TDM/TRO features, including carpool parking
spaces, bicycle racks, turnouts, walkways, and transportation Information areas, would become
part of the overall development project and not involve the construction of additional structures.
Although some TDM/TRO features such as bus turnouts require coverage of earth with
impervious surfaces, the amount of coverage over that presently required by City development
codes Is negligible and will not significantly affect wind or water erosion of soils.
2. AIR
The adoption and Implementation of the TDM/TRO will aid In Improving ambient air quality. The
purpose of TDM/TRO measures Is to Increase the average vehicle ridership (AVR) by
encouraging ridesharing and the use of alternative fortes of transportation. Improvements
which aid pedestrians, bicyclists, bus riders, carpoolers, and vanpoolers aim for this goal.
Successful implementation of TDM/TRO measures will result in reduced emissions of air
pollutants, particularly from single -occupant automobiles, and aid in reducing traffic congestion.
Improvements and facilities required by the TDMITRO would not result in the production of
objectionable odors, nor would they be of the scope or magnitude to affect the regional or local
climate or temperature.
3. WATER
TDMiTRO measures may result In minimal Increases In coverage of land by impervious
surfaces. Individual projects would be subject to their own environmental review. On-site
drainage for all projects Is subject to standards of the City Engineering and Building and Safety
Section to ensure that there are no adverse Impacts to neighboring properties. The TDMITRO
does not contain measures which would require water use and would not reduce waters
available for public use. No significant Impact upon water Is anticipated since absorption,
drainage, and runoff under the proposed ordinance would not differ significantly from that of
development without TDM/TRO measures.
4. PLANT LIFE
TDM/TRO measures will not affect the presence, numbers, or types of plant species in Santa
Clarita. Preferential parking requirements may reduce the land area used for parking by
encouraging car and vanpooling. Project- level environmental review will Identify any
endangered or protected plant species as the projects are proposed: No significant impact to
plant life is anticipated since the TDMITRO will not significantly change existing standards of
development.
5. ANIMAL LIFE
TDM measures will not affect the presence or numbers of any animal species, fish, or game
Within the City of Santa Clarlta. Project -level environmental review will Identify any Impacts to
IN
animal life as projects are proposed. No significant Impacts are anticipated to occur through
Implementation of the TDMITRO since this ordinance will not significantly change existing
standards of development in the City.
'•�Llf-#
Implementation of the TDMITRO Is anticipated to reduce the total number of vehicle trips to
locations within the City of Santa Clarlta. Improvements required by the TDM/TRO are not
anticipated to produce noise. These measures are anticipated to reduce trips, resulting In
corresponding decreases In ambient noise levels.
7. LIGHT AND GLARE
The requirements of the TDM/TRO will not produce significant impacts to light and glare.
Parking lot and walk way lighting standards would not be Increased above existing development
requirements as a result of the TDMITRO.
*.M j1`GltbfE
Commercial, office and Industrial developments to which the TDM/TRO will be applied must be
consistent with the City of Santa Clarita General Plan and Zoning Map. The City's General Plan
Includes goals and policies to Improve air quality and encourages the use of alternative modes
of transportation. The City's General Plan also encourages mitigation of traffic congestion, a
benefit from Implementation of TDMITRO measures. The adoption and Implementation of the
TDWTRO are not anticipated to cause the present or planned land use of the City to change
significantly since the goals of TDM/TRO are consistent with General Plan policies.
9. NATURAL RESOURCES
The TDMITRO Is not anticipated to have a significant Impact upon natural resources since there
are no TDM/TRO measures which consume significant amounts of water, electricity, or other
natural resources.
10.. RISK OF UPSET
Due to the nature of TDM/TRO requirements, no significant impacts to emergency services or
risk of upset are anticipated as a result of adoption and implementation of TDM/TRO measures.
11. POPULATION
The TDM/TRO Is not anticipated to significantly alter the location, distribution, density, or
growth rate of the human population In Santa Clarita since this ordinance applies singularly to
non-residentlal projects. The population of commuters in Santa Clarlta may enjoy greater
opportunities for alternative transportation and better traffic circulation through Implementation
of TDMITRO measures.
12. HOUSING
The TDMITRO Is applicable to non-resldentlai projects and Is not anticipated to have a
significant Impact upon housing In the City of Santa Clartta.
13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
The purpose of the TDM/TRO Is to reduce the number of single -occupant automobile trips and
Al
encourage the use of ridesharing and other alternative forms of transportation. The distribution
of transportation Information and convenient facilities for ridesharers, bicyclists, and other
commuters may result In a potential decrease In vehicle trips.
The TDM/TRO only applies to new projects and will not affect parking or parking demand for
existing facilities. The TDMITRO may affect the manner In which people travel to work and other
activities, resulting in Increased mobility and reduced travel times.
Because this ordinance will require, for large projects, the creation of pathways from the
exterior circulation system to every primary building on a development she, hazards to
pedestrians and bicycles may decrease. Provisions for facilities for bicyclists, however, may
result In more cyclists on Santa Clarha Streets and may Increase the possibility of bicycle
accidents within the City. The City Is presently developing a network of bicycle trails
throughout the City which would provide for safer travel for cyclists. Implementation of.
TDMITRO is not anticipated to have a significant short-term or long-term negative Impacts upon
the transportation/circulatlon system. As more projects are constructed Implementing TDMITRO
features, long -tens Impacts to commuter patterns and to the transportation network may be
significant.
14. PUBLIC SERVICES
TDMITRO improvements are not anticipated to create a significant Impact upon public services
since these Improvements are primarily the responsibility of the private property
owner/developer. TDMiTRO requirements may encourage greater transit usage, but the
requirements also call for Improvements to bus stops.
15. ENERGY
Bulletin boards, kiosks, and bicycle parking areas may be lighted electrically. Such an increase
In energy use would be negligible and Is not anticipated to create a significant impact upon
energy resources.
16. UTILITIES
Due to the nature of the TDMiTRO, Improvements required under the TDMITRO are not
anticipated to significantly after existing communication, water, sewer, storm drain, natural gas,
or solid waste disposal systems and facilities.
17. HUMAN HEALTH
Successful TDMITRO Implementation is anticipated to result in Increased mobility and reduced
air emissions. Therefore, the TDMiTRO may have beneficial effects on human health and may
reduce human health hazards.
18. AESTHETICS
The TDMiTRO is not anticipated to have a significant Impact upon aesthetics since there will be
no change to the existing development requirements for all non-residential projects to be
reviewed by the City planning section.
19. RECREATION
Implementation of the TDMrTRO may result in Increased numbers of bicyclists. It is likely that
these bicyclists may use the City's multl-use trail network to travel to work and other locations
In the City. Thus, the demand for bicycle trails may Increase above existing levels. This
Increased demand is not anticipated to. be significant since the City is presently constructing
and expanding the trail network.
20. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Improvements required by the TDMITRO are generally small and Incidental to the overall
development project. Since developments are already reviewed for Impacts to cultural
resources on an Individual project basis, no significant Impact to cultural resources Is
anticipated through adoption and Implementation of the TDMITRO.
a3
-9-
C. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME "DE MINIMUS' FINDING
Will the project have an adverse effect either Individually or cumulatively, on fish and wildlife
resources? Wildlife shall be defined for the purpose of this question as "all wild animals, birds,
plants, fish, amphibians, and related ecological communities, Including the habitat upon which the
wildlife depends for its continued viability."
(Section 711.2, Fish and'Game Code.)
YES NO
[ ] (X
aq
-10-
D. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
Section 15065 of the California Environmental Quality Act states, in part, that If any of the following
can be answered yes or maybe, the project may have a significant effect on the environment and
an Environmental Impact Report shall be prepared.
YES MAYBE NO
1. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wlidlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory? ( ] [ ] (X]
2. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals? (A short-term Impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively
brief, definitive period of time while long-term Impacts will endure well Into the future.)
.............. :............................. I ]
IX
3. Does the project have Impacts which are Individually limited but cumulatively considerable?
(A project may Impact on two or more separate resources where the Impact on each resource Is
relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those Impacts on the environment Is significant.)
............................................ r r rXl
4. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or Indirectly? ...................... [ ] ( ] (X]
aSC
E. TIERING DETERMINATION
1. THE TDMITRO IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CMP EIR MODEL ORDINANCE
The City of Santa Clarlta TDMITRO Is consistent with the EIR prepared for the Los Angeles
County Congestion Management Program. That document notes (page 3 of Executive
Summary) that "Local jurisdictions may reference the EIR during Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) ordinance approval; and as part of environmental review project approval,
the EIR certification decisions for regionally significant projects:' Final certification of the CMP
EIR was adopted by the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission on November 25, 1992.
2. TDM/TRO IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT
CODE
The proposed TDMITRO Is consistent with the City of Santa Clarlta General Plan which Includes
policies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation. The TDMITRO will be
adopted as part of the City's Unified Development Code.
3. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL IMPACTS NOT DISCUSSED IN CMP EIR
Implementation of the TDMITRO would not affect the environment In an unusual or significant
manner. Implementation of the ordinance In the City of Santa Clarita will not cause significant
environmental Impacts that are not discussed In the CMP EIR.
F. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this Initial Study, It Is determined that:
The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. [X]
Although the proposed project COULD have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described In this Initial Study
have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. [ ]
The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT Is required. [ ]
LYNN M. HARRIS
DEPUTY CITY MANAGERICOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared By:
Reviewed By:
(Signature)
Approved By:
(Name/Title)
currenNdmf rmb1.lhs:lkt
a7