SR-417-002-04 (2)
J-
.
/j /1-... 002-- 0 tf
.
g --,cj-
.2S.
t... to t _
JUN 1 ~:~\
LUTM:PB:SF:tmpcc.word.ppd
council Meeting: May 28, 1991
Santa Monica, California
TO: Mayor and city Council
FROM: City staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Introduce for First Reading the Pro-
posed Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Ordinance.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City council conduct a study ses-
sian and public hearing on the proposed Transportation Management
Plan (TMP) Ordinance.
SUMMARY
The following summarizes the proposed ordinance provisions:
o The Ordinance is de.s igned to achie.ve a 1. 5 average
vehicle ridership (AVR) for employees during the morn-
ing and evening peak traffic periods. Regulation XV
only applies to the morning peak traffic period.
o The Ordinance will apply to employers of 100 or more
employees in the first year, employers of 50-99 em-
ployees in the second year and employers of 10-49 em-
ployees in the third year. Regulation XV only applies
to employers of 100 or more employees.
o The Ordinance requires employers and developers to sub-
mit yearly plans to the city indicating how a 1.5 AVR
will be achieved.
o The Ordinance will replace Regulation XV requirements.
Employers will no longer be required to submit plans to
the South Coast Air Quality Management District. Em-
ployers will submit plans to the city for review and
approval.
- 1 -
~ ~l
.1'';;\ , t.. <-
~;-1
.
.
o Employer Fees will be $6.00 per employee per year for
employers of 50 or more and $8.00 per year for em-
ployers of 10-49. Discounts will be given if employers
achieve a 1.5 AVR or join an Transportation Management
Association (TMA).
o Employer fees will go towards operation of the City's
TMP office and the development of TMAs throughout the
city.
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a study session
and public hearing and based on this report and public comment,
direct staff to make any necessary modification to the Ordinance
and then return the Ordinance for first reading at a subsequent
Council meting.
BACKGROUND
On October 23, 1984, the City Council adopted the Circulation
Element of the General Plan.
The Circulation Element directed
the City to develop a Transportation System Management (TSM) Plan
to implement the transportation management policies contained in
the Element. Two of the major circulation proposals originally
cited were: 1) to increase average auto occupancy by ~6%, from
1.2 persons per car in 1984 to 1.4 in 2000, and 2) to encourage
staggered work hours to reduce peak hour traffic. The goals of
the City-wide plan included a reduction in the quantity and
length of vehicular trips.
since adoption of the Circulation Element, the South Coast Air
Quality Management District (SCAQf1D), through adoption of Regula-
tion XV, has required reductions in the number of home-to-work-
site vehicle trips and resultant air pollution.
Regulation XV
requires that employers with 100 or more employees increase aver-
age vehicle ridership (AVR) to predetermined levels. AVR is a
- 2 -
.
.
formula that looks at a week-long period and divides the total
number of employees commuting to work in a given time period by
the number of auto commute trips. An AVR of 1.0 means that every
employee drives to work alone.
The City of Santa Monica and applicable private employers within
the City are subject to SCAQMD's requirement of an AVR of 1.5 per
worksite. The TMP is designed to meet the requirements of Reg-
ulation XV and address specific needs of the City.
Finally, the SCAQMD adopted the 1989 Air Quality Management Plan
(AQMP). The AQMP identified how the state and national ambient
air quality standards would be achieved through regulation of
direct (i.e. worksites) and indirect sources (i.e. automobiles).
The primary purposes of the Transportation Management Plan (TMP)
are to reduce transportation congestion on City streets and to
improve air quality. This is proposed to be accomplished through
effective management and coordination of both transportation de-
mand (e.g. number, time, and length of work-related commute
trips) and systems (e.g. roadways, transit) in the city. The TMP
outlines requirements to reduce the number of work-related com-
mute trips in both the morning and evening rush hours and the
resultant auto pollution. Requirements are targeted towards ex-
isting employers and new non-residential development.
The TMP program as proposed follows several years of study and
discussion with the business community, residential neighborhood
organizations, and other citYt county, and state jurisdictions.
During this period, three ~MP documents were drafted and released
- 3 -
.
.
to the public: Draft TMP, Draft TMP implementing ordinance, and
the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
In June 1987, Planning Consultants Research (PCR), an environmen-
tal consulting firm, was retained by the City to prepare the TMP
program, implementing ordinance, and EIR. A Draft Plan was pre-
pared in June 1988 and released as the first policy document.
The Draft TMP outlined the goals and objectives of the plan by
providing the scope and framework for the program. The program's
implementation schedule and a discussion of various TDM and TSM
measures was included.
In conjunction with the Draft Plan, an Draft Environmental Impact
Report (DEIR) was prepared to assess potential impacts of the
TMP. It concluded that i~plementation of the TMP would not re-
sult in any significant environmental impacts.
To implement the policies of the nIP, a preliminary draft or-
dinance was released to the pUblic in March 1989 and a revised
draft ordinance prepared by the City Attorney was released March
1991. These documents refined the policies of the Draft TMP and
outlined the specifics of the program in ordinance format.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE LAND USE/CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Two major policies of the 1984 update of the Circulation Element
were: 1) to promote programs to lncrease ridesharing as measured
by average vehicle occupancy from 1.2 in 1984 to 1.4 by 2000
(Policy 4.3.8): and 2) to minimize peak hour trips by encouraging
staggered work hours (Policy 4.3.9).
- 4 -
.
.
The TMP implements both policies.
It should be noted that the
"average vehicle occupancy" concept as noted in 1984 differs from
AVR in that it considers all vehicle trips (commute and non-
commute). However, the TMP's requirements are designed to ensure
results consistent with both the Circulation Element and Regula-
tion xv.
other Circulation Element policies implemented by the TMP
include:
o The city shall support the lmplementation of short- and
long-range transportation measures for reducing air pollu-
tion from transportation sources as recommended by the
SCAQMD (Policy 4.1.4).
o The City shall encourage transportation alternatives to
reduce the use of fossil fuels (Policy 4.1.6).
o Maximize the efficiency of the existing roadway system
through traffic signal synchronization and other traffic
flow improvements I as long as the impact on residential
neighborhoods is analyzed and carefully considered (Policy
4.3.10) .
RELATIONSHIP TO SCAQMD REGLLATION XV
Adopted by the SCAQHD on ;:)E:cerrber 11, 1987, Regulation XV re-
quires that businesses wlch 100 or more employees in the South
Coast Air Quality Basin reduce home-to-worksite vehicle trips to
predetermined levels.
Consequently, all Santa Monica employers
with 100 or more employees are now required to comply.
One of the primary objectives of the TMP is to ensure compliance
with Regulation xv. This would allow affected employers in the
City to substitute the T::? for the requirements of Regulation XV.
City staff has met with the SCAQI1D and an exemption from Regula-
tion xv will be given to Santa I10nica employers. The TMP thus
- 5 -
.
.
fulfills a key objective by ensuring compliance with Regulation
xv.
To allow an exemption for Santa 110nica employers, the SCAQMD must
determine that the TMP is at least as effective as Regulation XV
in its goals. As explained below, the TMP meets the air quality
objectives of Regulation XV and goes beyond these objectives by
requiring the same reductions for afternoon traffic.
Regulation XV was adopted to reduce vehicle air emissions by
focusing on morning AVR. The morning AVR is based on traffic
levels from 6:00 a.m. to lO:OO a.m. However, the TMP also ad-
dresses auto congestion and pollution during the afternoon peak
traffic period (3: 00 p. m. to 7: 00 p. m. ) . By also focusing on
afternoon AVR, the TMP addresses the worst traffic levels of the
day and requires reductions consistent with the morning levels.
Further, while Regulation XV targets employers with 100 or more
employees, the TMP ultl:i'lately affects employers with as few as
ten employees.
Finally, the City is devotlng the first year of the program to
working with the largest employers (100 or more employees). This
coincides with the require~ents of the SCAQMD, which began
notifying large employers (lOC or ~ore) in Santa Monica beginning
January 1, 1990. Employers of 200 or more have already been re-
quired to comply with RCT.llcctlon X'] and \.;ould have to comply with
the TMP in the first year of the program. Afterwards, those em-
ployers would only submit plans to the City, as the City will
- 6 -
.
.
obtain an exemption from Regulation XV requirements for Santa
Monica employers.
In order to avoid duplication of effort for employers who have
-
completed and approved Regulation XV Plans, during the first year
the Draft Ordinance permits employers to submit an approved Reg-
ulation XV Plan less than six months old, as their city required
Worksite Transportation Plan.
In addition, for the first year,
these employers would be exempt from paying the Employee Impact
Fee.
TMP ORDINANCE
Formulated after the Draft Plan, the Draft TMP Ordinance refined
the goals and objectives of the Plan, while outlining details of
implementation in an ordinance format.
The TMP Ordinance will provide a mix of requirements and
incentives to reduce the number of work-related commute trips and
resultant auto pollution City-wide. To accomplish this, the Plan
calls for management of transportation demand (e.g. number, time,
mode, and length of vehicle trips) and facilities (e.g. roadways,
bikeways, transit, and walkways).
These plan elements include,
but are not limited to:
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measures
o Information and Marketing
o Rideshare Matching
o Vanpool Brokerage
o parking Management
o Alternative Work Schedules
o Telecommuting
o Local Employment Markets
o Transit Fare Subsidies
o Transit Service Improvements
- 7 -
/
.
.
o park-n-ride Facilities
o Bus stop Lighting Improvements
o Bicycle Facilities
Transportation System Management (TSM) Measures
o Coordination with Regional Network
o Left Turn Lanes
o Signal Synchronization
o Access Control
o Residential Traffic control
o Residential Parking Control
APPLICABILITY OF TMP ORDINANCE
The TMP Ordinance requires employers (any public or private em-
pI oyer having a permanent place of business in the City and em-
ploying 10 or more employees) and developers of non-residential
development to comply with Ordinance provisions. As currently
drafted, the City will also be required to comply with the provi-
sions of the Ordinance. The ordinance does not impose require-
ments on new or existing residential uses.
EXISTING EMPLOYERS
Requirements
Requirements for employers are based on the number of employees
at each worksite.
Small employers with less than 10 employees
are exempt from all requirements.
Medium-sized employers with
10-49 employees are required to pay an annual Traffic Impact Fee
of $8 per employee and submit a Worksite Transportation Plan out-
lining TDM alternatives to be made available to employees. Large
employers with 50 or more employees are required to pay an annual
Traffic Impact Fee of $6 per employee, assign a Worksite
- 8 -
.
.
Transportation Plan Coordinator, and prepare a Worksite Transpor-
tat ion Plan demonstrating a worksite AVR of 1.5 during both the
morning and afternoon peak traffic periods.
Smaller employers
pay a higher per-employee fee ($8 versus $6), as they are not
expected to achieve the same levels of trip mitigation on their
own and require more support from the City TMP Office.
In addition, employers at multi-tenant worksites or employment
clusters with 50 or more employees will be encouraged to volun-
tarily form Transportation Management Associations.
Should
smaller employers join a TMA with 50 or more employees, the $6
fee would apply. If voluntarism is not effective, such employers
may be required by the City'S TMP Coordinator to form a Transpor-
tat ion Management Association (TMA).
TMAs are groupings of
developers or employers geared to maximizing the effectiveness of
TDM measures and easing the responsibilities of each tenant
through a coordinated group effort. Each employer in a TMA con-
tributes information and plans to a designated TMA Coordinator,
who then files an annual plan with the city outlining TOM mea-
sures for each employer and for the building as a whole. Requir-
ing eligible worksites to form TI{As would be based on the
desirability of coordination and the potential for ride sharing
success at the worksite.
For example, a commercial office employer with 60 employees would
be required to:
o pay an annual Traffic Impact Fee of $360.00 (60 X $6.00);
o assign an employee to serve as a Worksite Transportation Plan
Coordinator;
o prepare a Worksite Transportation Plan demonstrating measures
to achieve a worksite AVR of 1. 5 in the morning and the
- 9 -
.
.
afternoon peak traffic periods.
o potentially form a TMA with other tenants in the building or
employment cluster, at the discretion of the City's Transpor-
tation Management Coordinator.
An employer with a current worksite AVR of 1.3 in both the morn-
ing and afternoon would have to implement new TOM measures or
strengthen existing ones to achieve a 1.5 AVR. The City's TMP
Office will assist employers in assembling Worksite Transporta-
tion Plans to attain the 1.5 AVR goal.
All required reductions in peak period trips pertain only to em-
ployee commute trips.
Thus, an employer would be required to
maintain peak period AVR of 1.5 only for its employees and not
for its customers.
Employers required to achieve a 1.5 AVR in the morning and after-
noon can choose from a variety of TDM measures.
The city TMP
Office will provide a TMP Handbook to all employers that outlines
requirements, including a reference guide to some common TDM mea-
sures and potential results to be expected.
For exaltlple, the
guide estimates that a successful program providing free bus
tokens to 2.5% of its employees will reduce vehicle trips by a
comparable amount. These trip mitigation estimates serve only as
a guide to assist employers in developing a Worksite Transporta-
tion Plan that will achieve desired results.
Use of Fees
Required fees for employers are based on the impact of each work-
site upon the city's transportation and circulation system.
Thus, larger employers have greater requirements (quantifiable
- 10 -
.
.
reduction of employee vehicle trips) than smaller employers (mak-
ing rideshare options available to employees). The fees assessed
to employers are intended to pay for the costs of operating the
TMP program, the establishment and operation of TMA's and the
staffing of the City TMP office.
To estimate the potential fees to be collected by the TMP pro-
gram, the city estimates that there are approximately 54 em-
ployers with a total of 19, 526 employees within the 100+ em-
ployers category, approximately 100 employers with a total 18,939
employees within the 50-99 employers category and over 500 em-
ployers with approximately 21,000 employees within the 10-49 em-
ployer category. It is estimated that the city will receive ap-
proximately $58,578 from fees in the first year, approximately
$231,000 in the second year, and approximately $399,000 in the
third year. Based upon the fees to be received, and the antici-
pated operating costs, the TMP program will generate sufficient
revenues to support the operation during the first few years.
Funds from the Southmark Colorado Place Phase III, and Watergar-
den development agreements will be used to off-set the antici-
pated deficit. The funds from both of the development agreements
are to be used by the city solely to assist in financing the
costs associated with the implementation of a City-wide traffic
systems management ordinance.
The City TMP Office will have several functions. These include
assisting employers and developers in development of Worksi te
Transportation Plans and formation of Transportation Management
- 11 -
.
.
Associations. The Office will also review Worksite Transporta-
tion Plans for adequacy, coordinate annual reviews, outreach to
employers and developers, and perform administrative duties re-
quired to implement and operate the City-wide program.
Effective Date of Requirements
As proposed, the Ordinance would affect the largest employers
(100 or more employees) beginning July 1, 1991. Notification of
all other employers would be done on a phased schedule. Such
phasing will allow the city to refine and improve the program to
correct any administrative irregularities.
To coincide with the requirements of SCAQMD Regulation XV, the
City will notify the largest employers (100 or more) in the first
year. These employers will be required to: 1) pay a Traffic Im-
pact Fee, 2) assign an employee to work as a Worksite Transporta-
tion Plan coordinator, and 3) assemble a Worksite Transportation
Plan demonstrating a 1. 5 worksite AVR during the morning and
afternoon peak traffic periOdS.
Employers of 50-99 employees would be contacted in the second
year. These employers would comply with the same requirements of
the largest employers (100 or more).
Smaller employers (10-49 employees) would be notified in the
third year of the program. These employers will be required to
1) pay a Traffic Impact Fee, and 2) assemble a Worksite Transpor-
tation Plan.
NEW DEVELOPMENT
- 12 -
.
.
Requirements
Requirements for new development are based on the traffic gener-
ated and its impact upon City streets and transportation systems.
Thus, non-residential development projects have requirements
based on the expected number of afternoon peak hour vehicle
trips. The trip rates are derived from standardized rates es-
tablished by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE), and in-
clude all trips to the development (e.g. employees, customers,
deliveries).
New non-residential development resulting in less than 10 pm-peak
trips will pay a one-time Transportation Impact Fee. New devel-
opment resulting in 10-49 pm-peak trips will pay the Impact Fee
and prepare Worksite Transportation Plans outlining TDM and TSM
measures to be available at the development.
Because actual tenant space is often not leased until after a
building is built, Worksite Transportation Plans would provide
general guidelines for TDM measures that will be available or
encouraged to tenants. In addition, measures that are programmed
into the development proposal (i.e. installation of showers, bi-
cycle lockers, and TSM roadway improvements) can be included as
part of the required reductions.
Developer Impact Fee
The Transportation Impact Fee for developers will be based on the
number of peak hour trips generated by the development multiplied
- 13 -
. .
by a pre-established trip cost factor.. This cost factor esti-
mates the quantitative impact of each new pm-peak hour trip upon
the City's transportation systems.
The 1989 draft ordinance proposed a factor of $2,500 per pm-peak
trip, based on a calculation of new lane miles expected for the
City in the future. However, completion of the analysis required
to confirm the new cost factor is pending. Thus, the trip cost
factor will be based on the improvements identified in the city-
wide Traffic study. Determining a trip cost factor is a techni-
cal process based on the City's forecasted transportation needs,
deficiencies, and proposed capital improvement projects through
the year 2010.
The the developer trip cost factor will comply with state legis-
lation that requires jurisdictions to demonstrate a reasonable
relationship between new development, resultant needs for im-
provements, and the fees assessed to finance those improvements
(AB 1600). The TMP program will also conform with SB 372, which
governs the use of new development fees for capital facilities
development.
Use of Fees
Revenue from developer Transportation Impact Fees will be allo-
cated to the following funds:
o Transportation Demand Management (TOM) Improvements. This
helps fund the City's TMP Office to assist developers and
TMAs in initiating and maintaining trip reduction pro-
grams. Funds would also be available for the program's
additional expenses, such as promotional materials,_survey
instruments, and processing as they relate to developers'
needs.
- 14 -
.
.
o Transportation system Management (TSM) Improvements. This
funds TSM improvements in traffic signal synchronization,
left turn lanes, residential traffic control, etc., with
the exception of public transit.
o Transportation Facility Development (TFD). This funds
construction of major capital improvements to a highway or
transit system (e.g. light rail).
o Public Transit Improvements. This fund would be allocated
to public transit measures, including additional peak-
period service, increased service, expanded routes, new
routes, transit turnouts, and seed money for rail projects
specified in the Circulation Element.
Effective Date of Requirements
New development will not be affected until a developer trip cost
factor is established. New development without a final Certifi-
cate of Occupancy on the effective date of adoption of the fee,
however, will be subject to appropriate requirements.
Thus, a
project that has received planning approvals and may be under
construction, but which has not yet obtained a final Certificate
of Occupancy will have to comply with fee requirements for new
developers.
TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONS
While requirements of the TMP are geared towards developers and
individual employers, the program recognizes that pooling of
resources among several employers can lead to better TDM results.
Transportation Management Associations (TMA) are groupings of
residents, developers, or employers geared to maximizing the ef-
fectiveness of TDM measures and easing the responsibilities of
each tenant through a coordinated group effort.
- 15 -
.
.
The TMP ordinance promotes the TMA concept in several ways.
First, the City's TMP office will assist in forming and operating
voluntary Associations for employers and smaller developers not
required to do so. The city Transportation Management Coordina-
tor has been meeting with representatives from large employers to
assist in forming such associations.
Second, existing multi-tenant buildings or employment clusters
with 50 or more employees are eligible to be designated as TMAs.
The city TMP Office will evaluate which sites possess the best
opportunities for ridesharing success and notify all involved
employers of the requirement to form a TMA. Good examples in-
clude multi-building sites that share parking, such as the Santa
Monica Business Park and Water Garden.
Finally, employers who join a TMA will be eligible for a 25% re-
duction in the required Employer Annual Impact Fee. This creates
an incentive for employers to join together to from TMAs.
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The City recognizes that residential uses contribute to citywide
traffic problems. As originally proposed, the TMP imposed re-
quirements on new residential development. However, the impact
of residential uses, new and existing, on transportation systems
has not yet been fully assessed. Placing requirements upon
residential uses poses unique problems not associated with com-
mercial and industrial uses that must be restudied (i.e impacts
on existing affordable housing). As a result, all requirements
- 16 -
.
.
for residential development have been deleted pending further
study of the issue.
Additionally, while residents do contribute to citywide traffic
problems, the TMP focuses on developing a manageable program with
near-term results consistent with Regulation XV, which targets
only work-related commute trips.
Upon evaluation of the Circulation and Traffic Mitigation study
and follow-up studies, the City can properly assess the impact of
new and existing residential development on traffic problems. At
that time, a complete program designed to impose fees and/or re-
quirements on residential development may be re-evaluated.
On a related issue, the Draft TMP notes that 28.1% of workers in
the City of Santa Monica also live in the city. Thus, even with-
out specific requirements for residential uses, over one-fourth
of city residents could potentially be affected by the TMP as
proposed.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
Employers
Upon receiving notice from the City, employers will have 90 days
to pay appropriate fees and submit a Worksite Transportation
Plan. The city TMP Office will be available to assist employers
in preparing plans. Upon receipt of employer plans, the City
will have 120 days to review the plan. If the plan is approved,
the employer would submit annual updates assessing their pro-
- 17 -
.
.
gram's success. If the plan is not approved, employers are given
30 days to revise the plan.
Failure by an employer to submit a Worksite Transportation Plan,
prepare an annual update, revise an inadequate plan, or implement
any required provisions of a Worksi te Transportation Plan will
result in enforcement action by the city. Violators will be
given one warning without penalty. upon notification of a second
violation, the City will impose fee penalties.
Penal ties, which will apply to both partial or complete non-
compliance with the ordinance. Currently, staff anticipates as-
sessing penalties at a flat rate of $5.00 per employee per day
until the violation is corrected.
Any employer who disputes the Cityts determination regarding com-
plian?e with the ordinance may appeal the decision to the work-
site Transportation Plan (WTP) Appeals Board. Such an appeal
must be filed within 10 days of the determination of non- com-
pliance. A public hearing would be held within 45 days of the
appeal by the WTP Appeals Board. The Board will be composed of
the Parking and Traffic Engineer, Director of Land Use and
Transportation Management Department, and an appointed represen-
tative from the business community.
New Development
Developer submittal of Worksite Transportation Plans is required
at the time of application for development permits with the Plan-
ning and Zoning Division. The city TMP Office will have 30 days
- 18 -
.
.
to review the developer's worksite Transportation Plan for
adequacy. These plans must be approved prior to issuance of
building permits. Full payment of traffic impact fees will also
be required prior to issuance of building permits. The review
and appeal process for Worksite Transportation Plans is the same
for developers and employers.
PARKING REDUCTION ORDINANCE
The Circulation Element of the General Plan recommends that the
City "allow the reduction of parking requirements for new devel-
opment in accordance with approved transportation control mea-
sures which have been demonstrated to be effective in reducing
parking needs and which are meni tared and enforced by the ci ty"
(Policy 4.7.5).
To provide incentives to developers to implement TOM measures, an
ordinance was originally drafted to permit reductions in off-
street parking requirements for new development and additions to
existing development. A developer presenting an effective TDM
package and demonstrating a commitment to successful reductions
in vehicle trips would be eligible for parking reductions.
The City recognizes the potential benefits from such a parking
reduction permit. However, the program posed administrative and
implementation problems that could not be reconciled at this
time. For example, the city would have to enter into an agree-
ment with the developer to ensure that TOM measures successfully
- 19 -
.
.
reduced vehicle trips to the project to correspond with the re-
duced parking supply. In the event TDM measures were unsuccess-
ful and a parking problem was created, developer funds would be
used by the Ci ty to construct additional parking in the area.
However, the feasibility of locating City-owned lots and develop-
ing parking in the vicinity to alleviate the parking deficit may
be remote and would pose administrative problems. As a result,
the Parking Reduction provision has been deleted. Following ini-
tial implementation of the TMP, this issue may be revisited.
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Pursuant to the City of Santa Monica Guidelines for Implementa-
tion of the California Environmental Quality Act, an Environmen-
tal Impact Report (EIR) was prepared to assess potential impacts
of the TMP.
The Final EIR (FEIR) concluded that implementation of the TMP
would not result in any significant environmental impacts. The
FEIR stated further that nearly all issues studied would experi-
ence beneficial impacts.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The Chamber of Commerce has actively been participating in the
review and preparation of the ordinance. Comments form the Cham-
ber, throughout the process, have resulted in numerous changes to
each draft of the ordinance. Attached to this report are the
most recent Chamber comments and the responses from staff.
- 20 -
.
.
In addition to the comments from the Chamber, staff has received
comments from the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD). The Ordinance as proposed will be able to replace Reg-
ulation XV requirements, however, the City must ensure that there
are adequate staff resources to implement the Ordinance, and the
city must sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SCAQMD
before the City may retain implementation authority of Regulation
XV.
The SCAQMD has submitted comments to the proposed ordinance,
those comments and staff's responses are attached to this report.
A draft MOU has been provided to the City by SCAQMD which staff
is currently reviewing. staff will be working with to develop a
mutually acceptable MOU prior to the implementation date of the
Ordinance. In addition, staff is working with SCAQMD to identify
the appropriate staffing levels and will be returning to the
Council with a recommendation for staff during the FY 91/92 bud-
get process.
PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW
The Planning Commission reviewed the Draft Ordinance and made the
following recommendations:
o The City should develop a map of all potential TMAs
throughout the city.
o The ordinance should apply to all employers in the City.
In should not be limited to employers of 10 or more.
o Fees should be reduced by at least 80% when an employer
reaches a 1.5 AVR.
o The ordinance should contain a termination date or sunset
clause.
- 21 -
.
.
staff has considered the Planning Commission comments and incor-
porated the fee reduction incentive when employers reach a 1. 5
AVR. Employers who demonstrate a 1.5 AVR in the first year will
receive a 50% reduction in fees, if achieved for two years, a 60%
reduction in fees, and if achieved for three years, an 80% reduc-
tion in fees.
The mapping of potential TMAs will occur as employers begin to
submit worksite transportation plans. Once the larger employers
have submitted plans, it will be easier to determine potential
TMA boundaries.
The application of the ordinance to employers who have 10 or less
employees, and the suggestion for a sunset or termination clause
are not feasible at this time. Once all the employers who are
presently subject to the ordinance are in compliance, staff will
evaluate the benefit of adding the additional employers. Because
this ordinance will replace Regulation XV requirements, the
SCAQMD will not support a termination or sunset clause.
CONCLUSION
The TMP fulfills several immediate and long-term goals for the
City, including:
o Addressing the need for reduction of traffic and auto pol-
lution at a time when the SCAQMD has already imposed re-
quirements upon employers of 100 or more. The TMP is con-
sistent with the SCAQMD I S goals by targeting the same
employers.
o Going beyond the goals of the SCAQMD by targeting smaller
employers and new developers and requiring them to miti-
gate their traffic impacts.
- 22 -
.
.
o Addressing air quality and traffic issues required for
local implementation of the SCAQMD's 1989 Air Quality Man-
agement Plan.
o Implementing several policies in the 1984 update of the
Circulation Element. These policies related to the bene-
fits of such a traffic reduction program.
o Providing immediate traffic benefits by imposing require-
ments on all new development.
o Phasing of the program for existing employers to allow the
city's numerous employers to ease into the program, while
allowing the City to refine and improve the administration
of the TMP. In targeting employers of 100 or more in the
first year, the city will work with employers who have
already prepared similar plans for SCAQMD Regulation XV or
are familiar with the concept of the TMP.
The TMP is a comprehensive program targeting small and large em-
ployers with requirements commensurate with the traffic impacts
of both. At the same time, the TMP places requirements on all
new non-residential development based on its impact upon existing
transportation systems. By requiring new development to mitigate
its impact immediately and by phasing in requirements for exist-
ing employers, the TMP addresses the need for both immediate and
long-term mitigation of existing traffic and air pollution prob-
lems in the City.
In addition, the program has the capacity to change and even
grow, should the concepts of a parking reduction program and/or
requirements for residential uses be reconsidered later. Adop-
tion of the program will help to achieve all the aforementioned
goals and policies and establish the City of Santa Monica's
Transportation Management Plan as one of the most comprehensive
traffic reduction programs in the nation.
1-
- 23 -
.
.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the City Council:
1. Conduct a Study Session on the Draft Ordinance.
2. Conduct a public hearing on the Draft Ordinance.
3. Direct staff to make any necessary modifications to the Or-
dinance and schedule the Ordinance for first reading at a
subsequent Council meeting.
Prepared by: Paul Berlant, Director of LUTM
Ron Fuchiwaki, City Parking and Traffic Engineer
Suzanne Frick, Planning Manager
Karen Pickett, Transportation Management
Coordinator
Exhibit: A. Draft Ordinance
B. May 6, 1991 Chamber of Commerce Comments and Staff
Responses
C. May 9, 1991 SCAQMD Comments and Staff Responses
D. Final EIR
/~----/------/
- 24 -
.
txH IfAT e
.
MAY 21, 1991
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN FROM SANTA
MONICA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
1) tiThe Ordinance should encourage the formation of TMAs and
avoid any provisions which discourage their formation."
Response:
A)
"It would be desirable to permit a TMA to elect to
be treated as the employer under the ordinance and
perform all of those functions, or permit it to
elect not to do so and, essentially, be an
invisible anti ty as far as the City is concerned
with each member separately complying with the
Ordinance."
staff agrees that a TMA may serve as a source of
information. The Ordinance has been amended to
provide for a TMA which acts as an informational
organization.
B)
"Employers participating in a TMA which elects to
operate as the employer should not be required to
pay a fee to the city in any amount with employers
belonging to a 'non-employer' TMA being charged a
smaller fee than would be applicable to non-member
employers. A TMA which is the employer should pay
an annual fee Which is significantly lower than $6
per employee in order to provide an incentive to
the employers."
staff agrees that the fees for TMAs should should
be less than that charged for a single employer.
The Ordinance has been modified to allow for a 25%
reduction in fees for employers who belong to a
TMA. However since the City will still have to
review the TMA Plan, a fee will still be required
for both employer TMAs and TMAs which act as the
employer.
C) "We suggest that the joint and several liability
language be deleted."
- 1 -
Response:
.
.
The formation of the TMA would be similar to that
of a partnership. All employers who join the TMA
would be equally responsible for implementing the
approved Worksi te Transportation Plan. Should an
employer decide not to comply with the approved
Plan, the TMA would have the ability of removing
the employer from the TMA.
2) "The amount of the annual fee is not supported by any detail
as to the anticipated level of revenues or need for the
expenditures."
Response:
City staff has prepared a budget outlining expected
revenues to be generated by the Transportation
Impact Fee. The number of staff required for the
city TMP office has been determined by discussions
with SCAQMD and the nUInber of employees in Santa
Monica that would be affected by the Ordinahce. It
is anticipated that employer fees will not be
sufficient to fund the initial start up program
operation during the first two years. Therefore,
funds from the traffic improvement fees collected
in conjunction with the Southmark and Water Gardens
development agreements will be used to fund the
program. The funds used from these development
agreements are to be used by the City solely to
assist in financing the costs associated with the
implementation of a City-wide traffic systems
management ordinance.
3) "The amount of the fee should be reduced beyond 50% for those
employers meeting the 1.5 AVR ratio.1I
Response:
Staff agrees and the Ordinance has been modified so
that employers who achieve a 1.5 AVR shall receive
a 50% reduction in the impact fee the following
year. If employers achieve a 1.5 AVR for two
years, a 60% reduction in fees will occur, and if
achieved for three years, employers will receive an
80% reduction in fees.
4) liThe annual fee to be paid by employers should not be, in any
way, commingled with the funds used to support the city's own
compliance with the ordinance."
Response:
Agreed, The City does not intend to use the fees
collected to fund City compliance with the
Ordinance.
- 2 -
.
.
5) tlWhy should employers with fewer than 50 employees be
required to file plans and perform annual monitoring?"
Response:
The City is attempting to accomplish two goals with
this Ordinance, improve air quality and reduce the
number of cars traveling during the a.m. and p.m.
peak traffic periods. Therefore, application of
the Ordinance to employers with fewer than 50
employees is necessary to achieve the two goals.
In addition, small employers will be encouraged to
join TMAs, however, since there is no requirement
that such employers join a TMA, the City must still
require a plan and perform annual monitoring.
6) "If developer worksite Plans are to be required, there should
be no requirement that the employer plans be consistent with
them."
Response:
The City recognizes that at the time of
construction and completion of a new building many,
if not most, tenants have not been selected. Thus,
the site plan required of developers would consist
of general TDM measures and structural improvements
to be incorporated into the development (i.e.
showers, lockers, bus shelters). Employers
including those improvements as part of their plan
will receive credit towards acheiving the 1.5 AVR.
7) IIAn exemption for the Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School
District should be considered, at least for the payment of
the annual fee."
Response:
There are no fee or plan exemptions for any
employers, as all employer sites will be
responsible for preparing a plan which the City
must review. In addition to the School District,
there are other non-profit social agencies that are
as equally in need of a fee waiver. Therefore,
unless the City council decides to amend the
Ordinance to permit a fee waiver, the School
District will be subject to the same fee as other
employers.
8) "Employers with over 100 employees should be assured that an
exemption from Regulation XV will be available.1I
Response:
city staff has been in contact with SCAQMD
regarding the exemption from Regulation XV for
Santa Monica employers if the ordinance becomes
operative. city staff has responded to comments
made by AQMD staff on the Draft ordinance, and it
- 3 -
.
.
appears tha t AQMD will provide an exemption for
City employers.
9) "In connection with Santa Monica pl.ans, employers having an
approved AQMD plan shoul.d be permitted to satisfy the plan
requirement for the first year simply by submitting that plan
and be allowed to retain their existing anniversary date for
reporting purposes."
Response:
To avoid duplication for employers who have
completed and approved Regulation XV Plans, during
the first year the Ordinance permits employers to
submit an approved Regulation XV Plan less than six
months old as their City required Worksite
Transportation Plan. For the first year, these
employers would be exempt from paying the Employee
Impact Fee. However, they would not be allowed to
retain their existing anniversary date, and instead
would have to submit the approved Regulation XV
Plan that is less than six months old as the
Worksite Transportation Plan 90 calendar days after
receipt of notice from the city TMP office.
10) "The Worksite Transportation Plan Appeals Board should
consist of members of the public rather than being dominated
by City staff.1I
Response:
The members of the Worksite Transportation Plan
Appeals Board is appropriate given the nature of
what is subject to review. It is necessary to have
members on the Board that are familiar with
preparing, reviewing, and the operation of
appropriate TDM measures.
11) liThe Ordinance should have s IIsunset" provision, at least as
to the employer portions, in order to insure a careful
evaluation of success."
Response:
As the need for traffic and air pollution
reductions are not expected to decrease, the
Ordinance has no Sunset provision. In addition,
since the Ordinance will replace Regulation XV
requirements, the SCAQMO will not support a Sunset
clause.
12) liThe Ordiance should clarify the relationship between the
impact fee to be paid by developers and the mitigation
requirements developed during the EIR process."
A) "AS part of any particular proposed development,
- 4 -
Response:
.
.
the EIR should, as it probably must, determine the
traffic mitigation measures necessary for that
proj ect and the developer should receive a
dollar-for-dollar credit against the traffic impact
fee for any mitigation measure which appeared on
the capital project list adopted by the council."
Any improvements required of a developer to
mitigate significant traffic impacts under the
city's environmental review process will still be
required and may not be used as credit against the
Transportation Impact Fee. However, any payment
made by a developer to fund an improvement
identified on the City-wide Traffic study's list of
capital improvements that is not required to
mitigate significant environmental impacts will be
credited against the developer's Traffic Impact
Fee, sUbject to mutual agreement by the developer
and the City.
13)
liThe traffic impact fee should not be imposed
projects which have received building permits
certificates of occupancy.1I
against
but not
Response:
The City does not agree. Since the building has
yet to be occupied, it is still appropriate to
assess fees to help fund traffic improvements. In
addition, all new development has a condition of
approval requiring payment of a traffic impact fee
prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
14) IIIf this Ordinance is to be treated as a 'notice' ordinance
regarding this fee for future projects, a maximum should be
established~"
Response:
The City does not agree. Developers have been
noticed about the potential traffic impact fee for
over two years. Throughout this period no maximum
fee level has been identified. Since a study is
necessary to establish the amount of the fee, the
City does not want to pre-suppose what the maximum
amount may be.
15) liThe requirement of a 'Worksite Transportation Plan' from a
developer is unrealistic, at least as described. We
suggest that the Staff seriously consider deleting the
concept of the developer plans entirely or, at least, modify
the ordinance to provide for plans which are realistic given
the limited value they can have.1I
- 5 -
.
.
Response:
staff agrees and has modified the Developer
Worksite Transportation Plans requirements. The
Ordinance now requires that developers submit a
Worksite Transportation Plan to the city for
implementation of selected measures at the
development site in accordance with procedures for
submission of developer plans.
16) "Similarly, the requirement of a 'Worksite Transportation
Plan Coordinator' for a single Duilding appears unnecessary."
Response:
Agreed. That requirement has been deleted from the
Ordinance.
- 6 -