Adopted August 16, 2010

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

BACKGROUND ...... 2

TDM PLAN INTRODUCTION ...... 6

POTENTIAL TDM STRATEGIES ...... 8

EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR TDM ...... 11

TDM ANALYSIS ...... 24

TDM ACTION PLAN ...... 28

ACRONYMS ...... 46

ROADWAY CATEGORIES ...... 47

APPENDIX ...... 48

Dowling Associates, Incorporated i San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

List of Figures

Figure 1: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Member Agencies ...... 3 Figure 2. CMP Monitoring Process ...... 7 Figure 3: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Employment Resources ...... 18 Figure 4: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Parking Resources ...... 19 Figure 5: TDM Analysis Framework...... 27 Figure 6: TRIMMS Analysis and Application Work Plan ...... 53 Figure 7 TRIMMS’s Structure ...... 59 Figure 8 TRIMMS’s Output Screen ...... 60 Figure 9: ITS Components in IDAS...... 62 Figure 10 2020 VMT by Speed Distribution for Light and Medium Duty Vehicles and Motorcycles ...... 76 Figure 11 2035 Speed Distribution for Light and Medium Duty Vehicles and Motorcycles .... 76

Dowling Associates, Incorporated ii San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

List of Tables

Table 1: Comparison of Strategies and Objectives ...... 1 Table 2: Population and Land Area by Jurisdiction ...... 2 Table 3: Surveyed Employers by Sector ...... 15 Table 4: Services and Transportation within 1/4 Mile of Worksite ...... 15 Table 5: Summary of San Joaquin Employer Parking and TDM Surveys ...... 16 Table 6: Existing Park-and-Ride Lots in San Joaquin County ...... 20 Table 7: Proposed Park-and-Ride Lot Expansion and Installations ...... 21 Table 8: Summary of District Off-Street Parking Supply ...... 23 Table 9: Number of Large Employers and Employees by Sector ...... 25 Table 10: Mode Share Survey for San Joaquin County ...... 25 Table 11: Carpool-Vanpool Survey for San Joaquin County ...... 26 Table 12: Percent Auto-Trip Reduction by Employment Sector ...... 26 Table 13: Developmental Guidelines for Facility based TDM Measures ...... 40 Table 14 Available Methods for Evaluations ...... 56 Table 15 Available Methods for Transit Improvements Evaluations ...... 61 Table 16 Available Methods for Pedestrian/Bicycle Demand Forecast ...... 63 Table 17 Available Methods for Quality Assessment for Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities ...... 64 Table 18 Available Tools for Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities Evaluations ...... 65 Table 19 Available Methods for TDM Strategies Evaluations ...... 66 Table 20 Available Methods for Parking Improvement Evaluations ...... 67 Table 21 Summary for Methods ...... 68 Table 22 TDM Strategy Scenarios ...... 71 Table 23 Forecast Number of Employees for 2020 and 2035 ...... 71 Table 24 Daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 ...... 72 Table 25 Average Commute Trip Length by Mode ...... 72 Table 26 Mode Share Survey for San Joaquin County ...... 72 Table 27 VMT Reduction from Large Employment Commuters by Scenarios ...... 72 Table 28 Adjusted Total Daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 ...... 73 Table 29 Daily VMT Reductions for 2020 and 2035 ...... 73 Table 30 Daily Trip Reductions for 2020 and 2035 ...... 73 Table 31 CO2 Equivalent Emission Rates for Urban Fleets ...... 75 Table 32 VMT Reduction by Speed Class ...... 77 Table 33 CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction Per Day from Running Activity ...... 77 Table 34 CO2 Equivalent for Start Activity ...... 78 Table 35 Percent Sub-Type for Light Duty Vehicles...... 78 Table 36 Light Duty Vehicle Trip Reduction by TDM Strategies ...... 78 Table 37 CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction from Start Activity by TDM Strategies ...... 79 Table 38 Total CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction per Day by TDM Strategies ...... 79 Table 39 Pavley + LCFS Reductions ...... 80 Table 40 Adjusted Total CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction per Day by TDM Strategies ...... 80

Dowling Associates, Incorporated iii San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Introduction

Many jurisdictions are in the process of adjusting priorities with regard to their transportation systems. Rather than automatically accommodating unconstrained peak-hour vehicle demands by roadway capacity expansion, they are first looking at strategies that make more efficient use of their existing transportation system. This toolbox of strategies falls generally under the rubric of a Travel Demand Management (TDM) or Mobility Management program.

TDM programs emphasize the movement of people and freight as opposed to the traditional objectives of prioritizing motor vehicle travel. Strategies that encourage walking, biking, using public transit, carpooling, flexible work schedules, and telecommuting are often incorporated into TDM plans. This shift in priorities is attributable to limited right-of-way for additional roadway expansion, capital improvement funding constraints, concern over the negative environmental impacts of expanding vehicle-based environments, and the recognition that there is a need to provide an equitable system for all users that makes driving alone a choice rather than a necessity.

The primary purpose of the TDM Plan is to establish an institutional and planning framework between San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) and its member agencies to more effectively address demand management and facility based demand management strategies for the purpose of relieving peak period congestion on Congestion Management Program (CMP) designated roadways. As part of the TDM Plan implementation, each local agency will be requested to adopt a TDM Resolution of Commitment that establishes the appropriate level of local agency resources/effort for implementation of demand management strategies. The level of effort will be based on the level of congestion on a given jurisdiction’s CMP roadways. Why TDM?

Vehicular congestion results from the concurrent demand of two elements: space and time. For traffic congestion, it results from the demand of a place on the transportation network at a time of the day when many other people are making the same demand. TDM programs aim to relieve peak period congestion by addressing the demand for transportation rather than its provision. This is done by encouraging mode-shifts (such as walking, biking, transit) as viable options to solo-driving (carpool and vanpool) and encouraging time-shifts in solo-driving (flex schedule and tele-work) to occur outside the traditional peak hours of demand.

A meaningful TDM program has the capacity to meet multiple objectives for transportation, safety, economics and livability. Traditional strategies for reducing congestion (increasing single occupant vehicle capacity) can have negative environmental impacts (fuel efficiency) and can generally work against other objectives that may also be important to communities. Table 1 summarizes objectives supported or contradicted by these strategies. Table 1: Comparison of Strategies and Objectives Strategies Fuel Widen Efficiency TDM Objective Highways Standards Program Congestion Reduction + - + Road & Parking Savings - - + Consumer Savings (vehicle + Transportcosts) Choice + Road Safety - - + Environmental Protection - + + Efficient Land Use - - + Community Livability - + "+" = supports objective; "-" = contradicts objective. Source: Victoria Transport Policy Institute, accessed website on October 15, 2009, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm51.htm Dowling Associates, Incorporated 1 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Given that the non-discretionary nature of the home based work trip and its contribution to AM and PM peak hour congestion, TDM strategies often focus on solutions at the employer-level. Commute hours are typically the most consistently congested time periods on a transportation network and solutions for congestion relief generally arise from analysis of these time periods. However, TDM strategies need not be confined to employers and can be implemented on a broader scale.

Background

SJCOG is a single county Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) and Congestion Management Agency (CMA). In partnership with its member agencies, SJCOG addresses all its federal and state regional transportation planning and programming responsibilities in San Joaquin County under the authority of these three designations. The San Joaquin Council of Governments is made up of eight member agencies: San Joaquin County and the seven cities of Stockton, Lodi, Manteca, Tracy, Ripon, Escalon, and Lathrop. Population and land area for each jurisdiction is shown in Table 2 for reference purposes. A map showing the member agencies is shown in Figure 1.

Table 2: Population and Land Area by Jurisdiction Square Jurisdiction Population Miles Escalon 7,131 8.0 Lathrop 17,429 22.0 Lodi 63,362 12.7 Manteca 66,451 14.9 Ripon 14,915 2.8 Stockton 286,927 60.8 Tracy 81,548 22.0 Unincorporated Areas 144,897 1,256.8 County Total 682,660 1,400.0 Source for Population: California State Department of Finance, 2008

SJCOG, with the assistance of Stanislaus Council of Governments, provides transportation demand management planning, commuter matching and marketing services for San Joaquin County under the auspices of Commute Connection. SCJOG’s Commute Connection Office operates and administers a ride-matching database to assist in commuters with carpool and vanpool matching and coordination free of charge. The program also refers commuters to available transit and provides information on park-and-ride lots, Freeway Service Patrol, bicycling, and telecommuting. It also assists local employers in arranging work site rideshare programs and provides a free Guaranteed Ride Home program for ridesharing employees.

Commute Connection serves as a TDM resource for all of SJCOG’s member agencies. It is also supports commuter oriented transit services provided by the various transit providers in for the San Joaquin (e.g., San Joaquin Regional Transit District and municipal transit agencies) as well as commuter and passenger rail services (e.g., Altamont Commuter Express).

On an annual basis, Commute Connection serves over six thousand commuters reducing annual vehicle miles of travel by approximately 32 million miles.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 2 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 1: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Member Agencies

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 3 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Legislation and Mandates

SJCOG is required to implement the federally required Congestion Management System (CMS) planning requirements. This federal MPO requirement was initially introduced with the passage of ISTEA (December 1991) and was legislatively continued as part of TEA-21 (July 1998). CMS responsibilities for MPOs located in federal air quality non-attainment areas and are also designated Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) such as San Joaquin County were expanded by the passage of SAFETEA-LU (August 2005)1 to now include a Congestion Management Process.

SJCOG is also the designated Congestion Management Agency for San Joaquin County (per Proposition 111 Traffic Congestion Relief and Spending Limitation Act of 1990, California Government Code: 65089). As such, SJCOG is required to maintain the state-mandated Congestion Management Program (CMP), enacted in 1990 by the California Legislature. Lastly, SJCOG is also required by the Measure K Renewal Ordinance approved by San Joaquin County voters in November 2006 to fully implement a regional CMP.

The intent of both the federal and state congestion management legislation is to have new land uses developed in tandem with the necessary transportation network improvements by coordinating the land use, air quality, and transportation planning processes. These are described in greater detail below. Federally Mandated Congestion Management Process

SAFETEA-LU (Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users) requires MPO to have congestion management process or CMP that provides effective management and operation of new and existing transportation facilities eligible for federal funding.

The federal CMS-CMP is "a systematic process for managing congestion that provides information on transportation system performance and on alternative strategies to alleviate congestion and enhance the mobility of persons and goods to levels that meet state and local needs." The intent of the CMP is to protect the region's investment in, and improve effectiveness of, the existing and future transportation networks. This is achieved by using the CMP to provide decision makers with information about transportation system performance and alternative strategies to reduce congestion, and enhance the mobility of persons and goods.

Areas designated as non-attainment of federal air quality standards such as San Joaquin County, the federal Congestion Management Process stipulates that for any project that will result in a significant increase in the carrying capacity of single occupancy vehicles (SOVs) and is also proposed to be advanced with federal funds, an analysis is required to demonstrate that travel demand reduction and operational management strategies have been implemented to the full extent possible on the subject roadway. TDM Implementation Mandates

The TDM Plan addresses the mandates called for by the voter approved Measure K Referendum, the state (Congestion Management Program) and the federal (CMS - Congestion Management Process) requirements. Each of these congestion management mandates require an increased multi-modal TDM and system management emphasis at both the local and regional level to comply. Failure to comply with any one of these mandates can have local and regional funding implications.

A key federal requirement is the implementation of a Congestion Management Process. For areas designated as non-attainment of federal air quality standards such as San Joaquin County, the federal Congestion Management Process stipulates that for any project that will result in a significant increase in the carrying capacity of single

1 23 CFR 450.320 and 23 CFR 500.109 Dowling Associates, Incorporated 4 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

occupancy vehicles (SOVs) and is also proposed to be advanced with federal funds, an analysis is required to demonstrate that travel demand reduction and operational management strategies have been implemented to the full extent possible on the subject roadway. If the analysis demonstrates that despite these strategies additional SOV capacity is still required, the CMS will identify all reasonable strategies to manage the SOV facility effectively. Such demonstrations of transportation demand management and operations and system management planning will require a more formal process involving SJCOG, its member agencies, transit providers and Caltrans. Other TDM Mandates

Besides addressing the regional, state and federal congestion management mandates mentioned above, the TDM Plan will also assist SJCOG and its member agencies to address other transportation planning mandates that entail demand management consideration and/or assessments. These include the following:

AB-1358 (Government Code 65040.2, 65302) for addressing multi-modal “complete streets” concepts in city/county general plan circulation elements. SB-375 – Redesigning Communities to Reduce Greenhouse Gases requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations to develop “Sustainable Communities Strategies” (SCSs) to achieve quantifiable targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions through more efficient development and better coordination. SB 375 streamlines the environmental review process for certain new development projects located near transit stations. Revised CEQA Guidelines (Section 15064-7, Appendix G) requiring local land use development projects to conform to both the CMP LOS standards and CMP TDM measures. Rule 9410 – Employer Based Trip Reduction Programs adopted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) in December 2009. Rule 9410 requires large employers (those with 100+ employees2) located in the San Joaquin Valley – such as San Joaquin County - to establish employee trip reduction programs. These programs are designed to encourage employees to reduce single occupant vehicle trips, thus reducing pollutant emissions associated with work commutes. There are three components of compliance with Rule 9410: o Employer Registration (Implementation Starting in 2010-2011) o Employer Trip Reduction Implementation Plan (Implementation Starting in 2011-2013) o Employee Survey and Annual Report (Implementation Starting 2014) One of the predominant industries in San Joaquin County is agriculture, and as such contains a number of employers who utilize seasonal labor for food harvesting and processing. Rule 9410 excludes large employers whose maximum work-force needs are less than sixteen consecutive weeks of full-time employment.

2 Employee sectors exempt from Rule 9410 include: agricultural, emergency health and safety, employment agencies, field personnel, independent contractors, home garage, part-time, seasonal or volunteer employees. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 5 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TDM Plan Introduction

This TDM Plan addresses the TDM mandates called for by the voter approved Measure K Referendum, the state (CMP) and the federal (CMS-CMP) requirements. Each of these congestion management mandates require an increased multi-modal TDM and system management emphasis at both the local and regional level to comply. Failure to comply with any one of these mandates can have local and regional funding implications.

Development of this TDM Plan was tailored to establish an equitable and working framework between SJCOG and its member agencies to address demand management and facility based demand management strategies to relieve peak period congestion on CMP roadways. The TDM Plan applies countywide and will be administered by SJCOG in partnership with its member agencies.

Implementation of the TDM Plan begins with the adoption a TDM Resolution of Commitment by each local agency in the county. The TDM Resolution of Commitment establishes the appropriate level of local agency resources and effort for implementation of demand management strategies. The level of effort is based on the amount of congestion on a given jurisdiction’s CMP roadways, with particular focus placed on Category 4 (roadways shown to be operating at level of service E or F with identified programmed improvements greater than seven years out) and Category 6 (roadways shown to be operating at LOS E or F with no improvement project planned) CMP designated roadways. Regional CMP Deficiency Plan and TDM Plan Coordination

Figure 2 illustrates the overall coordination of this TDM Plan with the CMS-CMP process. This process addresses the local (Measure K Referendum), state (CMP) and federal (CMS-CMP) requirements for addressing congestion management in San Joaquin County. It is also ultimately tied to the regional transportation planning/programming process performed by SJCOG.

As shown, SJCOG’s biennial CMP review will continue to monitor and track congestion levels on the CMP system of roadways. As part of that review, the number of deficient CMP system lane miles by jurisdiction will be biennially determined. Based on established thresholds for percent of deficient CMP lane miles and a given local jurisdiction’s AM/PM peak hour traffic contribution to the deficient lane miles, SJCOG will determine if the Level 2 TDM responsibilities defined in the each agency’s adopted TDM Resolutions of Commitment is triggered. The quantitative congestion threshold for Level 2 TDM implementation is established as part of the SJCOG’s Regional Deficiency Analysis while the TDM Action Plan is the document that defines the Level 1 and 2 TDM responsibilities.

SJCOG’s TDM Action Plan also identifies remedial actions to ostensibly reduce peak hour demand on all Category 5 roadways i.e., those roadways currently operating at LOS D that do not have programmed improvements within the 7-year CMP CIP. The remedial analysis includes consideration of SJCOG’s “toolbox” of proactive strategies that are considered suitable for the region that can measurably improve multimodal performance and contribute to significant improvements in air quality directly or on a system-wide level. These toolbox strategies are linked to the CMP given that they are a resource for identifying potential improvements as part of CMP deficiency plans as well as a principal source for implementing the Level 2 TDM requirements when triggered by monitored congestion levels.

In addition, a key component of SJCOG’s TDM toolbox is employer based trip reduction programs. With the adoption of Rule 9410 by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), large employers (those which employ 100+ full time non-seasonal employees) located in San Joaquin County must implement employer based trip reduction programs at their worksites.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 6 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 2. CMP Monitoring Process Local (Measure K & TDM) Federal CMS State CMP SJCOG CMP/CMS & Commute Connection

Biennial CMP Deficient w/o State CMP Deficiency Yes Yes Monitoring Inter-regional Deficiency Direct Fix Identified? Program Trips? Plan Deficiency Plan Traffic Counts No No

Local Agencies Lane Mile Lane Mile SAFETEA-LU System-wide - SJCOG Calculation Calculation Congestion Deficiency Plan - County of San Joaquin TDM - City of Escalon LOS D LOS E&F Management - City of Lathrop Action Plan Process - City of Lodi SJCOG RTP / FTIP - City of Manteca - City of Ripon Inventory Project/Program - City of Stockton Considerations - City of Tracy No Trigger Level 2? Adopt TDM Resolutions of Commitment for Levels 1, 2 Yes

Level 2 TDM TDM / ITS TDM Level 1 Responsibility Analysis Toolbox Responsibility (All)

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 7 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Potential TDM Strategies

This section contains a discussion of potential strategies to summarize tools that may be utilized in the creation of a TDM plan. They include financial, system, and demand incentives, as described below. Financial Incentives

These strategies provide financial reasons for motorists to switch transportation modes, carpool, eliminate or reduce the number of vehicle trips.

Roadway pricing – Charging vehicles for roadway use is probably the most effective way to reduce vehicle miles, increase carpooling, encourage multi-purpose vehicle trips (trip-chaining), and encourage access by other modes of travel. Congestion relief can be permanently achieved if tolls change according to demand, much the way airline ticket prices differ based on demand for flying on certain days and at certain times. General roadway pricing currently exists in certain areas of the United States (i.e., New Jersey’s toll roads, New York and San Francisco Bay Area bridge tolls) and tolled expressways are used in other parts of the world to fund transportation projects and operations (i.e., France, Mexico, and Singapore). Many jurisdictions of the United States have installed or are studying Express Lanes (HOT lanes) including San Joaquin County, which allow solo drivers to utilize carpool lanes by paying a toll that increases or decreases according to demand (i.e., SR-91 in Riverside-Orange Counties in California). Area-wide pricing – This mechanism charges a one-time fee to motorists to enter an area (generally a central business district) during certain time periods. London, England and Singapore currently operate area-wide pricing programs. Parking pricing – Charging to motorists to park decreases parking demand, which in turn reduces vehicle miles traveled, increases carpooling, and encourages access by other modes. It also properly assesses fees to the users (motorists) rather than having the cost to provide uncharged parking incorporated into goods and services purchased by the general population. By reducing parking demand, more land space can be devoted to community-enhancing land-uses and be oriented for access by pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit passengers with compact and mixed-use developments. Parking cash-out – For commercial or residential developments that currently subsidize or provide free parking for employees or residents, they can offer cash or reimbursement in exchange for the parking space. Employee travel allowance – This is generally offered as a benefit to employees, which can come in the form of reimbursement and/or as pre-tax income. Commuter Check allows employers to reimburse travel to and from work by transit. Employers can also reimburse employees who regularly commute to work by bicycle. Transit pass (Eco-pass) – Commercial or residential developments can offer to provide complimentary or subsidized transit passes to their employees and/or residents.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 8 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

System Incentives Provision of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes which provide travel time savings for high occupant vehicles including vanpools and transit vehicles. HOV lanes support rideshare and transit mode choices by providing exclusive and premium peak period lane capacity. Park and Ride lots – Government agencies and commercial developments can provide park and ride lots that are located to allow a convenient central meeting area for carpools, vanpools, and transit. Expansion of transit services that are specifically tailored to serve commuter needs e.g., regional express services as well as commuter rail. Bicyclist facilities – The following facilities can be provided to encourage access by bicycle: o Secure bicycle parking: Commercial and residential developments can provide secure, convenient parking to employees and residents that protects bicycles from inclement weather. Clearly-marked and conveniently located short-term parking can also be provided to visitors. o Changing areas, lockers, and showers: Schools and commercial developments can provide areas to change in and out of bicycle clothing, lockers for clothing and toiletry storage, and facilities for bicyclists who would like to shower after commuting to work. If these amenities are not able to be provided on-site, complimentary or subsidized membership at a local gym could be substituted.

Demand Incentives Rideshare Programs – Government agencies and/or employers offer rideshare matching services that facilitate matching interested or prospective carpoolers and/or vanpoolers with others that have similar or compatible trip characteristics to form carpools and/or vanpools. This is performed by developing a centralized rideshare matching database that is continually maintained. Preferred parking for carpools – Schools and commercial developments can designate preferred parking areas for employees and students who regularly carpool. Vanpool Programs – Employers and other large commercial developments (i.e., office business parks or office buildings) can offer vanpools that would shuttle employees to and from work. Commercial and residential developments can provide shuttles to and from major transit centers. Flexible work schedule – Employers can offer flexible work schedules to employees so that they have the opportunity to travel to and from work during non-peak commute hours. Tele-work – Employers can provide the opportunity to employees to work from home for a certain number of days per week. Car-sharing – Commercial and residential developments can either institute a car-sharing program or allow an existing car-sharing organization to set up in their parking areas. Car-sharing is a membership-based program that allows short-term use of vehicles for hourly and/or mileage charges. It provides access to vehicles for people who don’t regularly use a car to commute or shop. For employees who carpool, use transit, walk, or bicycle to work, it provides access to vehicles for mid-day errands or emergency needs. For residents, car-sharing can provide access to a primary or secondary vehicle on an as-needed basis. In retail areas, car-sharing can provide shoppers the opportunity to haul large purchases on an as-needed basis. Employers and residential developments can offer complimentary or subsidized car-sharing membership. Bike-sharing – Government agencies and commercial and residential developments can provide free or low- cost bikes for short-term use.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 9 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Guaranteed ride home – For employees who regularly commute to work by carpool, transit, walking, or biking, a guaranteed ride home program enables them take a taxi free of charge in the event of an emergency. Information and guidance – Commercial and residential developments can develop brochures and webpages that detail TDM programs and information. TDM Manager – Employers and residential developments can appoint a specific person to the task of managing their TDM program. This person would be responsible for implementing TDM strategies, tracking adherence to the TDM program, and disseminating information and guidance.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 10 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Existing Conditions for TDM

This section reviews the current environment for the implementation of TDM measures, including current policy language, the provision of parking, and employer incentives. Current Policies

Local agency planning documents were reviewed for inclusion of TDM language in their goals, policies, and programs. The focus of the research was to look for language that directly addressed the reduction vehicle trips or vehicle miles traveled. For example, policies that encouraged ridesharing were considered TDM language, whereas policies to promote bicycling were not considered to be TDM language, unless it was couched in phrasing indicating bicycling to replace vehicle trips. Additionally, policies that would work in opposition to TDM measures were also researched and presented. General plans may contain policies and goals that may work in opposition to implementing TDM. Typical policies contrary to TDM that are found involve both single occupant vehicle roadway capacity and parking supply. Most congestion relief comes in the form of these transportation system improvements. Policies for traffic congestion require roadways to meet level of service criteria for motor vehicles. Level of service (LOS) is a qualitative measure of traffic congestion, utilizing a scale from “A”, which represents uncongested conditions, to “F”, representing very congested conditions. In current practice, LOS is measured as delay or travel speeds per vehicle and does not incorporate LOS for other modes of travel nor does it take into account the movement of people. Most general plans and jurisdictions require the mitigation of substandard vehicle LOS, even if the deficiency only occurs in one of the peak-hours.

Increasing single occupant vehicle capacity, as mentioned earlier, can work against TDM strategies by encouraging more vehicle miles traveled and making use of other modes less desirable3. To counter this, the Congestion Management Program legislation (state statute Section 65088.1) allows jurisdiction’s to balance the need for level of service standards for traffic with the need to build infill housing and mixed use commercial developments within walking distance of mass transit facilities, downtowns, and town centers and to provide greater flexibility to local governments to balance these sometimes competing needs. Hence, for a given location that is formally designated by the local agency as an infill opportunity zone, the regional CMP level of service standards shall not apply to the streets and highways within that designated infill opportunity zone. To address local agency level of service standards within infill opportunity zones, similar policies could be considered by SJCOG’s member agencies. However, at this time no such policies are present in the local agency General Plans.

Surplus parking can also serve as a deterrent to TDM programs. General plans and municipal codes often require the installation of parking with each new development. The number of parking stalls required are often based on peak-demand periods of uncharged parking spaces, which means that the parking spaces are typically under- utilized. As stated previously, the provision of parking uncharged to motorists travel demand and discourages access by other modes of travel. Existing TDM Goals, Policies, and Programs Each jurisdiction’s most current general plan was reviewed for goals, policies, and programs that either support or work against TDM. Below is a summary of current policy language that support or work in opposition to TDM by the jurisdiction.

3 The upcoming 2010 Highway Capacity Manual will have a Multi-Modal Level of Service methodology, which will enable a comparative and integrated analysis of how well a street serves pedestrians, bicyclists, transit passengers, and motorists. This new methodology will enable jurisdictions to adopt standards that apply to all users of a transportation system. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 11 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Escalon Escalon’s most current General Plan was adopted on June 6, 2005 and does not include TDM goals, policies, or programs, although policy 6.4 under Transit and Rail calls for providing incentives for transit, carpools, and vanpools. Objective A requires that all roadways in Escalon operate at LOS D or better. Lathrop Lathrop’s most current General Plan, last amended on November 9, 2004, contains no language regarding TDM plans, policies, or programs. Arterial roadways are required to operate at or above LOS C, and freeway interchanges at LOS D. The General Plan calls for a number of widened roadways. Lodi The City of Lodi is in the process of updating its 1991 General Plan. The Draft Plan, dated September 10, 2009, includes goals and policies for TDM. Guiding policies call for the implementation of complete streets and reducing vehicle miles traveled. Three implementing policies for TDM are included to promote ride-sharing, encourage local employment opportunities, and ensure that new developments are more compact. These policies are as follows: T-P43 Promote ridesharing and cooperate with regional travel demand management programs to reduce peak-hour traffic congestion and help reduce regional vehicle miles traveled. T-P44 Promote employment opportunities within Lodi to reduce commuting to areas outside of Lodi. T-P45 Reduce the total vehicle miles of travel per household by making efficient use of existing transportation facilities and by providing for more direct routes for pedestrians and bicyclists through the implementation of “smart growth” and sustainable planning principles. Lodi maintains an LOS D standard for its roadways (T-P8), although several exceptions are made for conditions where achieving LOS D would result in solutions in direct conflict to other important policies or goals. Lodi also has an abundance of free parking, which tends to spread out land uses for other modes of travel and encourages access by motor vehicles for even the shortest trips. Manteca The City of Manteca General Plan 2023, dated October 6, 2003, contains TDM goals and policies. Goal C-1 calls for the efficient movement of people, goods, and services throughout the City of Manteca. Three policies support TDM, as stated below: C-I-15 The City shall establish a requirement for a transportation demand management program in any business park, industrial or commercial land use that employs more than 50 full-time equivalent employees. C-I-16 The City shall make information available at City Hall and the library regarding public transit, ridesharing, van-pools, and other transportation alternatives to single occupant vehicles. C-I-17 The City shall provide information about transit services at the City Hall and library. Manteca has established an average standard minimum of LOS C for its roadways in Policy C-P-2, with LOS D deemed acceptable where roadway widening is too costly, lower LOS operations in adjacent jurisdictions make LOS C impossible, or free-flowing traffic conditions would discourage travel by alternate modes. Policy C-P-26 requires the provision of off-street parking by all new development, except in the downtown area where the City is responsible for off-street parking supply.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 12 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Ripon Ripon’s most current General Plan, dated September 19, 2006, contains goals to promote the efficient movement of people, goods, and services within the Ripon area and to use the existing transportation system to its fullest extent. In contains one policy that specifically relates to TDM: Policy F1 The City will select, with agencies such as the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, appropriate voluntary transportation control measures to reduce demand for the single occupant automobile travel. According to Policy A6, LOS D is the standard for roadway operations, and Policy A7 requires off-street parking for all developments. Stockton Stockton is the most populous city in San Joaquin County. The Stockton General Plan 2035 Goals and Policies Report from December 2007 contains Goal TC-3, to minimize single-occupant vehicle demand. Under this goal, there are nine policies to support TDM, which are as follows: TC-3.1 Park and Ride Lots – The City shall support the location of park-and-ride lots within the parking lots of commercial and/or office uses or at other appropriate location, in consultation with SJRTD, San Joaquin County, SJCOG, Caltrans, and other agencies, and in compliance with the design features related to park-and-ride facilities that are specified in Policy TC-4.4. TC-3.2 Carpooling and Vanpooling – The City shall support development of programs to encourage carpooling and vanpooling among local employees. TC-3.3 Flextime – The City shall encourage the use of staggered starting and ending work hours and/or flextime to alleviate peak period traffic congestion. TC-3.4 Subscription Bus Service – The City shall encourage the provision of subscription bus service to major trip generators and special events. TC-3.5 Preferential Employee Parking – The City shall encourage preferential employee parking for carpools and vanpools. TC-3.6 Travel Demand Management – The City shall work with other agencies and institutions, such as school districts, universities and other major employers, to promote employer-based Travel Demand Management programs. TC-3.7 Other TDM Programs – The City shall support the following types of programs to manage travel demand: a. Participation in and promotion of a program in which major employers can use their employee ID cards as transit passes in exchange for a single annual charge to the employer. b. Telecommunications substitutes for commuting and other travel. c. Community (“free”) bike programs d. Car-sharing programs e. No-fare or low-fare shuttles at shopping centers and other major activity centers TC-3.8 Downtown Transit Facilities/Services – The City shall enhance the Downtown’s intermodal role by integrating mass transit facilities and services such as Bus Rapid Transit

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 13 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TC-3.9 Programs for Smart Growth/Transit-Oriented Development – To facilitate development of transit- oriented-development projects, the City shall support and capitalize on existing and proposed “smart growth” or transit-oriented-development (TOD) programs, which award funds for transportation projects to local jurisdictions that approve building permits for compact housing and mixed-use development near transit. Under the Implementation Measures, the Departments of Public Works and Community Development have been tasked with publishing a guide to transportation demand management strategies. This guide is to be made available to major new development projects, schools, major employers, and the general public. Stockton generally requires roadways to operate at LOS D or better for daily and peak-hours, but several exceptions are made for the downtown area (LOS E), on roadways where widening has already been determined to be infeasible, or where achieving LOS D would result in conflicts with other goals and policies. Tracy Tracy’s most current General Plan, dated July 20, 2006, has no reference to TDM goals, policies, or programs. However, the City’s zoning ordinance and infrastructure master plan are currently undergoing a comprehensive update to ensure local development creates greater options in transportation choices. The zoning ordinance update will: 1) analyze zone districts for mixed-use opportunities; and, 2) create mixed-use zoning standards that will increase opportunities for neighborhoods to balance a variety of use types to serve both residences and businesses. The Transportation Master Plan portion of the City’s Infrastructure Master Plan update will 1) designate appropriate types and sizes of roadways for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles for future development areas; and, 2) link future development areas and residential areas to accommodate a full range of transportation modes, such as walking, biking, and public transit. Completion of both updates is anticipated by 2011. In 2010, the City of Tracy also developed and adopted a Sustainability Action Plan to address reductions in greenhouse gases (GHG) consistent with AB 32. The plan provides a blueprint for systematically reducing GHG by 15 percent relative of current levels by 2020. This goal will be achieved through actions related to development (i.e., green building ordinance) or city operations (i.e., more efficient city buildings) as well as the update to the Transportation Master Plan described above that will combine the Roadways and Bikeways Master Plans. According to existing policies stated for Objective CIR-1.3, Tracy is to maintain LOS C standard for its roadways and intersections during the peak-hours. Exceptions are made near freeways (LOS D), in the downtown and Bowtie areas (LOS E), and where improvements are infeasible or would adversely impact the community’s character. County of San Joaquin The San Joaquin County General Plan 2010, adopted in July 1992, contains language referring to Transportation Systems Management that discusses TDM strategies. However, goals and policies to promote TDM strategies are not specified, whereas roadway widening projects are delineated. The General Plan is currently being updated and will most likely contain TDM goals and policies. Summary Stockton appears to have the most supportive policies for TDM. The currently adopted general plans for Lodi, Manteca, and Ripon also contained specific policy language supporting TDM. Escalon, Lathrop, Tracy, and San Joaquin County do not specifically address TDM in their plans. However, support for “Complete Streets” concepts which are supportive of TDM goals – are being incorporated by the City of Tracy. Almost all jurisdictions required roadway operations of LOS D or better, although some provided exceptions for areas where achievement of LOS objectives would either by too costly or would work in opposition to other goals and policies.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 14 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Employer-Based TDM

A sample of large employers in San Joaquin County were contacted to determine what incentives they are currently providing to employees to encourage commuting by modes other than single-occupant vehicles4. The sample was chosen to capture a broad range of employers by sector, as shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Surveyed Employers by Sector Number Employer Sector Surveyed Agriculture and Mining 4 Wholesale Trade 2 Manufacturing 11 Education and Health 3 Transportation 2 Government 2 Entertainment and Food 1 Retail Trade 1 Utility Provider 1 Total 27 Employer phone surveys conducted Winter 2009 Dowling Associates, Inc

The survey queried employers as to their location in relation to transit, bikeways, retail, restaurants, and other options for employees to commute and do errands close to work. They were specifically asked about having services on-site or being within ¼ mile of service and transportation options. Most employers surveyed had bus stops, sidewalks, and restaurants within ¼ mile of the worksite. Table 4 summarizes their responses.

Table 4: Services and Transportation within 1/4 Mile of Worksite Description Yes No Unsure Train station 8 19 0 Bus stop 15 8 4 Sidewalk 17 10 0 Bike lane 7 17 3 Shopping 9 18 0 Restaurants 15 12 0 Bank 10 17 0 Childcare 3 19 5 Employer phone surveys conducted Winter 2009 Dowling Associates, Inc

When the phone surveys were conducted, SJVAPCD’s Rule 9410 had not yet been adopted. Rule 9410 will require employee trip reduction strategies of large employers. The survey found that most employers have limited TDM measures in place. The most common TDM measures offered by employers included changing areas with lockers (helpful to employees who bike or walk to work), staggered schedule or flexible workday schedule options for employees, and employee access to on-site company vehicles for business or personal errands. A slight majority of employers offer secure bicycle parking. Most offer free parking to employees. Table 5 summarizes the responses.

4 Telephone surveys were completed by Dowling Associates Inc. for approximately 30% of the 102 employers. Surveys span all eight employment sectors by weighted by percentage. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 15 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 5: Summary of San Joaquin Employer Parking and TDM Surveys Description Yes No Unsure Parking Employee vehicle parking subsidized or uncharged 25 2 0 Secure bicycle parking 13 12 2 Commuter Financial Incentives Parking cash out 0 27 0 Subsidies for vanpools 3 24 0 Subsidies for carpools 2 25 0 Free parking for carpools/vanpools 1 Subsidies for walking commuters 0 27 0 Transit travel allowance, such as Commuter Check 3 24 0 Free or subsidized transit pass 1 26 0 Reimbursement to bike commuters 0 26 1 Other Incentives Preferred parking for carpools 3 23 1 Carpool and vanpool matching service 3 24 0 Employer operated vanpools 1 26 0 Guaranteed ride home service via taxi 0 26 1 Guaranteed ride home via company car 2 24 1 Access to on-site company vehicles or bicycles for 12 15 0 business or personal errands Car sharing membership 0 27 0 Work from home options 1 26 0 Staggered schedule or flexible workday schedule 12 15 0 options Compressed work week options 7 20 0 Changing area with lockers 17 9 1 Showers 6 19 2 Gym membership 11 16 0 Transportation Coordinator Appointed employee transportation coordinator 2 25 0 Employer phone surveys conducted Winter 2009 Dowling Associates, Inc Parking Resources Ample parking opportunities, particularly if they are free of charge to motorists, generally work against effective implementation of TDM. A review of parking resources provided by employers, Park-and-Ride lots, and the local jurisdictions provides a sense of the climate for parking in San Joaquin County. Large Employers

According to SJCOG, there are roughly one hundred large employers located in San Joaquin County. Large employers are characterized as organizations that employ at least 100 people. A sample of employers was contacted regarding the parking resources that they provide to employees. With the exception of employers in downtown Stockton, most appear to offer ample parking opportunities that are uncharged to employees who drive to work. Most offer no incentives to employees to get to work by carpooling, taking transit, walking, or bicycling.

At this time, no formal public or private shared parking arrangements were identified among large employers5. Nonetheless, consolidation for downtown parking resources can reduce the need to expand the current parking supply needed to accommodate future employment growth in downtown areas. A map of San Joaquin County’s employment resources is shown in Figure 3.

5 Statement does not apply to special event parking arrangements. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 16 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Park-and-Ride Lots

Park-and-Ride Lots are provided to facilitate connections to carpools, vanpools, and/or transit. They are generally located in close proximity to freeways and state routes to allow for easy vehicle access. Motorists are not charged to park in these lots. Some Park-and-Ride lots also provide bicycle parking. The most up-to-date information regarding Park-and-Ride lots can by found at the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG) Commute Connection website at www.commuteconnection.com. A map of San Joaquin County’s Park and Ride Lot is shown in Figure 4.

There are a total of 1,421 vehicle stalls at the seventeen (17) Park-and-Ride Lots located within San Joaquin County. Seven (7) of these lots provide parking for bicycles and all but three (3) lots have connections to transit. Most of the lots in San Joaquin County are funded by Measure K (a voter-approved, half-cent sales tax for transportation improvements) and maintained by the San Joaquin Regional Transit District. A summary of Park-and-Ride lots in San Joaquin County is shown in Table 6.

According to the 2007 Park-and-Ride Master Plan developed for the SJCOG, four of the existing Park-and-Ride lots in San Joaquin County were over-capacity and two were near capacity. The survey was conducted in February 2007 before the installation of the Park-and-Ride lots at Big League Dreams Sports Park in Manteca and 6th Street & Central Avenue in Tracy, which were not included in the count. In November 2009, Commute Connection conducted a survey of Park-and-Ride lot usage and found that six were at or over capacity and one was near capacity (see also in Table 6). The Park-and-Ride Lot in Tracy at 6th Street and Central Avenue was not counted because the surveyor could not identify which stalls were set aside for commuters. Park-and-Ride lots with no transit connections had very low rates of usage.

Comparing 2007 to 2009 occupancy counts, it appears that usage remained the same or increased at most Park- and-Ride lots in Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, and Tracy while generally it decreased in Escalon, Ripon, and Stockton. The economic downtown that began in late 2006 may have contributed to the shifting patterns of Park-and-Ride lot usage.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 17 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 3: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Employment Resources

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 18 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 4: Map of San Joaquin Council of Government Parking Resources

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 19 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 6: Existing Park-and-Ride Lots in San Joaquin County Vehicle Parking Bicycle # of Transit Connections # Occupancy Parking Cala- Rio Location and Name City Stalls 2007 2009 # Type SJRTD veras Lodi Vista Tracy Hwy 120 & Escalon Bellota, Crossroads Plaza Escalon 15 14% 0% 1 Locker 1 Viking & Main Escalon 40 68% 25% 2 Locker 1 5th St btwn Lathrop & Louise, Valverde Park Lathrop 48 96% 100% 2 Locker 3 Hwy 99 & E Hwy 12, Caltrans Lot? Lodi 40 93% > 100% 0 2 1 I-5 & Hwy 12, Flag City Lodi 50 > 100% > 100% 0 1 1 Hwy 120 & Main St, Walmart Shopping Center Manteca 50 > 100% 100% 0 8 Northgate St & Maywood Ave, Brethren Church Manteca 40 60% 75% 0 2 Hwy 120 at Daniels & Milo Candini, Big League Manteca 583 Not 1% 6 Rack No Transit Connections Dreams Sports Park surveyed SR-99 & Main, Nestle Parking Area Ripon 40 80% 30% 0 2 Kelley Dr & Beaufort Ave, Calvary 1st Church Stockton 40 > 100% 50% 1 Rack 6 3034 Michigan Ave & Plymouth Rd, Lifesong Church 2 Stockton 45 60% 50% 0 5 I-5 & Benjamin Holt Dr, Marina Shopping Center Stockton 35 > 100% 100% 0 4 1 3040 E Fremont St & Hwy 99, Life Church 3 Stockton 49 77% 25% 2 Rack 3 1 Hammer & Sampson, Walmart Shopping Center Stockton 56 22% 100% 0 6 I-205 & Grant Line & Naglee Rd Tracy 180 63% 95% 4 Rack 9 I-205 & MacArthur Dr Exit, Factory Outlet Tracy 40 1% 1% 0 No Transit Connections 6th St & Central Ave (NW corner) Tracy 40 Not Not 0 No Transit Connections surveyed surveyed Total 1,421 11 SJRTD = San Joaquin Regional Transit District; Calaveras = Calaveras Transit; Lodi = Lodi Grapeline; Rio Vista = Rio Vista Delta Breeze; Tracy = Tracy Tracer 2007 refers to the year in which an occupancy count was done as part of the SJCOG's Park-and-Ride Lot Master Plan. 2009 refers to the year in which an occupancy count was done by Commute Connection staff. 1 Number of stalls, which may differ from SJCOG's Park-and-Ride Lot Master Plan , was verified by phone on November 24, 2009 with Teresa Garcia of Commute Connection. 2 Previously Bethany Church 3 Previously Grace Assembly of God Church

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 20 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Given that Park-and-Ride lots facilitate multi-modal connections including bicycle, transit and high occupancy vehicle formation and have shown to be very effective at reducing vehicle demand – particularly for the longer trip length inter-city and inter-county trip markets – expansion of the County’s Park-and-Ride Lot resources is considered a top regional TDM/ TSM priority.

The 2007 Park-and-Ride Master Plan proposes the expansion of six (6) existing Park-and-Ride lots as well as the establishment of over 15 new lots throughout San Joaquin County. The Master Plan projects the need for 400 to 600 more additional parking stalls at each of 7 to 10 locations, based on a ratio of one Park-and-Ride stall per 110 households built. One of the existing lots proposed for expansion in Stockton (Omelet House at SR-99 & Victor Road) is no longer functioning as a Park-and-Ride lot. Another lot in Stockton (Raley’s Shopping Center at SR-99 & Morada Lane), which opened after the Master Plan’s publication, is no longer functioning as a Park-and-Ride lot. Two (2) of the new proposed lots have already been installed (Big League Dreams Sports Park in Manteca and the 6th Street & Central Avenue lot in downtown Tracy). The proposed Park-and-Ride lot in Ripon (SR-99 & Jack Tone Road) will have rack parking for up to 10 bicycles. Table 7 shows an updated table reflecting proposed expansions of existing Park-and-Ride lots as well as new Park-and-Ride locations.

Table 7: Proposed Park-and-Ride Lot Expansion and Installations Vehicle Parking Stalls Proposed Total Location and Name City Current Addition Proposed 5th St btwn Lathrop & Louise, Lathrop 48 50 98 Valverde Park I-5 & Louise Ave Lathrop HH Growth HH Growth I-5 & I-205 Lathrop HH Growth HH Growth I-5 & Lathrop Rd Lathrop HH Growth HH Growth I-5 & Hwy 12, Flag City Lodi 35 50 85 SR-99 & Harney Ln Lodi HH Growth HH Growth Hwy 120 & Main St, Walmart Manteca 50 150 200 SR-120 & S Union Rd Manteca HH Growth HH Growth SR-120 & S Airport Wy Manteca HH Growth HH Growth I-205 & Mountain House Pkwy Mountain House HH Growth HH Growth Mountain House Pkwy & Byron- Mountain House HH Growth HH Growth Bethany Rd (Town Center) SR-99 & Jack Tone Rd Ripon 75 75 Kelley Dr & Beaufort Ave, Calvary Stockton 40 100 140 1st Church I-5 & Benjamin Holt Dr, Marina Stockton 45 50 95 Shopping Center I-5 & French Camp Rd Stockton 50 to 75 50 to 75 SR-99 & Eight Mile Rd Stockton 50 to 75 50 to 75 I-5 & Hammer Ln Stockton HH Growth HH Growth SR-99 & Wilson Wy Stockton HH Growth HH Growth SR-99 & Mariposa Rd Stockton HH Growth HH Growth I-5 & Eight Mile Road Stockton HH Growth HH Growth I-205 & 11th St Tracy HH Growth HH Growth HH Growth refers to the Master Plan recommendation of installing 1 parking stall per 110 new households constructed. Source: Park-and-Ride Lot Master Plan, prepared for the San Joaquin Council of Governments, October 31, 2007.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 21 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

District Off-street Parking

Local jurisdictions were queried for off-street parking facilities that they own or operate. These facilities are typically surface lots or parking garages that are open to the general public and serve a district or area rather than a specific business or use. Most off-street parking facilities are located in downtown or commercial districts. With the exception of Stockton and Lodi, all municipalities that provide off-street parking facilities provide it at no charge to users. What follows is a summary of off-street parking facilities by jurisdiction.

Escalon The City of Escalon owns and operates two surface parking lots in its downtown area, which provides 31 total parking stalls. Parking is uncharged to the users. Lathrop The City of Lathrop does not own or operate district off-street parking facilities. Lodi The City of Lodi owns and operates off-street parking facilities in its downtown area. Lodi’s Multi-Modal Transit Station, a facility providing connections to Amtrak rail, Greyhound buses, and four local transit providers, has a parking garage of 329 stalls. Parking in the garage is uncharged to the users. Lodi also owns and operates nine surface parking lots with approximately 400 parking stalls throughout downtown that are open to the general public. It is uncharged for up to three hours of parking, but long-term parking requires the purchase of a permit of $15 for three months. Manteca The City of Manteca has a long-term lease to operate off-street parking at surface lots in their downtown area as well as at the newly constructed Promenade Shops off of State Route 120. There are over 2,150 parking stalls that are uncharged to motorists. Ripon The City of Ripon owns and operates four surface parking lots in its downtown area, which provides 88 parking total parking stalls. Parking is uncharged to the users. Stockton The City of Stockton provides off-street parking in their downtown area as well as in the Miracle Mile Improvement District. According to Stockton’s Downtown Parking District document dated March 5, 2009, there are over 4,700 off- street parking stalls available to the general public during weekdays spread over 17 lots and 4 garages, the majority of which require payment for use. The number of stalls does not include the San Joaquin County garage located in downtown Stockton, which is operated by Stockton’s Central Parking District. 591 more parking stalls in the downtown area at the Stockton Arena Garage may be available to the general public during event nights and weekends. In addition to the off-street parking spaces, there are approximately 1,800 metered on-street parking stalls in the downtown Stockton area. There are 194 off-street parking stalls provided in the Miracle Mile, a shopping, dining, arts and entertainment district centered on Harding Way and Pacific Avenue. Motorists do not pay to park in the off-street surface lots along the Miracle Mile.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 22 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Tracy

The City of Tracy owns and operates four surface parking lots in its downtown area, which provides roughly 430 total parking stalls. In December 2009, Tracy’s multi-modal transit station will open and have an additional surface lot that provides 220 parking stalls in the downtown area, bringing the total up to 650 stalls. Motorists are not charged to park in city-owned facilities.

County of San Joaquin The County of San Joaquin owns 275-stall parking garage located in downtown Stockton that is operated by Stockton’s Central Parking District. Motorists pay to park in the County parking garage. Table 8 summarizes the total off-street parking supply by district and jurisdiction. The majority of off-street parking that jurisdictions provide is found in surface lots. The cities of Stockton and Lodi provide some parking in garages. Table 8: Summary of District Off-Street Parking Supply Surface Lots Garages Total General Number Number Number of Jurisdiction Location Count of Stalls Count of Stalls Stalls Pay to Park Escalon Downtown 2 31 0 31 No Lathrop 0 N/A Lodi Downtown 9 400 1 329 729 Most free for at least 3- hours, purchase permits for long-term parking Manteca Promenade 1 1,922 0 1,922 No Shops Manteca Downtown 1 234 0 234 No Ripon Downtown 4 88 0 88 No Stockton Downtown 17 2,340 4 2,403 4,743 Majority pay to park Stockton Miracle 9 194 0 194 No Mile Tracy Downtown 5 650 0 650 No San Joaquin Stockton 0 1 275 275 Yes County Downtown Total 48 5,859 6 3,007 8,866 December 2009 - Dowling Associates, Inc

Summary The current climate for parking in San Joaquin County appears to, by and large, encourage access by automobile for commuting purposes and/or access to commercial districts. Except for downtown Stockton and Lodi, most employers and municipalities offer parking free of charge to motorists. About half of the existing Park-and-Ride lots are well-utilized, and generally those with transit connections had higher usage than those without.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 23 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TDM Analysis

As part of the deficiency plan action development, an impact analysis for estimating potential effectiveness of improvement strategies was completed. Evaluated improvement strategies included the implementation of TDM, using the TRIMMS 2.0 software. TRIMMS is a visual basic spreadsheet application for evaluating benefits of a wide range of transportation demand management (TDM) in terms of emission reductions, accident reductions, congestion reductions, excess fuel consumption and adverse global climate change impacts. TRIMMS can be used to evaluate impact of strategies at site specific or area wide level for arterials, freeways, or both facility types. Inputs for specific information on the program characteristics include cost, time duration, number of full-time/part-time employees, and employment sector. The default mode shares and trip length are provided for the selected metropolitan areas and users are able to modify or change these parameters based on local survey data. Predictions for mode shares are performed based on regression equations utilizing parameters on employer support programs such as transit/carpool/vanpool/bike/walk subsidies/services, parking service, etc. The software allows users to assess different TDM strategies affecting the cost of travel such as a transit fare reduction and to evaluate service improvements that target mode access and travel time. A flow chart schematic illustrating the TDM analysis is provided in Figure 3. Key data gathered from a sample of large employers in San Joaquin County provided refined information that was used in the TRIMMS analysis. A more detailed description of TRIMMS is provided in Appendix A. As a resource to local agencies interested in improving TDM analysis capabilities, a description of other commercially available TDM analysis software tools is provided in Appendix B. Evaluated TDM Toolbox

Followings are TDM strategies that were evaluated in TRIMMS. These strategies make up a partial list of TDM Toolbox measures recognized by the County:

Promoting alternative work schedule Telework Participation in rideshare program Carsharing program Improve bicycle access and facilities Guaranteed ride home program Parking pricing Public transit improvements Improvements to bike/sidewalk facilities Shared parking facilities Amenities at worksite Transit, vanpool, carpool, bicycling, and/or walking subsidies All TDM strategies above combined were evaluated for their impacts on trip reduction for each employment sector.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 24 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Large Employers

A list of 102 large employers (i.e., employers with 100 or more employees) representing just over 66,500 full-time and part-time employees was provided by SJCOG’s Commute Connections Office. TRIMMS allows an assessment of TDM benefits specifically targeting commute trips of large employers, which are grouped into different employment sectors. This large employer list is summarized by sector in Table 9. Table 9: Number of Large Employers and Employees by Sector

Employees % of Total Sector Employers Full-Time Part-Time Total Employees Agriculture and Mining 18 3,387 3,494 6,881 10.31% Construction 2 490 0 490 0.73% Education 7 12,725 0 12,725 19.07% Finance and Insurance 2 813 0 813 1.22% Government 11 15,340 0 15,340 22.99% Health Service 9 9,459 0 9,459 14.18% Information Services 2 1,100 0 1,100 1.65% Manufacturing 29 7,499 2,989 10,488 15.72% Military 2 1,942 0 1,942 2.91% Personal Service N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Retail Service 13 4,817 50 4,867 7.29% Transportation 6 1,515 0 1,515 2.27% Utilities 1 1,100 0 1,100 1.65% Other N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 102 60,187 6,533 66,720 100.00%

Trip Characteristics

In order to evaluate for a trip reduction, basic trip characteristics are required for a before-after analysis. A change in ridership by mode for each employment sector was calculated using built-in empirical equation and parameters for particular worksite characteristics. Table 10 presents baseline mode share surveyed data for San Joaquin County. Table 10: Mode Share Survey for San Joaquin County Mode Percentage Auto - Drive Alone 78.0% Auto - Rideshare 15.5% Vanpool 1.4% Public Transport 1.4% Cycling 0.5% Walking 2.0% Other 1.2% Total 100.0% Source: US Census Bureau 2006-2008 American Community Survey

TRIMMS provides estimate person trips for baseline and final scenarios, to convert person trips to auto-trips for carpool/vanpool mode, a share of carpool and vanpool was further broken down to proportion by number of persons per vehicle using census data. Table 11 shows these proportions by occupancy.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 25 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 11: Carpool-Vanpool Survey for San Joaquin County Carpool/Vanpool Type Percentage 2-person 70.6% 3-person 14.8% 4-person 6.4% Vanpool 5 or 6-person 5.1% Vanpool 7-person 3.1% Total 100.0% Source: US Census Bureau 2006-2008 American Community Survey

TDM Trip Reductions

Table 12 presents percent change in auto-trips between baseline and final scenarios for each employment sector. Percent trip reduction representing all employment sector combined was calculated using weight average, which takes into account for percent employees in each sector. The sectors with relatively higher employees have more influence in the calculation. Findings from TRIMMS analysis suggest that when TDM strategies were applied, it is estimated that auto-trips would be reduced by 2.2%. Table 12: Percent Auto-Trip Reduction by Employment Sector Percent Auto-Trip Reduction % Auto-Drive Auto- Sector Employees Alone Rideshare Vanpool Total Agriculture and Mining 10.3% -2.50% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Construction 0.7% -2.30% 1.50% 1.50% -2.00% Education 19.1% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Finance and Insurance 1.2% -2.40% 1.50% 1.50% -2.00% Government 23.0% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.30% Health Service 14.2% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Information Services 1.7% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Manufacturing 15.7% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Military 2.9% -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20% Personal Service N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Retail Service 7.3% -2.50% 1.60% 1.60% -2.10% Transportation 2.3% -2.50% 1.60% 1.60% -2.20% Utilities 1.7% -2.40% 1.50% 1.50% -2.00% Other N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Weighted Average -2.60% 1.70% 1.70% -2.20%

TDM Trip Reduction Impact on Green House Gases

For purposes of AB-32 and SB-375, the affect of TDM implementation within San Joaquin County on greenhouse gases (GHG) was estimated for two future analysis years 2020 and 2035. The GHG reductions were calculated from estimated reductions of commute trips and VMT based on the TRIMMS analysis described above. This analysis showed that GHG emissions would be reduced by approximately10.5 and 12 tons per day in 2020 and 2035 respectively. This analysis is provided in Appendix C.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 26 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 5: TDM Analysis Framework

List of Deficient Segments Travel Demand Model Employer Data TDM Strategies List of CIP Projects: - Programmed - Planned

Analysis: TRIMMS - Select link/Select zone Non-ITS Projects ITS Projects

Impacts on each employer sector: Sketch Method - Trip reductions IDAS Information for each Deficient Information for each Segment: Deficient Segment: Impacts of each Non- - Trip info. by trip type - New Trip info. for each ITS Project Impacts of each ITS TDM Strategy Project

Summary Tables

Impact on Deficient Segments (Trip Reduction) Impact on Deficient Segments (Trip Reduction) TDM Strategies CIP Projects Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 6 … Segment 1 Segment 2 Segment 3 Segment 4 Segment 5 Segment 6 … Strategy 1 aaa bbb ccc … … … … Project 1 xxx yyy zzz … … … … Strategy 2 bbb … … … … … … Project 2 yyy … … … … … … Strategy 3 ccc … … … … … … Project 3 zzz … … … … … … Strategy 4 … … … … … … … Project 4 … … … … … … … Strategy 5 … … … … … … … Project 5 … … … … … … … Strategy 6 … … … … … … … Project 6 … … … … … … … Strategy 7 … … … … … … … Project 7 … … … … … … … Strategy 8 … … … … … … … Project 8 … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … … …

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 27 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TDM Action Plan

This section describes the levels of effort needed for TDM implementation in San Joaquin County. Definitions of each level of effort are provided including examples for how individual TDM measures can be structured.

TDM measures provide a framework for good planning and sustainable communities. When implemented, they can result in numerous benefits including: 1) greater transportation efficiency by promoting more transportation choices for travelers; 2) more livable communities that encourage non-motorized forms of transportation; and, 3) employee benefits by providing greater commute choices and commuting flexibility. For the local agencies, documented TDM efforts will allow them to better comply with federal and state congestion management mandates as well as the state’s SB375 provisions. The latter allows a streamlined CEQA process for agencies with projects that promote more efficient use of existing transportation infrastructure and services.

TDM Action Plan Objectives

There are seven primary objectives for preparing the TDM Action Plan: 1) Develop an equitable framework for the countywide coordination and implementation of TDM actions and strategies to formally address deficiencies on the Regional CMP system of roadways; 2) To integrate the countywide coordination and implementation of TDM actions and strategies with the Regional CMP process – based on development status and level of congestion on CMP roadways within each jurisdiction; 3) To better integrate the Regional CMP process with the other regional transportation planning and programming functions performed by SJCOG in partnership with its member agencies; 4) Facilitate enhanced TDM efforts on Category 5 CMP roadways as well as Category 4 and 6 CMP roadways otherwise exempt from CMP deficiency planning; 5) Assist in the development of CIP improvements that provide system-wide improvements to circulation or air quality; 6) To examine the likely level of congestion relief on CMP deficient roadways that can be reasonably anticipated from travel demand reduction and operational management strategies; and, 7) To establish a direct institutional and quantifiable link between the TDM Action Plan, the CMP and the regional transportation planning and programming process in San Joaquin County. How the above objectives will be met must be done in a manner consistent with the following legislative requirements: 1) the federal mandated CMS congestion management process; and, 2) the state mandated CMP deficiency planning mandates.

Based on the stated objectives and legislative requirements above, implementation of the TDM Action Plan begins with the adoption a TDM Resolution of Commitment by each local agency. A description of what the TDM Resolution of Commitment is and what it entails is described in the following section.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 28 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TDM Resolution of Commitment

The TDM Resolution of Commitment establishes the appropriate level of local agency resources/effort for implementation of demand management strategies. The level of effort is based on the level of congestion on a given jurisdiction’s CMP roadways with particular focus placed on Category 4 and 6 CMP designated roadways. The TDM Action Plan consists of expected Levels of Effort (Level 1 and 2), which are cumulative.

Level 1 is a required minimum effort to be implemented by SJCOG and each of its member agencies. The purpose of the Level 1 Effort is to formalize the existing working relationship SJCOG currently has with its partner agencies and further refine existing TDM related activities currently being implemented countywide..

In response to measured levels of congestion on the CMP network within the boundaries of a given jurisdiction, additional TDM efforts described under Level 2 may be triggered. Level 2 TDM Efforts require the development of a sub-regional TDM Action Plan that can draw from a wide range of example TDM strategies presented herein. This “menu” approach allows a given local agency to customize its sub-regional TDM Action Plan to a given local situation (e.g., design guidelines for site access, roadways, transit stops, off-street vehicle parking, bicycling support, transportation pricing) for the purpose of reducing and minimizing congestion.

Integrating TDM planning efforts relative to CMP roadway network performance provides: a sub-regional barometer for CMP system performance; a congestion trigger point and defines a level of effort that addresses the critical situation; and, an equitable nexus between degree of TDM responsibility and fair share contribution of local traffic For the purpose of integration, a CMP congestion threshold performance measure was developed. The congestion threshold is comprised of the following two checks: 1) when over 30% of the Category 4 and 6 CMP lane miles in a jurisdiction operate at LOS E or worse during peak commute hours; and, 2) if over 30% of the traffic on these segments is determined to be generated within the jurisdiction. If both these conditions are met, a sub-regional TDM Action Plan (i.e., TDM Level 2 effort) will be required, It should be noted that the state CMP interregional trip exemption for the development of deficiency plans is not applied when evaluating this performance measure. Programming status is considered however given the exclusion of Category 1 and 2 deficient segments. For example, if a Category 4 or 6 roadway segment becomes a programmed improvement, it will be reclassified to a Category 1 or 2 and its deficient lanes miles will not be applied towards the congestion threshold calculation.

The congestion threshold will be analyzed every two years as part of the SJCOG’s CMP biennial review.

Development of CMP performance measures is required by state statute. The 30/30 percent congestion threshold performance measure was developed to comply with this requirement and to integrate the CMP with the TDM Action Plan. It will also be used to track CMP system congestion levels with a more CMP specific and holistic metric (percent of deficient CMP lane miles). It is a performance measure that indicates when a given jurisdiction would be responsible to pursue TDM actions or planning as defined in the TDM Resolution of Commitment. It does not constitute a standard nor does it trigger the need for developing a CMP deficiency plan or require other non-TDM implementation responsibilities under the CMP/CMS programs. Level of Effort criteria is summarized below.

TDM Level of Effort Applies to:

Level 1 - Universal Applies to all county jurisdictions and SJCOG

Level 2 - Triggered Applies to jurisdictions that trigger the Congestion Threshold Performance Measure

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 29 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Implementation timeline for formal local agency adoption of the TDM Resolution of Commitment is July 2011. At that time, SJCOG will be determining local agency compliance as part the CMP biennial review. The TDM Action Plan Levels of Effort are described on the following pages. It should be noted that SJCOG or its member agencies can and are encouraged to implement any of the various Level 2 actions even if the above criteria is not met for implementation. If a local agency is implementing TDM actions above and beyond the TDM Action Plan’s requirements, it would receive credit for doing so as part of SJCOG’s CMP biennial review.

Level 1 Effort: Universal The purpose of the Level 1 Effort is to formalize TDM efforts that are currently being performed throughout the County. Other than further defining the existing working relationship SJCOG currently has with its partner agencies and establishing clear lines of communication and coordination between local and regional TDM activities, implementation of the Level 1 Effort is not anticipated to result in additional workload beyond existing levels. A more formal countywide framework for TDM planning and implementation will ostensibly lead to: Greater consideration for TDM strategies as part of local and regional planning processes; Greater access to TDM resources at the local and regional levels; Greater accountability for TDM implementation; and, Better reporting and documentation of TDM activities for disclosure purposes to state and federal agencies as well as for satisfying state and federal reviews. The standardized TDM measures proposed for all jurisdictions include:

1) Designation of a TDM Liaison (Existing staff person)

The TDM Liaison will act as the direct point of contact between the jurisdiction and SJCOG regarding the following: Conduit between local agency, jurisdiction’s new large employers (100+ employees) and/or owners/managers of developments supporting multiple businesses with SJCOG’s Commute Connection program. To further build the data base and promote Commute Connection services to the existing businesses, and if available, forward information to SJCOG on existing large employers consisting of 100+ employees. (e.g., location, type of business, contact person). Attend quarterly SJCOG TDM Committee Meetings (Note: topic will be built into the existing committee structure). Familiar with and collaborates with SJCOG in developing and implementing TDM/Operations System Management measures for their portions of the CMP roadway network operating at LOS D. Supplied by SJCOG, assist in TDM information dissemination to existing employers (e.g., printed materials, link on website, participate in events such as bike-to-work week). Ensure that new land uses comply with the TDM measures stipulated in the conditions of development approval. Notified when SJCOG’s CMP program provides comments on, for example, new development projects, Specific Plans, General Plan updates. 2) Ensure that new development complies with CEQA guidelines: 1) Conform to both CMP LOS standards and CMP TDM measures identified in the TDM Action Plan; 2) Application of accepted travel demand mitigation measures to

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 30 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

reduce impact on the CMP network; and, 3) Incorporate “Complete Streets” concepts per Government Code 65040.2, 65302.

3) On a quarterly basis, forward all new residential (dwelling units) and other new non-residential building permit information to SJCOG. (Note: will be achieved through the Regional Transportation Impact Fee program).

4) Use measures from regionally adopted plans to promote alternate modes of transportation associated with new development (e.g., Park-and-Ride Lot Master and Implementation Plans, TDM elements of the Regional Expressway Plan, Regional Transit Systems).

5) Participate in future regional planning efforts and furthering other TDM related programs (e.g., Regional Bike Network Plan, MK Bike/Pedestrian/Safe Routes to Schools Program, update of ITS Strategic Deployment Plan).

A more detailed description of the Level 1 TDM activities for both SJCOG and its member agencies is provided below.

Local Agencies’ Level 1 Effort

All jurisdictions in San Joaquin County (Cities of Escalon, Lathrop, Lodi, Manteca, Ripon, Stockton, Tracy, as well as San Joaquin County) will be required to implement the following TDM measures detailed below. 1) Designation of a TDM Liaison (Existing Staff Person) The TDM Liaison will oversee implementation of the jurisdiction's TDM efforts and TDM efforts throughout the jurisdiction. This individual also will be the point of contact between the jurisdiction and the TDM services/activities and outreach efforts provided by SJCOG’s Commute Connections to large employers within the jurisdiction. The TDM Liaison responsibilities will entail the following: a) In coordination with SJCOG’s Commute Connection Office – openly share locally generated or collected TDM data with SJCOG as well as receive SJCOG’s Commute Connection’s data base consisting of all large employers (with 100+ employees) located within the jurisdiction. The latter data base will include contact information to the employers TDM liaison or the employers Human Resources contact. Access to this data base will allow local agencies to share for planning purposes the following information with SJCOG’s Commute Connection Office: i) Number of Large Employers registered with SJVAPCD within Jurisdiction ii) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Tier 1 Worksites (100-249) iii) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Tier 2 Worksites (250+) iv) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Employers with ETRIPS v) Average ETRIP Points of Registered SJVAPCD Employer vi) If applicable – local agency ETRIP points vii) Documentation of other non-SJVUPACD TDM Plans being implemented within the jurisdiction.

b) SJCOG will provide the TDM Liaison a list of all Category 3 and Category 5 CMP roadways within the jurisdiction. Local agencies are encouraged to assist SJCOG in developing and implementing an enhanced TDM and system management strategy to reduce single occupant vehicle congestion on the Category 3 and Category 5 segment/s during peak commute hours. c) The TDM Liaison will attend SJCOG’s TDM Advisory Committee meetings. These meeting will be held on an as-needed basis (anticipated 2-4 times per year) and will use the existing Regional CMP Committee as its forum.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 31 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

d) The TDM Liaison will participate in a TDM information dissemination program to its large employers (including the home agency). Assisted by SJCOG’s Commute Connections program, the information campaign will include each local agency establishing an SJCOG Commute Connection link on the agency’s website; provision of a TDM packet to existing and new employers; and, promoting the benefits of transit, rideshare, and non-motorized commute alternatives by supporting SJCOG Commute Connection TDM annual events that include but are not limited to, the following activities: i) San Joaquin County Carpool Month ii) San Joaquin County Bike Month iii) San Joaquin County Telecommute Month iv) San Joaquin County Walking Month v) San Joaquin County Transit Month vi) San Joaquin County Vanpool Month vii) San Joaquin County Rideshare Month e) The TDM Liaison will be responsible for monitoring and reporting TDM compliance for developments who receive or have received conditions of approval based on TDM measures 2) Submittal of residential and non-residential land use permit data to SJCOG (Achieved through RTIF) Given the importance of accurate computer modeling, local agencies will participate in the sharing of new residential dwelling units and new square-footage for non-residential building permit data geo-referenced by SJCOG model traffic analysis zone. Permit data will be limited to new single or multi-family dwelling units or new square footage of non-residential uses. Permits associated with dwelling unit additions, decks, and other improvements that do not result in additional units are not applicable. Change of use of major commercial developments or demolitions could be included is desired by SJCOG. By making SJCOG a clearinghouse for development permit data, SJCOG can more easily update its baseline land use inputs, track its future land use allocation assumptions, and more readily perform model baseline year updates. Although each local agency will make arrangements with SJCOG to determine the most efficient means of providing this information, it is anticipated that this task can be addressed by SJCOG geo-processing the local agency RTIF Quarterly Summaries. The primary outcome is a permit tracking system by development type and TAZ number. 3) Park-and-Ride Lots As defined in the 2007 Park-and-Ride Lot Master Plan and Implementation Plan, where appropriate local agencies will require as a condition of development new park-and-ride lots as identified in the 2007 Park-and- Ride Lot Master Plan. 4) CEQA Review Whereas, Level 1 TDM efforts and SJVAPCD Rule 9410 focus on existing development, new development is to be addressed as part of the CMP consistency with CEQA. Consistent with the revised CEQA Guidelines, local land use development projects are to conform to both the CMP LOS standards and CMP TDM measures identified in the TDM Action Plan. As part of the typical CMP CEQA review process, local agencies will review and apply appropriate and accepted travel demand mitigation measures known to reduce single occupant vehicle use in order to off-set a development project's traffic impact on the Congestion Management (CMP) system of roadways. Local land use development projects that trigger the need for a CEQA CMP impact assessment will be reviewed relative to the following existing and future planning documents:

Regional Expressway System Plan (System Management and TDM components) Park-and-Ride Master Plan Regional Bikeway Plan

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 32 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Infill Development Zone Plan Regional Transit Systems Plan These resource documents will be reviewed and cited by local agencies as appropriate when identifying TDM mitigation measures under CEQA to address identified CMP system impacts.

In addition, as the provisions of AB-1358 (Government Code 65040.2, 65302) to address multi-modal “complete streets” concepts in city/county general plan circulation elements gains traction through local agency circulation updates, consistency with local agency multi-modal streetscape design policies will also be required. 5) Local Agency Participation and Representation in Regional Planning Studies As stated in sub-section 4 above, several regional planning resource documents will serve to facilitate and guide CEQA lead agency selection of appropriate TDM mitigation measures to address CMP CEQA impacts. These existing and future planning documents include, but are not limited to, the following:

Regional Expressway System Plan (System Management and TDM components) (Existing) San Joaquin Valley ITS Strategic Deployment Plan (Existing) Park-and-Ride Master Plan (Existing) Regional Bikeway Plan (Under Development) Infill Development Zone Plan (Under Development) Regional Transit Systems Plan (Existing) Given the need for greater local level planning representation and implementation of these regional planning efforts, local agency participation is anticipated during the development and/or future updates of these CMP TDM resource documents.

SJCOG Level 1 Effort

In concert with Level 1 effort by local agencies, the SJCOG will continue to implement the following TDM related activities, as detailed below. 1) Assist with Local Adoption of TDM Resolutions of Commitment SJCOG will develop boiler plate – ready to adopt – TDM Resolutions of Commitment and provide to each local agency to assist local agency adoption. 2) Performance Measure Tracking Track the number of Category 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 CMP lane miles and report during CMP biennial review. Present the results of the congestion threshold performance measure. Also track four major Commute Connections programs and report during biennial updates of the CMP program by SJCOG. These may include: the carpool match-list database; the vanpool program; regional transit ridership placement and the passenger rail ridership placement. 3) Local Agency Assistance Provide assistance to local agencies for implementing an enhanced alternate modes program and TDM measures to specifically reduce peak hour demand on Category 3 and Category 5 roadways.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 33 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

4) Form a TDM Committee The TDM Committee will be made up of TDM Liaisons from all the local jurisdiction and SJCOG. It will meet on an as-needed basis – anticipated to be quarterly as part of the regular CMP meetings. The TDM Committee will discuss strategies, track progress, and review submittals by local agencies of TDM plans and monitoring. 5) Develop and Implement a Van Pool Marketing and Incentives Program The Commute Connections Office of SJCOG will implement a vanpool marketing and incentives program to promote vanpool formation and ridership to both existing and new employers. 6) Coordinate with the SJVAPCD to Implement Rule 9410 With the adoption of Rule 9410 by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), large employers (those which employ 100+ full time non-seasonal employees) located in San Joaquin County must implement employer based trip reduction programs at their worksites. SJCOG Commute Connections Office will coordinate with the SJVAPCD to assist in the implementation of Rule 9410. This will include maintaining a large employer data base with the following information: i) Number of Large Employers registered with SJVAPCD within Jurisdiction ii) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Tier 1 Worksites (100-249) iii) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Tier 2 Worksites (250+) iv) Number of Registered SJVAPCD Employers with ETRIPS v) Average ETRIP Points of Registered SJVAPCD Employer vi) If applicable – local agency ETRIP points vii) Documentation of other non-SJVUPACD TDM Plans being implemented within the jurisdiction. SJCOG’s Commute Connections Office will share this data base with each local agency’s TDM Liaison (See Local Agencies’ Level 1 Effort) to facilitate local TDM planning efforts. 7) Provide each Local Agency Commute Connection Information Packet The Commute Connections Office of SJCOG will continue to provide each local agency its Commute Connection Information Packet which describes the various TDM incentives and strategies for reducing single occupant vehicle peak hour travel demand. 8) Update of the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Strategic Deployment Plan for the San Joaquin Valley SJCOG will be performing periodic updates of the San Joaquin Valley ITS Strategic Deployment Plan. ITS applications in the San Joaquin County portion of the Valley typically will continue to focus on the following ITS market packages: 1) Safety; 2) Traveler Information Systems; 3) Incident Management Systems; 4) Advanced Public Transit Systems; and 5) Freeway (e.g., vehicle detection, HOV/HOT lanes) and Arterial Management Systems (e.g., signal synchronization, signal preemption). An enhanced Traveler Information System market package will continue to be a key focus. The latter includes implementation of a 511 Program as well as other advanced traveler information systems that promote alternative modes of travel e.g., electronic traveler information (e.g., websites, kiosks, HAR), real time transit system communication systems (bus GPS units and time of arrival information boards at bus shelters), automatic vehicle location and demand responsive dispatching. 9) Inter-agency coordination by SJCOG a) Develop memorandums of understanding with the neighboring counties of Alameda, Stanislaus, Sacramento, Merced, and Contra Costa to strategize on reducing inter-regional vehicle trips

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 34 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

i) Ensure schedule concurrence and stop coordination over multiple transit agencies ii) Develop a single-card that allows payment for various transportation related activities (travel over multiple transit agencies, vehicle parking, bicycle locker parking, roadway tolls, etc.) iii) Develop park-and-ride lot locations and strategies to encourage usage iv) Research and implement real-time traveler information on CMP roadways v) Coordinate road and transit projects vi) Review land-use policies that affect inter-regional trips b) Research the possibility of implementing a interregional car-sharing program i) Contact City Car Share http://www.citycarshare.org/ and Zip Car http://www.zipcar.com/ for information on successful car sharing strategies ii) Research Spride Share http://spride.com/, which could formalize car-sharing capabilities for personally- owned vehicles. The ability to institute this program depends on the passage of California’s AB1871 (Jones) “Motor vehicle insurance coverage: Carsharing", which removes existing vehicle insurance barriers to car-sharing of individually owned vehicles. The bill unanimously passed the Assembly on June 3, 2010 and has moved onto the Senate for consideration. iii) Identify possible locations for car-sharing vehicles iv) Develop a position paper on the feasibility of car-sharing in San Joaquin County c) Transportation card and passes i) Pursue developing a single-card system that allows payment for various transportation related activities (travel over multiple transit agencies, vehicle parking, bicycle locker parking, roadway tolls, etc.) ii) Work with transit agencies to secure eco-passes or discount passes for unlimited use for select populations (e.g., senior housing; K-12 students; university students, faculty, and staff; major employers) d) Bicycling i) Identification of a Regional Bikeway Network (existing and future/proposed network) and the development of a Regional Bikeway Plan. This plan will serve as a regional guidance document for both SJCOG and its member agencies to facilitate future programming and selection bikeway improvements (see also item iii) ii) Work with transit agencies to ensure the convenience and availability of allowing bicycles on transit iii) Research and develop a bike sharing program for employees, residents, and tourists iv) SJCOG will work with local agencies to develop a county-wide bicycling map showing existing and proposed bikeways as well as bike parking v) Pursue developing a plan for the identification, removal, and recycling of abandoned bicycles on public rights-of-way and in government-owned facilities 10) Preferred Development Zones SJCOG will develop a collaborative Regional Plan to identify Smart Growth Opportunity Zones. The final product will provide a greater focus for implementation of the Measure K Smart Growth Program through enhance opportunities for sustainable development, connectivity, and emission reductions.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 35 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

11) Local Agency Support SJCOG will continue to provide technical support to - and identify any opportunities to combine efforts with - local agencies to apply for grants and other funding that support Smart Growth efforts including: i) Improve streetscapes ii) Develop and fund projects that will encourage ancillary (e.g., landscaping, crosswalks, bike paths, development iii) Meet infrastructure needs 12) Regional Blueprint Implementation SJCOG will continue to work with its member agencies on implementing the Regional Blueprint to: i) Identify institutional barriers towards meeting the Blueprint vision ii) Develop alternatives and recommendations iii) Finalize “tool box” of transportation/land use strategies that can be used by existing and new development

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 36 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Level 2 Effort: Triggered

As part of the overall coordination between the TDM Action Plan and the CMP, the number of deficient CMP system lane miles by jurisdiction will be biennially determined by SJCOG. Based on established thresholds for percent of deficient CMP lane miles and a given local jurisdiction’s AM/PM peak hour traffic contribution to the deficient lane miles, Level 2 TDM responsibility defined in the each agency’s adopted TDM Resolutions of Commitment may be triggered.

Jurisdictions that trigger a Level 2 TDM effort will collaborate with SJCOG to develop a sub-regional TDM Action Plan. A sub-regional TDM Action Plan may contain some or all of the measures presented in this section. It is expected that the measures in this section will be modified as needed to fit each action plan. It should also be noted that the TDM Toolbox of measures is not an exhaustive list. Local agencies may consider other TDM measures not listed in this section if it can be demonstrated that they are effective at reducing peak hour single occupant vehicle demand.

SJCOG’s “toolbox” of proactive strategies is considered a suitable “starting point” for development of a sub-regional TDM Action Plan. Each measure can be customized for a given local situation (e.g., design guidelines for site access, roadways, transit stops, off-street vehicle parking, bicycling support, transportation pricing) for the purpose of reducing peak hour congestion and contributing air quality or system-wide circulation improvements. These toolbox strategies are also linked to the CMP given that they are a resource for identifying potential improvements as part of CMP deficiency plans as well as a principal source for implementing the Level 2 TDM requirements when triggered by monitored congestion levels.

Level 2 Efforts will be implemented in addition to Level 1 Efforts. As described previously, Level 2 is triggered when: 1. 30 percent or more of a local jurisdiction’s CMP roadway lane miles are determined to be deficient (i.e., operating at LOS E or worse) without programming status within the 7-year CMP CIP; and 2. 30 percent or more of the congestion is attributable to that jurisdiction. Other jurisdictions may also be involved in the sub-regional TDM Action Plan if they too are shown to contribute significantly to the congestion problem.

Development and approval of a local agency TDM Action Plan must occur within one year of the finding by the SJCOG board that a Level 2 TDM effort is triggered. Local approval of the local agency TDM Action Plan must first occur at a publicly noticed meeting. After local agency approval, the SJCOG board must also approve the local agency TDM Action Plan at a publically noticed meeting. The local agency TDM Action Plan must be approved by the SJCOG Board to satisfy the requirements of the CMP and the TDM Resolution of Commitment. As described in SJCOG’s Regional Deficiency Analysis and based on monitored CMP roadway congestion levels, no San Joaquin County jurisdictions currently trigger the TDM Level 2 threshold. If CMP congestion levels are maintained, Level 2 TDM responsibilities may not be triggered in perpetuity. However, if future congestion levels do trigger the need for a local agency to implement TDM Level 2 responsibility and develop a sub-regional TDM Action Plan, this TDM Plan provides a pro-active guide to assist the local agency in developing such a plan. Assessing the condition of the CMP roadway network in this manner provides: a sub-regional barometer for CMP system performance; a congestion trigger point and defines a level of effort that addresses the critical situation; and, an equitable nexus between degree of TDM responsibility and fair share contribution of local traffic

Example TDM Level 2 strategies are described on the following pages.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 37 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

1) Design Guidelines for Site Access, Roadways, and Transit Stops Local agencies may develop design guidelines for site access and roadways that will be applied in the urbanized areas. The design guidelines should prioritize access to developments and on the roadway by transit, walking, and biking. New developments and the local agencies will use the design guidelines. Examples of design guidelines for site access, roadways, and transit stops are as follows: a) Site access management i) Minimize the number of access driveways to parking areas ii) Provide main entrance access to buildings directly from sidewalk or street iii) Ensure transit stops are located to minimize travel distances for pedestrians to main entrances b) Roadways i) Design walkways for shortest path ii) Cul-de-sac and curvilinear roadway systems should provide straight line access for non-motorized travel through the development to the arterial and collector roads and transit stops c) Transit stops i) Locate in close proximity to intersections and other pedestrian roadway crossings ii) Locate preferably on the far side of intersections, wherever possible and practicable iii) Major transit stops should be designed with room for shelters and benches 2) Off-Street Vehicle Parking Local agencies have a strong influence over off-street vehicle parking in their municipal codes, the requirements of which are typically set to accommodate peak-hour demand or at times seasonal demand for parking. This measure calls for a review of off-street parking requirements and identification of shared-use parking opportunities. Example efforts for addressing off-street vehicle parking are as follows: a) Review off-street vehicle parking requirements i) Design a survey of building vacancy rates, and vehicle parking availability and occupancies ii) Distribute survey to residential and commercial property owners and management companies with instructions for times and methods of conducting the counts of parking iii) Administer survey as part of the requirement for business license renewals iv) Reduce off-street requirements for new development, if applicable v) Develop locally appropriate off-street vehicle parking requirements for mixed-use developments b) Identify shared-use parking opportunities i) Encourage residential and commercial property owners to share off-street parking resources in exchange for the ability to develop on more of their land area ii) Identify areas for new multi-use development and provide information and assistance for reducing off- street parking requirements c) Survey municipally-owned or operated off-street parking facilities annually

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 38 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

i) Conduct count of vehicle parking availability and occupancies for at least 3 different time periods ii) Consider zoning parts of under-used lots for redevelopment 3) Bicycling Support Providing infrastructure and support systems for bicycling can motivate motorists to switch to using bikes for transportation purposes. Bicycling is an environmentally friendly, efficient, reliable, economical, and healthy way of getting around. Local agencies can encourage bicycling by implementing the following example measures: a) Bicycle parking i) Require new residential developments to provide secure bicycle parking on the ground floor that shelters at least two bicycles per unit from inclement weather. Attached or detached garages for single family homes suffice for bicycle parking. ii) Identify locations of commercial and retail activity and provide short-term bicycle parking for customers, per Caltrans’ guidelines for location and placement iii) Install bike parking in public parking garages and lots. Locate in a visible location or include wayfinding signage. b) Bicycle mapping i) Local agencies will provide a GIS-ready map, compatible with the SJCOG’s GIS projection, showing the following components: (1) Existing and future bikeways and type (Class 1 multi-use trails, Class 2 bike lanes, and Class 3 bike routes) (2) Bike parking and type (long-term lockers and garages, and short term racks) 4) HOV and Express Lanes Local agencies can come out in support of roadway operations that encourage carpooling, increase transit reliability, and provide opportunities for single-occupant vehicles to pay for using carpool lanes. The following are examples of supportive actions: a) Support and study High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes on CMP roadways i) Consider roadway expansions only for HOV lanes ii) Consider conversion of existing multi-purpose lanes into HOV lanes b) Express Lanes i) Consider roadway expansions only for High Occupancy Toll (HOT) or Express lanes ii) Consider conversion of existing multi-purpose lanes into Express lanes 5) Facility-based measures for new development Local jurisdictions can consider requiring sizeable new residential and commercial development to include provisions for travel by bicyclists, pedestrians, transit passengers, and carpools. These provisions cover on-site construction, designs of buildings, off-street parking areas, and roadways; programs and information; monitoring and appointment of transportation coordinator. Examples of applicable sizeable new development guidelines are indicated in Table 13.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 39 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 13: Developmental Guidelines for Facility based TDM Measures Development type Transit-rich area 1 Other areas Residential 100 or more dwelling units 50 or more dwelling units Commercial (including office buildings 100 full-time equivalent 50 full-time equivalent employees with multiple tenants) or government employees Multi-use 100 or more combined dwelling 50 or more combined dwelling units and full time equivalent units and full time equivalent employees employees Office or industrial park All All Event center or stadium All All School 150 students 100 students

1 Transit-rich area is where at least 50% of the project’s employees, residents, students, or attendees are within 1/3 mile walking distance of existing or future transit stations or stops. Facility-based measures could include the following example components: a) Construction and operations i) Site construction should not impede normal pedestrian and bicycle circulation. If necessary, temporary sidewalk and bike lane closures will be accompanied by safe accommodation as close as possible to the site on the adjacent roadway. ii) Freight loading and unloading should not impede walkways or bicycle circulation iii) Refuse and recycling containers should be stored so that they are not impeding the public right-of-way b) Minimize travel distances for pedestrians and bicyclists on public rights-of-way i) Walkways should be designed for shortest path ii) Cul-de-sac and curvilinear roadway systems should provide straight line access for non-motorized travel through the development to the arterial and collector roads and transit stops c) Orient buildings towards pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit passengers i) Provide main entrance access to buildings directly from sidewalk or street ii) Ensure transit stops are located to minimize travel distances for pedestrians to main entrances iii) Minimize the number of access driveways to parking areas d) Off-street parking facilities i) Prohibit surface parking lots that border more than 100 continuous feet of sidewalks ii) Ensure covered parking lots and garages are accessible by vanpools iii) Assign priority parking to carpools and vanpools iv) Dedicate premium parking spaces, if requested, to car-share vehicles e) Bicycle storage facilities i) Require 1 short-term bicycle parking space for every 5 vehicle parking spaces (residential and commercial) Dowling Associates, Incorporated 40 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

ii) All housing developments will include one storage space per unit on the ground floor adequately-sized to store at least two bicycles per unit (residential) iii) Require 1 long-term secure bicycle parking space protected from inclement weather for every 10 parking spaces (commercial) or students (schools) iv) Develop plan for identification and removal of abandoned bicycles on the public right-of-way f) Changing facilities i) Provide shower, if possible ii) Provide locker and changing room access to employees who bike or walk to work (commercial) g) Transportation information i) Provide a kiosk, bulletin board, or website for posting and disseminating transportation-related information ii) Include the ability for residents and employees to post content or questions, e.g., carpooling iii) Monitor and post transportation information related to bicycling, walking, transit, and ridesharing h) Encourage employees, residents, event attendees, and adults driving students to school to reduce vehicle miles traveled i) Offer free or discounted transit passes to employees, residents, event attendees, and students ii) Offer parking cash-outs for employees or residents who give up their parking spaces iii) Conduct contests and promotions with rewards for walking, biking, taking transit, or using carpools in place of driving solo iv) Reimburse employees who commute by walking or biking v) Require multi-family carpools for students accessing schools, with matching assistance from school’s administrative staff i) Appoint a transportation coordinator i) The transportation coordinator will monitor and post transportation information on kiosk, bulletin board, or website ii) Distribute transit passes iii) Develop promotional program to encourage walking, biking, transit use, and carpooling iv) Conduct monitoring program j) Monitoring program i) Conduct annual survey of residents or employees regarding transportation habits ii) Conduct annual counts of motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians accessing or exiting the site in the AM and PM peak hours iii) Develop and implement ideas for reducing vehicle miles traveled based on survey results iv) Submit summary of survey and counts to local jurisdiction 6) Prepare system-wide deficiency plans When isolated analysis and direct fixes of deficient CMP roadways are not locally desired, CMP statutes allow local agencies to develop system-wide deficiency plans. System-wide deficiency plans are a good option when meeting CMP LOS standards are not be possible (e.g., due to insufficient right-of-way or cost) or undesirable

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 41 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

(e.g., avoiding expansive intersections that increase pedestrian crossing times). Jurisdictions can develop comprehensive and locally-appropriate transportation strategies for improving system-wide circulation or air quality rather than adhering to vehicle CMP LOS standards. System-wide deficiency plans also allow local jurisdictions to indirectly address specific vehicle operation issues by pursuing system-wide improvements to walking, biking, transit, and TDM programs, as well as land-use changes that aim to reduce vehicle miles traveled. The system-wide deficiency plan should contain the following: a) Deficiency analysis of CMP roadway i) Identification of CMP designated facility that exceeds the CMP LOS standard ii) Planning-level cost estimates of the physical improvements needed to maintain the CMP LOS standard at the deficient location iii) Discussion of issues precluding the feasibility for a “direct fix” improvement to allow the deficient location to operate with the CMP LOS standard b) System-wide improvements i) Discussion of possible system-wide improvements, including physical changes to non-CMP locations, TDM programs, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements ii) Analysis of system-wide improvements to circulation and air quality improvement. iii) List of feasible and appropriate system-wide improvements c) Action plan i) How deficiency plan actions will be implemented ii) Identifies lead agency responsibility for implementation and identification of other stakeholder agencies iii) Source of funding for each identified action iv) Timing of each action’s implementation d) Monitoring program i) Develops measures of effectiveness ii) Describes how the local jurisdiction will evaluate the implementation of deficiency plan actions iii) Reconciles CEQA requirements with deficiency plan 7) Financial Incentives Motorists and developers can be encouraged to make more socially beneficial changes through the implementation of user and permitting fees. Imposing additional fees on developers hoping to locate projects in areas of little transportation choice would make projects in infill areas more appealing. Charging motorists for roadway use and parking is probably the most effective way to reduce vehicle miles, increase carpooling, encourage multi-purpose vehicle trips (trip-chaining), and encourage access by other modes of travel. Congestion relief can be permanently achieved if tolls and parking charges rise or fall according to demand, much the way airline ticket prices differ based on demand for flying on certain days and at certain times. On the surface, such measures appear to penalize motorists. However, all transportation system users, including motorists, could benefit from pricing. These benefits include creating revenue for better quality roads, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities: eliminating roadway congestion for more reliable trip durations: ensuring the availability of parking in commercial areas: developing higher livability standards for communities: creating safer streets: and providing multi-modal opportunities for travel. ITS technology has evolved to the point that toll Dowling Associates, Incorporated 42 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

collection and parking charges are no longer onerous to the agency or inconvenient to the user due to the availability of transponders and other devices. Examples of financial incentives include the following measures: a) Charge additional permitting fees for new or reuse development in areas with poor transit access. 6 b) Analyze the system-wide effects of instituting roadway congestion pricing and/or High-Occupancy Toll (HOT or Express) lanes as a feasible alternative on CMP roadways c) Parking i) Determine areas of high parking demand (less than 15% availability during peak demand times) for on- street and municipally-owned parking lots/ garages ii) Form neighborhood improvement districts iii) Develop a parking plan that encourages long-term parking in off-street facilities, short-term parking on- street, and provides real-time parking information to motorists iv) Institute parking charges with rates that ensure at least 15% availability of parking spaces in commercial areas v) Use revenue generated from parking charges to make streetscape improvements to the neighborhood improvement district 8) Require TDM Plans for existing development While SJVAPCD Rule 9410 Employer-Based Trip Reduction applies to existing companies of 100 or more employees, there are many other opportunities for implementing TDM for existing development. TDM plans can be required of all school districts, areas of existing employment density, local government offices, and office buildings containing multiple tenants. Example TDM plan requirements for each development type are detailed below: a) Develop and implement employee TDM plans at local government offices, containing the following: i) Assess on-street and off-street vehicle and bicycle parking supply and occupancy during a typical mid- morning weekday ii) Identify shared parking opportunities, locations for long-term bicycle parking (at least 1 for every 10 parking spaces or employees), and consider implementing parking charges iii) Work with transit agencies to offer discounted transit passes to employees iv) Offer parking cash-outs to employees who give up their parking spaces v) Conduct survey of employees to determine mode(s) of transportation to work before and after implementation of TDM program vi) Sponsor annual workshops explaining biking, walking, transit, and carpooling opportunities and incentives vii) Offer prime parking spaces to employees who carpool or vanpool viii) Provide reimbursement to employees who commute by walking, biking, or transit

6 Examples of how areas can be defined as transit-poor areas include: failure to meet certain conditions. Example conditions include: (1) At least 50% of the project’s employees, residents, students, or attendees are within 1/3 mile walking distance of existing or future transit stations or stops (2) Bus stops and transit stations are served by at least 2 major routes with scheduled headways of 15 minutes or less for at least 5 hours per day. Alternatively, the development can be within 300 feet of an existing or future bus rapid transit corridor. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 43 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

ix) Develop contests and promotions with rewards for walking, biking, taking transit, or using carpools in place of driving solo x) Provide company cars and bicycles for business-related travel or running personal errands to employees who walk, bike, take transit, or carpool to work xi) Offer guaranteed ride home to employees who walk, bike, take transit or carpool to work in case of emergencies, working late, or illness xii) Allow flexible workday and workweek schedules and telecommuting opportunities to employees xiii) Provide automated carpool matching for employees xiv) Conduct annual surveys of employees’ commute habits and awareness of benefits b) Develop TDM plan for areas of existing employment density i) Identify areas where employment density exceeds 1,500 persons per square mile. ii) Follow steps detailed in 8-a-i, 8-a-ii, and 8-a-iii. iii) Work with employers to implement TDM plan as outlined in 8-a-iv through 8-a-xiv iv) Summarize annual surveys in a report to SJCOG c) Require TDM plans for existing office buildings of multiple tenants i) Identify office buildings containing 100 or more employees ii) Follow steps detailed in 8-a-i, 8-a-ii, and 8-a-iii. iii) Work with employers and building management to implement a TDM plan as outlined in 8-a-iv through 8- a-xiv iv) Summarize annual surveys in a report to SJCOG d) Require TDM and Transportation Management Plans from each school district i) Work with school districts to implement TDM plan for employees (1) Follow steps detailed in 8-a-i, 8-a-ii, and 8-a-iii. (2) Work with district offices to implement TDM plan as outlined in 8-a-iv through 4-a-xiv (3) Summarize annual surveys in a report to SJCOG ii) Require district offices to assist individual schools in developing Transportation Management Plans that: (1) Develop measurable goals for reducing the number of vehicles accessing schools and creating an orderly roadway environment (2) Conduct counts and observations of school-related vehicles and bicycles in the AM peak-hour before and after implementation of measures detailed in transportation management plans (3) Establish pick-up and drop-off areas at each school that are monitored by school staff who assist students entering and exiting vehicles. Locate the pick-up and drop off areas away from the main school entrances to create a safer environment for students accessing the school by foot or bike. (4) Develop a safe driving and parking guidance manual that is conveyed to parents and other adult care-givers. Establish a vehicle circulation pattern for student drop-off and pick-ups for each school and enforce rules and laws to maintain an orderly roadway environment.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 44 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

(5) Encourage multi-family carpools for students accessing schools, with rideshare matching assistance from school’s administrative staff (6) Require 1 long-term secure bicycle parking space protected from inclement weather for every 10 students (7) Develop contests and promotions to encourage student access to school by walking, biking, transit, and carpooling (8) Conduct annual counts and observations of school-related vehicles and bicycles in the AM peak-hour (9) Report results to TDM coordinator at local jurisdiction

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 45 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Acronyms

Acronyms used in this memorandum are spelled out below CIP Capital Improvement Projects CMA Congestion Management Agency CMP Congestion Management Program CMS Congestion Management System FTIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems LOS Level of Service MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency SAFETEA-LU Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SJCOG San Joaquin Council of Governments SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District SOV Single Occupancy Vehicles STIP State Transportation Improvement Program TDM Transportation Demand Management TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TMA Transportation Management Area CIP Capital Improvement Projects CMA Congestion Management Agency CMP Congestion Management Program CMS Congestion Management System FTIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems LOS Level of Service MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization RTPA Regional Transportation Planning Agency SAFETEA-LU Safe Accountable Flexible Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SJCOG San Joaquin Council of Governments SJVAPCD San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District SOV Single Occupancy Vehicles STIP State Transportation Improvement Program TDM Transportation Demand Management TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TMA Transportation Management Area

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 46 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Roadway Categories

The San Joaquin Regional Congestion Management Program defines roadway segment categories relative to the status of their improvement. Below is a summary of the categories used in this TDM Plan and Regional Deficiency Analysis. Category 1 LOS E/F - Improvement project completed less than seven years out Category 2 LOS E/F - Improvement project completed less than seven years out but not fully funded Category 3 LOS D - Improvement project greater than seven years out Category 4 LOS E/F - Improvement project greater than seven years out Category 5 LOS D - No improvement project planned or programmed Category 6 LOS E/F - No improvement project planned or programmed

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 47 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Appendix

A. TRIMMS B. TDM Analysis Tools C. TRIMMS Green House Gas Analysis

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 48 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

APPENDIX A

TRIMMS

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 49 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Summary lists of the TRIMMS TDM analysis software inputs, application process, applicable measures that can be analyzed, applicable employment sectors and outputs are provided in this appendix. For a more detailed description see Appendix B. List of Parameters and Inputs for TRIMMS Category Area Wide Site Specific Global Inputs (defaults General Inputs General Inputs available for some Working days (days/yr.) Working days (days/yr.) selected areas) Discount rate (%) Discount rate (%) Added delay (hours/1,000VMT) Added delay US household income (hours/1,000VMT) Vehicle Occupancy US household income Auto – Drive alone Vehicle Occupancy Auto – Rideshare Auto – Drive alone Vanpool Auto – Rideshare Vanpool Regional Parameters Population density (persons/sq.-mi.) Population density (defaults available for Fuel price ($/gallon) (persons/sq.-mi.) some selected areas) Fuel efficiency – Auto ($/gallon) Fuel price ($/gallon) Median household income ($) Fuel efficiency – Auto Arterial travel speed (mph) ($/gallon) Freeway travel speed (mph) Median household income ($) Arterial travel speed (mph) Freeway travel speed (mph) Cost Parameters (defaults Pollutants costs: VOC, CO, NOx ($/kg) Pollutants costs: VOC, CO, available for some Wage rate for each listed industry ($/hour) NOx ($/kg) selected areas) CO2 cost($/metric ton) Wage rate for each listed Accident cost ($) and rate (accidents/million VMT) industry ($/hour) Noise cost ($/mile) CO2 cost($/metric ton) Accident cost ($) and rate (accidents/million VMT) Noise cost ($/mile) Information related to the Total Cost ($) Total Cost ($) program(s) we wish to Duration (years) Duration (years) evaluate Discount Rate (%) Discount Rate (%) Commuters Affected (no.) Commuters Affected (no.) Industry Sectors Affected (select from list) Industry Sectors Affected (select from listl)

Area-wide baseline % share and trip length (miles) for each mode: % share and trip length (miles) for each commute travel behavior Auto – Drive alone mode: (can borrow from the Auto – Rideshare Auto – Drive alone included areas in the Vanpool Auto – Rideshare software e.g. Bakersfield Vanpool or Fresno) Public Transport Cycling Public Transport Walking Cycling Other Walking Percent of trips in peak period (%) Other

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 50 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Category Area Wide Site Specific Percent of trips in peak period (%) Program Subsidies Transit Transit (Yes/No) Vanpool Vanpool Carpool Carpool Bike Bike Walk Walk Carpool matching Carpool matching Guaranteed emergency ride home Guaranteed emergency ride Flexible working hours home Compressed work week schedule Flexible working hours Formal telework program Compressed work week schedule Formal telework program Worksite Characteristics N/A Accessibility Bus/train station within ¼ mile Sidewalk within ¼ mile Bike lane within ¼ mile Amenities Shopping within ¼ mile Restaurant within ¼ mile Bank within ¼ mile Childcare within ¼ mile Parking Parking charge for carpooling Parking charge for vanpooling Number of available parking spaces Program Marketing Average hours that organizations dedicate to program Hours that organization dedicates to management and promotion (hours/week) program management and promotion (hours/week) Type of promotion (Yes/No) Internal mails Internal promotional e-mails Promotional events Financial and Pricing Current/New parking cost ($/vehicle) for: Current/New parking cost ($/vehicle) Strategies Auto – Drive alone for: Auto – Rideshare Auto – Drive alone Vanpool Auto – Rideshare Current/New trip cost ($/trip) for: Vanpool Auto – Drive alone Current/New trip cost ($/trip) for: Auto – Rideshare Auto – Drive alone Vanpool Auto – Rideshare Public transport Vanpool Cycling Public transport Walking Cycling Other Walking

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 51 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Category Area Wide Site Specific Percent of workforce affected (%) Other Percent of workforce affected (%) Access and Travel Time Current/New access time (min.) for: Current/New access time (min.) for: Improvements Auto – Drive alone Auto – Drive alone Auto – Rideshare Auto – Rideshare Vanpool Vanpool Public transport Public transport Cycling Cycling Walking Walking Other Other Current/New travel time (min.) for: Current/New travel time (min.) for: Auto – Drive alone Auto – Drive alone Auto – Rideshare Auto – Rideshare Vanpool Vanpool Public transport Public transport Cycling Cycling Walking Walking Other Other Percent of workforce affected (%) Percent of workforce affected (%)

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 52 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 6: TRIMMS Analysis and Application Work Plan List Possible/Applicable TDM Strategies

Select and Group Employers into Sectors

TRIMMS

Identify Impacts of each TDM Strategy on each Sector (e.g. Mode Share Impacts and Travel Impacts)

Create a List of TDM Impacts Identified from Previous Steps

Integrate TDM Impacts with Travel Demand Model

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 53 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

List of Possible TDM Strategies Possible strategies from toolbox of TDM measures

TDM Strategies Evaluable in TRIMMS Promoting alternative work schedule Yes Telework Yes Participation in rideshare program Yes Carsharing program Yes Improve bicycle access and facilities Yes Showers and changing rooms N/A Guaranteed ride home program Yes Parking pricing Yes Public transit improvements Yes Park and ride lots N/A Parking cash-out program N/A Creation of transportation management associations N/A Transit and bicycle integration N/A Operation of a dedicated shuttle service during the peak period to transit station or urban residential area N/A Implementation of a commute trip reduction program N/A Participate in/create/sponsor a transportation management association N/A Design streets that encourage pedestrian and bicycle access Yes Connectivity measures N/A Improvements to bike/sidewalk facilities Yes Shared parking facilities Yes Speed reductions N/A HOV prioritization N/A Amenities at worksite Yes Transit/vanpool/carpool/bike/walk subsidies Yes List of Possible Employer Sector Agriculture and Mining Manufacturing Construction Military Education and Health Professional Services Entertainment and Food Other Services Finance and Insurance Retail Trade Government Transportation Information Services Wholesale Trade Others

Possible TRIMMS Output Format Impacts by Sector (%Trip Reduction) TDM Ag. Const. Edu. Ent. Fin. … 1 X% … … … … … 2 … … … … … … 3 … … … … … … 4 … … … … … … 5 … … … … … … … … … … … … …

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 54 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

APPENDIX B

TDM ANALYSIS TOOLS ASSESSMENT

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 55 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Introduction As part of the deficiency plan action development, the DAI team will provide impact analysis for estimating potential effectiveness of improvement strategies. The evaluations of these strategies will be performed using appropriate tools identified and selected by the team. Improvement strategies in four categories will be evaluated including:

Transit service improvements Pedestrian and bicycle facility enhancements TDM strategies Parking improvements

Several analysis tools have been developed to evaluate impacts of these strategies7. Depending on key inputs and desire outputs, only particular technique will be appropriate and used to evaluate each strategy. Table 14 presents a list and descriptions of the available tools.

Table 14 Available Methods for Evaluations

Method Description

Off-the-Shelf TDM/TCM Analysis Software TDM Evaluation Model Software to predict trip and VMT impacts of employer-based TDM strategies. Spreadsheet software based on TDM Evaluation Model; also calculates TCM/Commuter Choice Model emissions.

TCM Analyst Spreadsheet software to estimate travel and emission impacts of TCMs.

Software for estimating emission benefits and cost-effectiveness of potential CM/AQ Evaluation Model CMAQ projects and for ranking projects. (Center for Urban Transportation Research Average Vehicle Ridership CUTR_AVR model) Model to predict AVR impacts of workplace-based TDM programs. Spreadsheet model for evaluating benefits of wide range of transportation TRIMMS demand management. Customized TDM/TCM Analysis Software Spreadsheet model for screening and sensitivity testing of a wide range of TCM Tools TCM strategies at an area-wide level. Models to predict emissions impacts of various transit, non-motorized travel, Off-Net/PAQONE and traffic flow strategies. Software to help employers predict benefits of and track participation in ECO/Regulation XV Software Employee Commute Options (ECO) programs. Sketch-Plan Workbook Approaches Calculation steps to estimate emissions reductions and cost-effectiveness of California Standardized Methodology TDM programs, based on survey data on mode shares. Workbook to estimate potential benefits of various TDM strategies applied at RAQC Workbook a regional level.

7 A Sampling of Emissions Analysis Techniques for Transportation Control Measures, Final Report, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., October 2000. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 56 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Method Description

Sample calculations by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments MWCOG Sketch-Planning Methods (MWCOG) for various TCM strategies. Sample calculations and empirical data from North Central Texas Council of NCTCOG Sketch-Planning Methods Governments (NCTCOG) for TDM and traffic flow strategies. Specialized Methods

Quick-HOV Procedures and software to analyze impacts of HOV facilities.

(Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Deployment Analysis System) IDAS Software to analyze travel and emissions impacts of over 60 ITS strategies, based on regional travel model data. (Simplified Model for the Assessment of Regional Travel) Software to SMART estimate air quality impacts of highway and transit network improvements. Commercial software for analyzing traffic flow and emissions impacts of Traffic Simulation Models intersection and roadway operational improvements. Model for estimating emissions benefits of alternative fuel light-duty and AirCred transit vehicles. Spreadsheet for analyzing replacements of older buses with new diesel or Bus Replacement Spreadsheet alternative fuel buses. Report containing methods and procedures for assessing emissions impacts Freight Air Quality Analysis Procedures of freight strategies.

Sources: A Sampling of Emissions Analysis Techniques for Transportation Control Measures, Final Report, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., October 2000. Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 57 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Trip Reduction Impacts for Mobility Management Strategies (TRIMMS) TRIMMS 2.0 software is developed in 2009 by National Center for Transit Research, University of South Florida. It is considered as one of sketch-planning tools currently available in the market. TRIMMS is a visual basic spreadsheet application for evaluating benefits of a wide range of transportation demand management (TDM) in terms of emission reductions, accident reductions, congestion reductions, excess fuel consumption and adverse global climate change impacts.

The databases included in TRIMMS are a literature review of benefits and impact of TDM initiatives at the national level. It allows users to update some parameters as appropriate. The TRIMMS’s structure is shown in Figure 7.

TRIMMS can be used to evaluate impact of strategies at site specific or area wide level for arterials, freeways, or both facility types. Inputs for specific information on the program characteristics include cost, time duration, number of full-time/part-time employees, and employment sector. The default mode shares and trip length are provided for the selected metropolitan areas and users are able to modify or change these parameters based on local survey data. Predictions for mode shares are performed based on regression equations utilizing parameters on employer support programs such as transit/carpool/vanpool/bike/walk subsidies/services, parking service, etc.

The software allows users to assess different TDM strategies affecting the cost of travel such as a transit fare reduction and to evaluate service improvements that target mode access and travel time.

The analysis outputs include: Changes in mode share, trip and VMT with respect to the baseline Changes in social costs generated by TDM policy under evaluation B/C ratio for program evaluation purposes

The software also allows users to conduct a sensitivity analysis or an additional analysis by modifying the parameters. Figure 8 illustrates the output screen from TRIMMS.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 58 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 7 TRIMMS’s Structure8

8 Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 59 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 8 TRIMMS’s Output Screen

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 60 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Transit Service Improvements

The available analysis tools and their key inputs to evaluate impacts from transit service improvements are provided in Table 15.

Table 15 Available Methods for Transit Improvements Evaluations Strategy and Method Key Inputs Outputs Improved Transit TDM Evaluation Model Change in travel time and/or cost by transit Trips, VMT TCM/Commuter Choice Model Change in travel time and/or cost by transit Trips, VMT, Emissions Percent change in fares or service frequency, or survey data TCM Analyst/EPA TCM Methodology Trips, VMT, Emissions on ridership (shuttle) Percent change in transit fare, wait time, travel time, and/or CM/AQ Evaluation Model Trips, VMT, Emissions total revenue-miles; number of riders (shuttle) TCM Tools Percent change in fare/cost of using transit Trips, VMT, Emissions Strategies: bus shelters, bike access, service changes, new service, transit center. Data: variously include daily boardings, Off-Net/PAQONE Trips, VMT, Emissions adjacent pop., current local mode share, change in revenue miles, headways, route travel times, wait/access times ECO/Regulation XV Software Change in travel time and/or cost by transit Trips, VMT California Standardized Methodology New transit riders by prior mode of travel Trips, VMT, Emissions RAQC Workbook Percent increase in service (peak-period departures) VMT, Emissions NCTCOG Sketch-Plan Methods Rail: Average daily ridership, previous mode of rail travelers Emissions Traffic volumes and physical characteristics (length, lanes, Quick-HOV Trips, Emissions etc.) of HOV/bus lane and parallel facility SMART Change in travel time, cost by link in transit network Trips, VMT, Emissions Change in travel time and/or cost by transit. Transit subsidies TRIMMS Trips, VMT, Emissions and accessibility.

Sources: A Sampling of Emissions Analysis Techniques for Transportation Control Measures, Final Report, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., October 2000. Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 61 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Intelligent Transportation Systems Development Analysis System (IDAS) IDAS is another tool for use to evaluate transit improvements related to Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) strategies. IDAS is a sketch-planning tool for estimating the benefits and costs of ITS investments. It performs as a post-processor to the travel demand model by varying parameters in the built-in ITS components. IDAS utilizes the modal split and traffic assignment results from a travel demand model to estimate changes in modal, route, and temporal decisions of travelers resulting from ITS deployments. Figure 9 provides a list of ITS technologies that are included within IDAS.

An evaluation of transit improvement based on elements under Advanced Public Transit Systems can be performed by IDAS.

The set of impacts evaluated by IDAS include changes in user mobility, travel time/speed, travel time reliability, fuel costs, operating costs, accident costs, emissions, and noise.

Figure 9: ITS Components in IDAS9

9 IDAS – User’s Manual, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 62 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Enhancements Assessment for future bicycle and pedestrian levels can be performed based on the available methods from the completed FHWA research project10. The analysis tool can be used to answer these questions: How many people will use, if a new bicycle and pedestrian facility is built? How many people will choose to walk or bike if an existing facility or network is improved? What types and combinations of improvements will have the greatest impact on increasing non-motorized travel? How will improvements to non-motorized travel conditions affect motor vehicle use?

In order to estimate for demands and potential increase of pedestrians and bicycles, it will be necessary to identify factors influencing these non-motorized travel modes. These factors include: Physical environment of pedestrian and bicycle facilities Supporting policies Local personal/population and socioeconomic characteristics Characteristics and policies of other modes Land use density and distribution

There are several methods for use to estimate demands for pedestrians and bicycles depending on availability of resources. These estimation methods include: Comparison studies: predicts non-motorized travel on a facility by comparing it to usage and to surrounding population and land use characteristics of other similar facilities. Aggregate behavior studies: uses regression analysis to relate non-motorized travel in an area to its local population, land use, and other characteristics. Sketch plan methods: applies factors and rules of thumb about trip lengths, mode shares, and other travel behaviors to predict non-motorized travel on facility. Discrete choice models: utilizes models to predict individual’s travel decisions based on characteristics of the available alternatives. Regional travel models: uses travel demand model to predict total trips by purpose, mode, and origin/destination and distributes trips across a network.

Each prediction method has advantages and disadvantages as described in Table 16.

Table 16 Available Methods for Pedestrian/Bicycle Demand Forecast Method Overview Advantage Disadvantage Comparison Compare usage before and after improvement Simple/easy to Difficult to find comparable Studies Compare usage on similar existing facility apply facility Facility level Experience base Does not control for other factors Aggregate Predict mode split Isolate some Low explanatory power Behavior Based on characteristics of population and area factors related to Poor transferability Studies Area/regional level non-motorized Not facility-specific travel Sketch-Plan Simple calculations Relatively simple Data limitation Methods Rely on availability of data and rule of thumb Reasonable Not very sensitive to Facility level estimate for specific facility design planning purpose factors Discrete Predict travel decisions at individual level High sensitivity to Extensive survey data Choice Include personal and environmental characteristics design factors collection

10 Forecasting Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel, Workshop Presented at ProBike/ProWalk’ 98, Santa Barbara, California, September, 1998. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 63 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Method Overview Advantage Disadvantage Models Facility level Consider combined Require expertise Area/regional level effects of variables Can transfer results Regional Multiple-stage models of travel behavior Integrated Require expertise to Travel Spatial – based on land use and transportation network framework for develop Models Facility level modeling travel Scaled for auto travel Area/regional level decisions Require additional data Spatial – considers collection for ped./bike trip patterns inclusions (origins and destinations)

For existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities, their qualities can be accessed through the use of available Supply Quality Analysis methods, which will not predict demands for the facilities. These methods are described in Table 17.

Table 17 Available Methods for Quality Assessment for Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities Method Overview Advantage Disadvantage Bicycle and pedestrian Relate characteristics of a facility to its Describe relative Do not predict demand compatibility measures overall attractiveness importance of Only rate individual route Indicate suitability of facility for bicycle facility design segments or pedestrian travel factors Use index (BCI) as an indicator for Useful for cycling compatibility prioritization and Facility level addressing deficiencies Environmental factors Describe friendliness of area Enhance Not well-developed for Based on quantitative ratings of performance of bicycle factors environmental factors travel models Based on subjective Area/regional level Use to prioritize ratings areas for Not facility-specific improvements

Based on the desire purpose, availability of data, and availability of supporting tools, the sketch-plan method is generally considered for evaluating impacts of pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements due to its planning-orient characteristics. A deficiency of existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities can be accessed by the use of Bicycle Compatibility Index (BCI), which is a tool in the bicycle and pedestrian compatibility measures. The BCI is developed by Federal Highway Administration11 to indicate the compatibility of facility for cycling. It uses a formula based on traffic volume, speed, land width, and other indicators of bicyclist stress to rank a road segment on a scale, which is then equated to a level-of-service (LOS).

Several analysis tools have incorporated the methods described above and they are summarized in Table 18.

11 The Bicycle Compatibility Index: A Level of Service Concept, Implementation Manual, Federal Highway Adminsitration, FHWA-RD-98-095, 1998. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 64 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 18 Available Tools for Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities Evaluations Strategy and Method Key Inputs Outputs Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities TCM/Commuter Choice Model "Level" of bicycle/pedestrian support program Trips, VMT, Emissions TCM Analyst/EPA TCM Vehicle volumes on roads adjacent to proposed trails; percent Trips, VMT, Emissions Methodology switching mode Number of new walkers/bicyclists or percent of trips that would CM/AQ Evaluation Model Trips, VMT, Emissions bicycle TCM Tools Percent of trips that would bicycle Trips, VMT, Emissions Size of service area, population density, existing mode share, Off-Net/PAQONE length of existing and new bike network; budget for promo. Trips, VMT, Emissions programs; bike coordinator Provision of bicycle racks or storage, provision of showers and ECO/Regulation XV Software Trips, VMT lockers California Standardized Number of commuters by new and prior mode of travel Trips, VMT, Emissions Methodology RAQC Workbook Population served by bike facilities VMT, Emissions MWCOG Sketch-Plan Methods Utilization and trip lengths for various strategies Trips, VMT, Emissions Size of service area, population density, bicycle mode share, NCTCOG Sketch-Plan Methods Emissions length of project Pedestrian/bike subsidies, sidewalk/bike lane availability, travel TRIMMS Trips, VMT, Emissions time improvement impact

Sources: A Sampling of Emissions Analysis Techniques for Transportation Control Measures, Final Report, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., October 2000. Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 65 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

TDM Strategies

The available analysis techniques and their key inputs to evaluate impacts from changes of TDM strategies are summarized in Table 19.

Table 19 Available Methods for TDM Strategies Evaluations Strategy and Method Key Inputs Outputs Employer-Based TDM Assume other strategies to achieve trip reduction TDM Evaluation Model Trips, VMT or AVR increase of X percent Assume other strategies to achieve trip reduction TCM/Commuter Choice Model Trips, VMT, Emissions or AVR increase of X percent Transit pass subsidy amount; number of people CM/AQ Evaluation Model Trips, VMT, Emissions switching to each mode Eligibility for various incentives; marketing and ECO/Regulation XV Software Trips, VMT administrative expenditures Number of commuters by new and prior mode of California Standardized Methodology Trips, VMT, Emissions travel Number of companies with TDM programs, NCTCOG Sketch-Plan Methods Emissions reported number of active participants Flexible working hours and alternatives, TRIMMS Trips, VMT, Emissions carpool/vanpool programs

Sources: A Sampling of Emissions Analysis Techniques for Transportation Control Measures, Final Report, Cambridge Systematics, Inc., October 2000. Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 66 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Parking Improvements The available analysis techniques and their key inputs to evaluate impacts from parking improvements are summarized in Table 20.

Table 20 Available Methods for Parking Improvement Evaluations Strategy and Method Key Inputs Outputs Parking Management TCM Analyst/EPA TCM Percent change in parking cost Trips, VMT, Emissions Methodology Change in vehicle-trips to site and elsewhere, number of CM/AQ Evaluation Model Trips, VMT, Emissions short-term and long-term spaces Current parking space utilization, cap on parking spaces, RAQC Workbook VMT, Emissions maximum parking ratios Maximum parking ratios, employment, trips, mode share by MWCOG Sketch-Plan Methods Trips, VMT, Emissions area TRIMMS Parking availability and space, parking cost Trips, VMT, Emissions

Quantifying the Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reductions: Guidance for Customizing the TRIMMS © Model, Final Draft Report, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida, April 2009.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 67 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Conclusions and Recommendations Table 21 summarizes compatibility of each method identified by FHWA to the evaluation for impacts of improvements on transit service, pedestrian/bicycle facilities, TDM strategies, and parking management. CM/AQ Evaluation Model and TRIMMS model are the two that can be used to assess all TDM components on interest. However, the CM/AQ was developed since 1995 while TRIMMS has just been updated in 2009, which would incorporate with more up-to-date database and parameters. TRIMMS is recommended for use in the deficiency analysis.

Table 21 Summary for Methods

Method Transit Ped./Bike TDM Parking

Off-the-Shelf TDM/TCM Analysis Software TDM Evaluation Model Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes TCM/Commuter Choice Model

TCM Analyst Yes Yes Yes

CM/AQ Evaluation Model Yes Yes Yes Yes

CUTR_AVR

TRIMMS Yes Yes Yes Yes

Customized TDM/TCM Analysis Software Yes Yes TCM Tools

Off-Net/PAQONE Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes ECO/Regulation XV Software

Sketch-Plan Workbook Approaches

California Standardized Methodology Yes Yes Yes

RAQC Workbook Yes Yes Yes

MWCOG Sketch-Planning Methods Yes Yes

Yes Yes Yes NCTCOG Sketch-Planning Methods

Specialized Methods

Quick-HOV Yes

Yes IDAS

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 68 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Method Transit Ped./Bike TDM Parking

SMART Yes

Traffic Simulation Models

AirCred

Bus Replacement Spreadsheet

Freight Air Quality Analysis Procedures

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 69 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

APPENDIX C

TRIMMS GHG ANALYSIS ASSESSMENT

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 70 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Introduction

This appendix presents the analysis results for TDM impacts on greenhouse gases (GHG) in terms of CO2 equivalent for the years 2020 and 2035. The GHG reductions were calculated from estimated reductions of commute trips and VMT, which were derived based on a change in travel behavior as a result of TDM applications.

Trip and VMT Reductions Estimate

The estimate for trip and VMT reductions were conducted using TRIMMS 2.0. The area-wide analysis type was selected to identify for travel behavior changes for entire San Joaquin County based on different scenarios for TDM strategies. The analysis was performed for the following four scenarios:

1. Baseline 2. Transit incentive subsidies 3. Transit, vanpool, carpool, bike, walk incentive subsidies 4. All possible area-wide TDM strategies combined

Table 22 presents the scenarios and their components that were used to evaluate impacts of various TDM combinations.

Total countywide employment for the forecast years of 2020 and 2035 was taken from SJCOG’s travel demand model and reviewed by SJCOG staff. Table 23 shows the forecast number of total employees and Table 24 presents a forecast daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 - as provided by SJCOG. Daily work related VMT were determined based on 2001 National Household Transportation Survey12. The survey indicates that 25% of private vehicle trips are work-related business. And for the work related portion, it is assumed that 36% of this portion is related to large employers, which were exclusively considered in the TDM trip reduction analysis. It is estimate that work related VMT are approximately over 1.7 million and 2.1 million for 2020 and 2035 respectively.

Table 22 TDM Strategy Scenarios Scenarios Transit All All Strategy Baseline Incenntive Financial Possible Program Subsidies Transit N Y Y Y Vanpool N N Y Y Carpool N N Y Y Bike N N Y Y Walk N N Y Y Guaranteed Ride Home and Ride Match Y Y Y Y Telework and Flexible Work Schedule Flexible Work Hours N N N Y Compress Work Week N N N Y Telework Program N N N Y Financial and Pricing Strategies N/A N/A N/A N/A Parking $ / veh., $ / trip Access Travel Time Improvements (min.) N/A N/A N/A N/A

Table 23 Forecast Number of Employees for 2020 and 2035 No. of Employees Year Retail Service Others Total 36% 2020 40,426 107,855 110,216 258,497 93,059 2035 47,180 137,379 128,240 312,799 112,608

12 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, Rule 9410 (Employer Based Trip Reduction), Final Staff Report, December, 2009. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 71 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 24 Daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 Work Large Total Related Enployments Year VMT/day (25%) (36%) 2020 19,895,926 4,973,982 1,790,633 2035 24,375,084 6,093,771 2,193,758

Information on basic commute trip characteristics is required to perform VMT reduction sensitivity analyses for different scenarios. A travel behavior change of ridership by mode was calculated using TRIMMS’s built-in empirical equations and parameters, which were pre-identified for major metropolitan areas across the US. However, none of the pre-selected metropolitan cities are located within San Joaquin County. Consequently, commute trip length information from the Fresno area was used. Mode share data were updated for San Joaquin County based on 2006-2008 American Community Survey data. Table 25 and Table 26 present average commute trip lengths by mode and percent mode share for San Joaquin County, respectively.

Table 25 Average Commute Trip Length by Mode Mode Trip Length (mi.) Auto-Drive Alone 12.2 Auto-Rideshare 12.2 Vanpool 20.4 Public Transport 12.2 Cycling 2.9 Walking 0.9 Other 12.2

Source: TRIMMS Survey Data

Table 26 Mode Share Survey for San Joaquin County Mode Percentage Auto-Drive Alone 78.0% Auto-Rideshare 15.5% Vanpool 1.4% Public Transport 1.4% Cycling 0.5% Walking 2.0% Other 1.2%

Source: US Census Bureau 2006-2008 American Community Survey

Table 27 presents the analysis results for VMT reduction using TRIMMS 2.0. It is estimated that TDM strategies involving all financial subsidies, tele-work, and flexible work schedule combined will reduce VMT by 1.72-1.73%. TDM strategies involving all financial subsidies will reduce VMT by 1.71-1.72% and a transit incentive subsidy will reduce VMT by 1.69-1.70%.

Table 27 VMT Reduction from Large Employment Commuters by Scenarios % Total VMT Reduction All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Year Baseline Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. 2020 0.00% -1.71% -1.69% -1.72% 2035 0.00% -1.72% -1.70% -1.73%

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 72 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 28 shows the adjusted forecast daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 for each scenario. The adjusted daily VMT was calculated by applying the percent VMT reduction identified for each scenario from TRIMMS2.0 (Table 27) to the portion of commuters working for large employers (Table 24). The adjusted total VMT was then obtained by subtracting the calculated VMT reductions from the total daily VMT. Table 29 and Table 30 present the amount of VMT and trip reductions by scenario for 2020 and 2035. The estimated trip reduction in Table 30 represents the amount of commuter trips associates with large employers that would be eliminated during the day as a result of TDM strategies.

Table 28 Adjusted Total Daily VMT for 2020 and 2035 Adjusted Daily VMT All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Year Baseline Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. 2020 19,895,926 19,865,328 19,865,748 19,865,197 2035 24,375,084 24,337,330 24,337,842 24,337,170

Table 29 Daily VMT Reductions for 2020 and 2035 Total VMT Reduction /day All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Year Baseline Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. 2020 0 -30,598 -30,178 -30,729 2035 0 -37,754 -37,242 -37,914

Table 30 Daily Trip Reductions for 2020 and 2035 Trip Reduction / day All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Year Baseline Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. 2020 0 -1,404 -1,385 -1,410 2035 0 -1,711 -1,688 -1,719

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 73 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

GHG Estimate Estimation for GHG typically involves three vehicle activities: 1. Running 2. Start 3. Idling

Idling activity was not considered in the analysis for light duty autos mode, while running and start activities were included.

GHG Impacts from Running Activity GHG Components

On-road mobile sources consist of three compounds including Carbon Dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), and Nitrous Oxide (N2O)13. The green house gas inventory is presented in units of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-eq) which weights and combines contributions for each green house gas emitted. Each compound differs in warming influence due to differing radiative properties and atmospheric half lives. The carbon dioxide equivalent emissions metric is based on each gasses potential to cause global warming, relative to that of CO214. Carbon dioxide equivalent emissions are defined as the amount of carbon dioxide emission that would cause the same time- integrated radiative forcing, over a given time horizon, as an emitted amount of a long lived GHG or a mixture of GHGs. The equivalent carbon dioxide emission is obtained by multiplying the emission of a GHG by its Global Warming Potential (GWP) for the given time horizon. For a mix of GHGs it is obtained by summing the equivalent carbon dioxide emissions of each gas.

GWP factors for use in calculating carbon dioxide equivalent emissions are 1 for CO2, 21 for CH4, and 310 for N2O2,15,16. It should be noted that the newest estimates for the global warming potential of N2O is slightly lower than the value used by the California Air Resources Board (298 vs. 310)4. This analysis uses the older value of 310 to be consistent with the State's methodology. Composite Emission Rates Composite emission rates are presented in Table 31. Emissions are a function of the mix of vehicle classes; vehicle ages; vehicle maintenances; ambient conditions; and vehicle operating speed. Emission rates used in this analysis reflect the average vehicle population from California’s major urban centers in the Bay Area, Central Valley, and Southern California. Temperature and humidity of 70o Fahrenheit and 30% relative humidity were assumed, and rates were provided in 5mph increments up to 65mph. The rates were determined 2020 and 2035. There are many sub-classes of operating vehicles associated with different emission rates, however, only the light duty auto (LDA), light duty truck (LDT), medium duty truck (MDT), and motorcycle (MCY) vehicle classes were considered in the calculation. These vehicle classes are most applicable to the analysis of employer based TDM strategies.

For GHG calculations, N2O emissions are assumed to be proportional to fuel consumption2 and are estimated using conversion factors of 1.92 and 0.332 grams of N2O per gallon of fuel consumed for gasoline and diesel, respectively17. These factors are California specific and were estimated by the Air Resources Board for use in the California green house gas inventory.

13 Rogers, J.; Eslinger, K.; Hunsaker, L.; Li, L.; Lowery, N.; Raymond, J.; Scott, K.; Vayssieres, M. California 1990 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Level and 2020 Emissions Limit; California Air Resources Board: Sacramento, California, 2007. 14 IPCC., Climate Change 2007 - Mitigation of Climate Change : Working Group III contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the IPCC. In Cambridge University Press: Leiden, 2007; p 863 p. 15 Forster, P.; Ramaswamy, V.; Artaxo, P.; Berntsen, T.; Betts, R.; Fahey, D. W.; Haywood, J.; Lean, J.; Lowe, D. C.; Myhre, G.; Nganga, J.; Prinn, R.; Raga, G.; Michael, S.; Van Dorland, R. 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: [S.l.], 2007. 16 IPCC., Climate change 1995 : IPCC second assessment : a report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Intergovernmental Panel on climate Change: [S.l.], 1995; p viii, 64 p. 17 CARB, C. A. R. B., Documentation of California's Greenhouse Gas Inventory: categories 1A3bi, 1A3bii, and 1A3biii. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 74 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 31 CO2 Equivalent Emission Rates for Urban Fleets 2020 2035

Light & Med Duty Light & Med Duty Vehicles plus Motor Vehicles plus SPEED Cycles Motor Cycles mpg g/mi g/mi Idle n/a n/a 5 1,191 1,191 10 896 896 15 701 700 20 570 569 25 481 480 30 422 421 35 384 383 40 363 362 45 356 355 50 362 361 55 383 382 60 420 419 65 478 477

Based on EMFAC 2007 fleet assumptions for Sacramento Valley, San Diego, San Francisco, San Joaquin Valley, South Central Coast, and South Coast air basins; 70 Fahrenheit with 30% Humidity CO2 equivalent = CO2 + (21*CH4) + (310*N2O) (mass bases), where N2O emissions assume 1.92 grams N2O per gal. of gasoline used and 0.332 grams N2O per gal. of gasoline used

Running Activities Running activities for 2020 and 2035 were obtained from EMFAC 2007. A running activity is presented in 5-mph speed range from 5 mph to 65 mph. Figure 10 and Figure 11 shows a speed distribution estimated by EMFAC2007 for 2020 and 2035, respectively.

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 75 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Figure 10 2020 VMT by Speed Distribution for Light and Medium Duty Vehicles and Motorcycles Speed Distribution for 2020 Spd65 Spd05 Spd10 Spd60 3% 1% 1% Spd20 3% 3% Spd15 Spd55 4% 6% Spd25 6% Spd50 11% Spd30 11%

Spd45 14%

Spd35 16%

Spd40 21%

Source: EMPAC 2007

Figure 11 2035 Speed Distribution for Light and Medium Duty Vehicles and Motorcycles

Speed Distribution for 2035 Spd55 Spd60Spd65Spd05 Spd10 2% 0% 2% 2% 3% Spd15 3%

Spd50 Spd20 12% 7%

Spd45 Spd25 6% 10%

Spd40 17% Spd30 21%

Spd35 15%

Source: EMFAC 2007

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 76 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

With the information for estimate VMT reductions (Table 29) and speed distributions (Figure 10 and Figure 11),

Table 32 shows the estimated VMT reduction by speed class for 2020 and 2035 and Table 33 shows the estimated reduction in CO2 emissions (grams/day) based on a running activity for each TDM strategy. TDM strategies are estimated to reduce on-road mobile source CO2-eq emissions from running vehicle activity by up to 12,767,931 grams or 14.07 tons per day in 2020 and 17,003,783 grams or 18.74 tons per day in 2035. A financial incentive strategy can reduce on-road mobile source CO2-eq emissions from running vehicle activity by up to 12,713,361 grams or 14.01 tons per day in 2020 and 16,932,019 grams or 18.66 tons per day in 2035. A transit incentive strategy can reduce on-road mobile source CO2-eq from running vehicle activity by up to 12,538,632 grams or 13.82 tons per day in 2020 and 16,702,233 grams or 18.41 tons per day in 2035.

Table 32 VMT Reduction by Speed Class EMFAC 2007 Speed Distribution VMT Reduction (miles / day) Light & Medium Duty All Financial Incentive Transit Incenntive Incentive+Flex. Work Hrs. Speed Bin 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 Spd05 0.61% 2.06% 187 777 185 767 188 781 Spd10 1.12% 2.53% 342 955 337 942 343 959 Spd15 3.90% 3.31% 1,193 1,248 1,176 1,231 1,198 1,254 Spd20 3.03% 6.80% 928 2,566 915 2,532 932 2,577 Spd25 6.07% 10.40% 1,858 3,925 1,833 3,872 1,866 3,942 Spd30 11.40% 21.38% 3,487 8,070 3,439 7,961 3,502 8,104 Spd35 16.20% 15.21% 4,958 5,742 4,890 5,665 4,980 5,767 Spd40 21.43% 16.66% 6,558 6,288 6,468 6,203 6,586 6,315 Spd45 14.43% 5.63% 4,414 2,125 4,354 2,097 4,433 2,134 Spd50 10.58% 11.76% 3,238 4,440 3,193 4,379 3,252 4,458 Spd55 5.86% 1.83% 1,792 690 1,767 681 1,799 693 Spd60 2.78% 0.17% 849 65 838 64 853 65 Spd65 2.59% 2.28% 793 861 782 850 797 865 Total 100.00% 100.00% 30,598 37,754 30,178 37,242 30,729 37,914

Table 33 CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction Per Day from Running Activity

CO2 Reduction (grams / day) All Financial Incentive Transit Incenntive Incentive+Flex. Work Hrs. Speed Bin 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 Spd05 223,267 926,039 220,199 913,472 224,226 929,964 Spd10 306,127 855,409 301,920 843,800 307,441 859,035 Spd15 836,267 874,279 824,774 862,414 839,857 877,985 Spd20 528,983 1,460,213 521,712 1,440,396 531,253 1,466,402 Spd25 894,404 1,884,748 882,112 1,859,170 898,244 1,892,737 Spd30 1,471,414 3,396,356 1,451,191 3,350,264 1,477,730 3,410,751 Spd35 1,904,770 2,199,388 1,878,591 2,169,540 1,912,946 2,208,710 Spd40 2,380,709 2,275,349 2,347,989 2,244,470 2,390,927 2,284,993 Spd45 1,571,716 754,315 1,550,115 744,078 1,578,462 757,512 Spd50 1,173,422 1,604,018 1,157,295 1,582,250 1,178,459 1,610,817 Spd55 686,091 263,516 676,662 259,940 689,036 264,633 Spd60 356,710 27,284 351,807 26,914 358,241 27,400 Spd65 379,481 411,104 374,265 405,525 381,110 412,847 Total 12,713,361 16,932,019 12,538,632 16,702,233 12,767,931 17,003,783 Dowling Associates, Incorporated 77 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

GHG Impacts from Start Activity

Emission rates for CO2, N2O, and CH4 were obtained using CARB’s on-road mobile source emission inventory model BURDEN. The CO2 equivalent rates were derived using the same method for a running activity.

Table 34 shows estimated CO2 equivalent rates in 2020 and 2035 for all technologies of light duty autos (LDA) and light duty trucks (LDT) and Table 35 shows a percent between LDA and LDT assumed on roads.

Table 34 CO2 Equivalent for Start Activity

CO2-eq (g / trip) Vehicle Type 2020 2035 LDA (59%) 382 246 LDT (41%) 502 308

LDA = Light Duty Auto LDT = Light Duty Truck

Table 35 Percent Sub-Type for Light Duty Vehicles Vehicle Type Percent LDA 59 LDT 41 Total 100

LDA = Light Duty Auto LDT = Light Duty Truck

The estimated trip reductions from TRIMMS (Table 30) were assumed to be all from light duty vehicles. Thus, trip reduction estimates were classified into either LDA or LDT.

Table 36 presents the trip reduction estimates by vehicle type for each TDM scenario. Table 37 presents estimate CO2 reductions from start activities, which are products of CO2 equivalent emission rates (Table 34) and estimate trip reductions (Table 36).

Table 36 Light Duty Vehicle Trip Reduction by TDM Strategies Trip Reduction / Day All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Vehicle Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. Type 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 LDA 829 1,010 817 996 832 1,014 LDT 576 702 568 692 578 705 Total 1,404 1,711 1,385 1,688 1,410 1,719

LDA = Light Duty Auto LDT = Light Duty Truck

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 78 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Table 37 CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction from Start Activity by TDM Strategies

CO2 Reduction (grams / day) All Financial Transit Incentive+Flex. Vehicle Incentive Incenntive Work Hrs. Type 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 LDA 316,280 248,637 311,931 245,260 317,626 249,692 LDT 289,219 216,434 285,242 213,495 290,449 217,352 Total 605,499 465,070 597,173 458,755 608,075 467,044

TDM Impacts on GHG

Table 38 summarizes for estimate total CO2 reductions for each TDM strategy. An application of TDM strategies (incentive and flexible work hours combined) is estimated to remove on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by up to 14.74 tons per day in 2020 and 19.25 tons per day in 2035. The application of transit incentive alone would reduce on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by up to 14.48 tons per day in 2020 and 18.92 tons per day in 2035. Establishing more financial subsidy programs (i.e. vanpool, carpool, bike, and walk) on top of a transit incentive would remove on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by 0.20 tons per day in 2020 and 0.25 tons per day in 2035.

Table 38 Total CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction per Day by TDM Strategies

CO2 Reduction in grams / day (tons / day) All Financial Incentive Transit Incentive Incentive + Flex. Work Hrs. Activity 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 Start 605,499 (0.67) 465,070 (0.51) 597,173 (0.66) 458,755 (0.51) 608,075 (0.67) 467,044 (0.51) 12,713,361 16,932,019 12,538,632 16,702,233 12,767,931 17,003,783 Running (14.01) (18.66) (13.82) (18.41) (14.07) (18.74) 13,318,860 17,397,089 13,135,805 17,160,988 13,376,005 17,470,827 Total (14.68) (19.17) (14.48) (18.92) (14.74) (19.25) Conversion: 1 ton = 907,184.74 grams

Dowling Associates, Incorporated 79 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010

Clean Car and Low Carbon Fuel Standards A new regulation for clean-car and low carbon fuel standard has been adopted after 200718. These regulations include: Pavley I – A clean-car standard for new passenger vehicles model years 2009 through 2016 Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) – A fuel standard that requires a reduction of at least 10 percent in the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by 2020

The emission rates obtained from EMFAC2007 do not reflect these new regulations. In order to comply with California’s vehicle and fuel standards, CARB has developed analysis tool for Metropolitan Planning Agencies (MPO) to assess the greenhouse gas reductions. Pavley I + LCFS Postprocessor – Version 1.0 was used to estimate the greenhouse gas emission reductions from the new regulations based on the results from EMFAC2007. The postprocessor extracts CO2 emission data for passenger vehicles from the BURDEN output. It then applies the Pavley and LCFS reduction factors to the CO2 emissions by vehicle model year, vehicle class, and calendar year.

Table 39 summarizes results for reductions based on Pavley I and LCFS.

Table 39 Pavley + LCFS Reductions

Pavley CO2 Reduction All Financial Incentive+Flex. Incentive Transit Incenntive Work Hrs. 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 28.29% 37.46% 28.29% 37.46% 28.29% 37.46%

Table 40 shows adjusted CO2-eq emission reduction for each TDM strategy. With new standards for clean-car and LCFS, it is estimated that TDM strategies can remove on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by 10.57 tons per day in 2020 and 12.04 tons per day in 2035. A transit subsidy alone can remove on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by 10.38 tons per day in 2020 and 11.83 tons per day in 2035. A combination of financial subsidy can remove on-road mobile source CO2 emissions by 10.53 tons per day in 2020 and 11.99 tons per day in 2035.

Table 40 Adjusted Total CO2 (Equivalent) Reduction per Day by TDM Strategies

CO2 Reduction in grams / day (tons / day) All Financial Incentive Transit Incentive Incentive + Flex. Work Hrs. Activity 2020 2035 2020 2035 2020 2035 Start 434,212 (0.48) 290,845 (0.32) 428,241 (0.47) 286,896 (0.32) 436,061 (0.48) 292,080 (0.32) 9,116,925 10,588,939 8,991,625 10,445,236 9,156,093 10,633,829 Running (10.05) (11.67) (9.91) (11.51) (10.09) (11.72) 9,551,136 10,879,784 9,419,866 10,732,132 9,592,153 10,925,909 Total (10.53) (11.99) (10.38) (11.83) (10.57) (12.04)

18 Pavley I + Low Carbon Fuel Standard Postprocessor Version 1.0, User’s Guide, Air Resources Board, California Environmental Protection Agency. Dowling Associates, Incorporated 80 San Joaquin Council of Governments – TDM Plan August 26, 2010