Laserfiche WebLink
11/18/2013 CAPCOA <br /> � • • <br /> MP#LU-1.7&LU-2.1.1.4 PDT-1 Parking Policy/ Pricing <br /> Mitigation Method: <br /> o Actual parkingprovision—ITE parkinggenerationrate <br /> /o VMT Reduction = x 0.5 <br /> ITE parkinggenerationrate <br /> Assumptions: <br /> Data based upon the following references: <br /> [1] Nelson\Nygaard, 2005. Crediting Low-Traffic Developments (p. 16) <br /> http://www.montgomeryplanninq.org/transportation/documents/TripGenerationAn <br /> alvsisUsingURBEMIS.pdf <br /> All trips affected are assumed average trip lengths to convert from percentage vehicle <br /> trip reduction to VMT reduction (% vehicle trips = °/aVMT). <br /> Emission Reduction Ranges and Variables: <br /> Pollutant Category Emissions Reductions <br /> COZe 5—12.5% of running <br /> PM 5—12.5% of running <br /> CO 5—12.5% of running <br /> NOx 5—12.5% of running <br /> S02 5—12.5% of running <br /> ROG 3—7.5%of total <br /> Discussion: <br /> The literature suggests that a 50% reduction in conventional parking provision rates (per <br /> ITE rates) should serve as a typical ceiling for the reduction calculation. The upper <br /> range of VMT reduction will vary based on the size of the development (total number of <br /> spaces provided). ITE rates are used as baseline conditions to measure the <br /> effectiveness of this strategy. <br /> Though not specifically documented in the literature, the degree of effectiveness of this <br /> measure will vary based on the level of urbanization of the project and surrounding <br /> areas, level of existing transit service, level of existing pedestrian and bicycle networks <br /> and other factors which would complement the shift away from single-occupant vehicle <br /> travel. <br /> 53 The percentage reduction reflects emission reductions from running emissions. The actual value will <br /> be less than this when starting and evaporative emissions are factored into the analysis. <br /> 208 PDT-1 <br /> 2 RESO.#15305 <br /> MUFF#603 <br />