MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA · 1:15 to 3:15 p.m. SANDAG, Conference Room 7 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231 Staff Contacts: Carolina Gregor (619) 699-1989 [email protected]

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA

REGIONAL PLANNING TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP The Regional Planning Technical Working Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda. Thursday, July 11, 2013 1:15 to 3:15 p.m. SANDAG, Conference Room 7 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231

Staff Contacts: Carolina Gregor (619) 699-1989 [email protected]

Susan Baldwin (619) 699-1943 [email protected]

AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS

• ALTERNATIVE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

• SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN: TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA

• SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT REGIONAL PLAN: INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSED STOP AND STATION AREA TYPOLOGIES

• SERIES 13 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST: DRAFT SUBREGIONAL FORECAST

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or see www.511sd.com for route information. Secure bicycle parking is available in the building garage off Fourth Avenue.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), SANDAG will accommodate persons who require assistance in order to participate in SANDAG meetings. If such assistance is required, please contact SANDAG at (619) 699-1900 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.

To request this document or related reports in an alternative format, please call (619) 699-1900, (619) 699-1904 (TTY), or fax (619) 699-1905.

REGIONAL PLANNING TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP

Thursday, July 11, 2013

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS INFORMATION

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Members of the public will have the opportunity to address the Regional

Planning Technical Working Group (TWG) on any issue within the jurisdiction of

SANDAG that is not on this agenda. Public speakers are limited to three minutes

or less per person.

+3. MEETING SUMMARY OF JUNE 13, 2013 APPROVE

The TWG should review and approve the meeting summary from its June 13, 2013,

meeting.

CHAIR’S REPORT

4. SGIP PROCESS REPORT (Bill Chopyk) INFORMATION

The Chair and others would like to discuss the lessons learned from the evaluation process on the SGIP.

REPORTS

+4. TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM: STATUS UPDATE (Suchi Mukherjee)

INFORMATION

SANDAG approved the first round of Smart Growth Incentive Program projects

under TransNet in May 2009. Two rounds of Active Transportation Program

grants were approved in June 2009, and September 2012. This report provides

an overview of the progress made through March 31, 2013, by the grant

recipients. During July 2013, the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee

and Transportation Committee will be asked to review amendments to existing

grant projects. These include a no-cost, time-only schedule extension for the

City of National City’s Bicycle Parking Enhancements and a request to transfer

the completion of the City of San Diego’s 4th Avenue/Quince and 4th &

5th Avenues/Nutmeg Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming projects to SANDAG

for completion through the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program.

+5. ALTERNATIVE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES (Carolina Gregor and Phil Trom)

DISCUSSION

The first phase of developing the scenarios focuses on alternative land use

concepts that could be tested with the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and

Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS) transportation network. A joint

TWG and Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee workshop was held in

May to develop ideas. A San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan workshop was held

in June, where the public was asked to provide input on alternative land use

concepts, emerging technologies, and related topics. Staff will provide an overview

of the input received and ideas that will be presented to the Regional Planning and

Transportation Committees on July 19, 2013. In addition, staff will present an

initial list of emerging transportation technologies for review and discussion.

** REVISED **

2

+6. SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN: TRANSPORTATION

PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA (Rachel Kennedy) DISCUSSION

At the June 13, 2013, TWG meeting, SANDAG staff provided an overview for the transportation project evaluation criteria development process. SANDAG staff has received initial feedback from last month’s SANDAG working group meetings, and San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan workshops. Building upon the criteria from the previously adopted 2050 RTP/SCS, SANDAG has developed preliminary draft evaluation criteria to be used for developing a prioritized list of transportation projects for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. The TWG will be asked to discuss and provide input on the preliminary draft evaluation criteria.

+7. SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT REGIONAL PLAN: INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSED STOP AND STATION AREA TYPOLOGIES (Christine Eary)

DISCUSSION

Staff has begun development of the Safe Routes to Transit Regional Plan, a key component of the Active Transportation Implementation Strategy. Draft proposed typologies have been developed in order to classify the over 6,000 transit stop and station areas in the region. These typologies will later be associated with levels of bicycle and pedestrian improvements, for the purpose of identifying potential active transportation projects and cost estimates in transit project areas. These projects will be included in San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. The Working Group is asked to discuss the proposed typologies and provide feedback.

+8. SERIES 13 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST: DRAFT SUBREGIONAL FORECAST (Kirby Brady)

DISCUSSION

Staff will present a revised draft of the Series 13 sub-regional forecast. The sub-regional forecast has been revised based on feedback provided to SANDAG staff from the local jurisdictions following the June 13, 2013 TWG meeting. The draft sub-regional forecast will be presented to the SANDAG Board on Friday, July 26, 2013. The attachments for this item will be distributed by email on Tuesday, July 9.

9. ADJOURNMENT AND NEXT MEETING INFORMATION

The next TWG meeting is proposed to be held jointly with the Cities/County Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) on August 1, 2013, (time to be determined).

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

San Diego Association of Governments


July 11, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3

Action Requested: APPROVE

MEETING SUMMARY OF JUNE 13, 2013 File Number 3102000

Please note: Audio file of meeting is available on the SANDAG website (www.sandag.org) on the TWG page. Agenda Item 1: Welcome and Introductions The meeting was called to order by Bill Chopyk (City of La Mesa), Chair of the Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG). Agenda Item 2: Public Comments and Communications Members of the public had the opportunity to address the TWG on any issue within the jurisdiction of the respective group that was not on the agenda. Announcements: Bill Fulton has been appointed as the new Planning Director for City of San Diego. Jeff Murphy transferred from the County to the City of Encinitas as Planning Director. Kelly Broughton, previously with the City of San Diego, will be serving as the new Development Services Director for the City of Chula Vista. Item 3: Meeting Summary

TWG members were asked to review and approve the summary for the May 9, 2013, TWG meeting. Action: Upon a motion by Barbara Redlitz (City of Escondido) and a second by Manjeet Ranu (City of El Cajon), the May 9, 2013, TWG meeting summary was approved unanimously. Agenda Item 4: TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program: Grant Application Recommendation for Fiscal Year 2013 Cycle (Information) Agenda Item 4 was a consent item and was briefly mentioned to provide TWG members with the opportunity for questions and discussions regarding the item. There were no questions or comments regarding this item. Agenda Item 5: 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy Commitments Progress Report) (Information) Agenda Item 5 was a consent item and was briefly mentioned to provide TWG members with the opportunity for questions and discussions regarding the item. The report has been posted on the SANDAG website.

4

http://www.sandag.org/uploads/projectid/projectid_349_16224.pdf

There were no questions or comments regarding this item. Agenda Item 6: Fifth Cycle Housing Element Status Report (Information) Susan Baldwin (SANDAG) presented to the TWG regarding the current status of local jurisdiction housing elements, which were due on April 30, 2013, as well as local compliance findings. Ms. Baldwin reported that 13 jurisdictions (including the City of Del Mar) have completed their housing elements and been found in compliance by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), 4 jurisdictions have completed draft housing elements (Oceanside, Poway, El Cajon, and San Marcos) found in compliance by HCD, and 2 jurisdictions are working on their housing elements as part of comprehensive General Plan updates (Carlsbad and Encinitas). Following the implementation of a program regarding emergency shelters, the city Oceanside’s housing element will be in compliance with state law. The City of Poway recently adopted its housing element, which is now under final review by the State. Diane Langager (City of Encinitas) commented that the City of Encinitas is considering the separation of their housing element from the General Plan update process. Ms. Langager stated that Encinitas will continue to update the housing element on a four year cycle. Don Neu (City of Carlsbad) reported that the City of Carlsbad housing element is complete and is planned for submittal to City Council in July, but will not meet the deadline, requiring Carlsbad to produce a housing element every four year rather than every eight years. Karen Brindley (San Marcos) commented that the San Marcos housing element will be presented to City Council for approval on June 25, 2013. Bill Chopyk reminded TWG members that August 28, 2013, (120 days from the April 30th due date) is the deadline for the housing elements to be adopted by City Council. Agenda Item 7: San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan: Public Workshops Underway (Information) Phil Trom (SANDAG) provided a brief update on SANDAG’s series of public workshops related to the regional plan. Mr. Trom stated that two of seven workshops have been completed and described the overall approach. Evening Workshops are held every Thursday in June throughout the region, with workshops remaining in Escondido, Oceanside, and La Mesa. Daytime workshops will occur at the Caltrans District 11 building in Old Town every third Friday, May through July, with remaining events taking place June 21 and July 19. Mr. Trom went on to share photos from the most recent workshop in San Ysidro, which was entirely bilingual, and shared a video produced by SANDAG to kick-off each workshop. Mr. Trom encouraged TWG members to attend and to spread the word in their jurisdictions. He added that a brainstorming session with the Cities County Transportation Advisory Council (CTAC) would be held at SANDAG on June 27, 2013, to discuss the role of emerging technologies in the development of the regional plan and invited TWG members to participate.

5

Coleen Clementson (SANDAG) expressed thanks to all who participated in the video and stated that the video could be made available for any jurisdiction that would like to utilize it as an educational or outreach tool, noting that community based organizations have been using the video to host small scale workshops and help convey the scope of what SANDAG works on. Agenda Item 8: San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan: Alternative Land Use and Transportation Scenarios to Further Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions- Status Report (Information) Carolina Gregor (SANDAG) provided a status report on the alternative land use and transportation scenario effort, including the results of the joint TWG/CTAC brainstorming session which focused on land use scenarios. Ms. Gregor informed the TWG that the effort is will occur in three phases: phase one will focus on land use scenario possibilities to test using the existing RTP/SCS transportation network; the second phase will look at alternative transportation network scenarios and will integrate emerging technology where possible; and the third phase will build on this work to consider potential policies for incorporation into the regional plan. Ms. Gregor went on to explain that a set of land use scenarios is in development, following the joint TWG/CTAC brainstorming outcomes, and based on a meeting with a subset of staff members and local jurisdiction representatives to refine scenarios. Visualizations will be developed with the support of the consultant team to provide a context for input at the upcoming workshop on land use and transportation being held at Caltrans on June 21, 2013. Ms. Gregor stated that the outcomes of the land use scenario effort will be tested using UrbanFootprint (a sketch planning tool) to assess potential GHG emission reductions. Ms. Gregor encouraged TWG members to attend the upcoming workshop focused on land use and transportation and described the six sub-topics which include: Land Use Scenarios, Mobility, Emerging Technology, Parking and Pricing, Transportation Project Evaluation, and Active Transportation. Ms. Gregor concluded by emphasizing the interest of policy makers in emerging technology as it relates to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and urged TWG members to attend the joint session with CTAC on June 27 from 9 to 11 a.m. Agenda Item 9: San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan: Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria (Discussion) Rachel Kennedy (SANDAG) presented on the update of the transportation project evaluation process for the next regional plan and requested input from TWG members regarding the evaluation criteria tools used to rank and decide on projects to include in the revenue constrained network. Ms. Kennedy opened the discussion with a brief background on past evaluation criteria efforts and processes, which included an ad hoc working group comprised of representation from partner agencies and standing SANDAG working groups to provide input on criteria, various presentations to SANDAG working groups, and ultimately approval by the SANDAG Board of Directors. Ms. Kennedy asked TWG members to keep in mind that projects compete categorically by mode (e.g. transit versus transit projects, freeway versus freeway projects).

6

Ms. Kennedy continued to describe the current effort to update the transportation project evaluation criteria, stating that SANDAG has contracted with a consultant (RSG) to assist with the criteria development process and will be utilizing modeling tools (ABM and PECAS) to support and update the criteria in new ways. Ms. Kennedy explained that SANDAG is requesting general feedback on the evaluation criteria and that refined criteria will be represented to the TWG in July for further review. Additionally, public outreach will be performed via the “Transportation Project Evaluation” table at the June 21 public workshop. Ms. Kennedy went on to highlight new components of the current approach to developing evaluation criteria, including a greater emphasis on public health, the development of a set of criteria to be applied to active transportation projects, and a refined consideration of social equity, using modeling tools (ABM/PECAS) to obtain a closer look at demographic information. Andy Hamilton (CARB) requested that the comments received from the Public Health Stakeholders Working Group (PHSWG) regarding the Transportation Evaluation Criteria be shared with the TWG in his absence. Printed copies of the comments were distributed. Elyse Lowe (Move San Diego) questioned how SANDAG’s Active Transportation Early Action Program (EAP) correlates with the development of evaluation criteria for active transportation projects. Coleen Clementson (SANDAG) responded that the current approach relies on criteria that has already been approved in the Bike Plan and will support the EAP. However, Ms. Clementson noted that as new funding becomes available, projects could be reshuffled and placed into the RTIP. Ms. Kennedy expanded on the response, mentioning that the active transportation project evaluation criteria would help prioritize projects that get placed into the RTP. In response to a follow-up question from Ms. Lowe, Ms. Kennedy clarified that criteria are in place that allocate points to projects for serving smart growth opportunity areas. Manjeet Ranu (City of El Cajon) stated that the criteria greatly emphasizes mobility, but suggested that an increased emphasis on land use and the likelihood of projects facilitating future investment from the private sector, as well as a focus on quality of life measures and design guidelines, should be captured in the evaluation criteria for transportation projects. Mr. Ranu emphasized the need for a well-rounded set of criteria. Kathy Garcia (City of Del Mar) expressed consensus with Mr. Ranu’s comment and expanded, stating that large scale facility siting and a consideration of land use relationships and adjacency should be incorporated into the review of projects. Marilyn Ponseggi (City of Chula Vista) suggested that the sources of traffic generation should be included in the consideration of transportation projects. Bill Chopyk (City of La Mesa) questioned the exclusion of social equity criteria from freight and rail grade separation projects, observing that social equity is included as part of the criteria for highway corridor and transit service projects. Mr. Chopyk asked for clarification on this matter and suggested

7

that social equity be included in freight and rail grade separation projects due to the impact of freight on many neighborhoods. Agenda Item 10: Series 13 Draft Sub-Regional Growth Forecast (Discussion) Kirby Brady (SANDAG) and Grace Chung (SANDAG) updated the TWG with a presentation that included a short background on the forecast process, an overview of the regionwide forecast, the outcomes of the draft subregional forecast, and the next steps in the process. Ms. Kirby reminded the TWG that SANDAG is using new market driven modeling tools (ABM/PECAS) and that the regionwide forecast projects a decrease in population and housing units from than the Series 12 forecast following revisions by the California Department of Finance. Ms. Brady reviewed the key outcomes of the Series 13 regional forecast which by 2050 projects a population of 4.07 million people (973,000 increase), 1.9 million jobs (489,000 increase), and about 1.5 million housing units (330,000 unit increase). Grace Chung (SANDAG) reviewed the data collection process which relied heavily on a new online review tool to foster two-way communication with local jurisdictions and efficiently review and update information provided by each jurisdiction regarding existing land use plans and policies. Ms. Chung emphasized the collection of detailed information at the parcel level including land use, housing unit, and other site specific information to incorporate accurate local criteria into the forecast. Ms. Brady reported that there is sufficient capacity in the region to site the housing projected in the forecast and reviewed the subregional forecast, which included growth projections for population, housing and employment for each jurisdiction. Ms. Brady highlighted the fact that, compared to Series 12, the Series 13 subregional forecast projects fewer overall housing units, also explaining that about 80 percent of the growth that occurs in the first increment of the forecast is site specific projects (projects in the pipeline and expected to be built in the next ten years), and that employment growth is frontloaded, due to an anticipated recovery from the economic recession. Ms. Brady concluded that a smaller overall labor force is projected in future as a function of the aging population. Ms. Brady ended her presentation informing TWG members that they will be contacted to review the sub-regional projections and provide comments during the next three weeks. At the July 11 TWG meeting the final sub-regional results will be reviewed, and then presented to the SANDAG Board of Directors on July 26. Ms. Brady reminded the TWG that the Series 13 Sub-Regional Forecast is not final until it is adopted with the Sustainable Communities Strategy, so jurisdictions will still have the ability to incorporate changes between now and final adoption. In response to inquiries from various TWG members, Ms. Brady clarified that everything in the forecast is based on the physical local jurisdiction boundaries as they exist today. Potential annexations are not included in the forecast unless provided by jurisdictions as inputs to the current forecast. Elyse Lowe (Move San Diego) suggested that information regarding site specific growth projections should be used to inform the TOD strategy process by sharing the information with the consultant that will assist in the preparation of the strategy plans.

8

TWG members agreed that this is public information, but deferred to the SANDAG Board of Directors for official consent to share the information. In response to a question by Bill Chopyk (La Mesa) regarding differences between the forecast numbers and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), Susan Baldwin noted that the RHNA is based on the previous forecast (Series 12) that projected a greater number of housing units (388,000); adopted local jurisdiction general plans now have sufficient housing capacity for the next 40 years. Rich Whipple (City of Poway) commented that it would be useful for SANDAG to make presentations to city councils about the growth forecast and suggested that a more modest approach be taken to what could be perceived as an aggressive growth forecast, relating the outcomes of the economic recession and subsequent population loss in Poway. Bill Chopyk (La Mesa) responded that a city’s approach can impact the numbers that form the forecast and this should be taken into consideration. Carolina Gregor (SANDAG) encouraged TWG members to maintain good communication with elected officials in their jurisdictions in order to help keep policymakers informed about SANDAG work. Agenda Item 11: 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy Transit Plan- Rail Advance Planning (Information) Dave Schumacher (SANDAG) made a presentation about the new transit projects undergoing advance planning at SANDAG, with a focus on four new rail lines. The first line would extend the Mid-Coast from Sorrento Mesa to connect a major job center, then to the I-15 BRT. The second would create trolley access to the to the beaches, likely connecting Pacific Beach to the Mid-Coast line at the Balboa station and tying into the Clairemont and Kearny Mesa job centers before heading South on I-15 to the Green Line in Mission Valley, and ultimately to SDSU. The third would build off of the Mid-City Rapid project by providing higher speed bus service along the El Cajon Boulevard and College Avenue corridors, which could eventually merit the introduction of Light Rail Transit or trolley due to high ridership. Lastly, an inland version of the existing Blue Line along the I-805 and I-15 corridors could alleviate pressure from the Blue Line, which projects high ridership, and would provide improved access to inland areas. Mr. Schumacher stated that there is a focus on tying into downtown and new jobs centers such as Kearny Mesa, UTC, Sorrento Mesa, and Otay Mesa to create a true system where there are multiple options to go to from point A to point B via light rail. In all, Mr. Schumacher reported that roughly 150 miles of new rail is being studied. The next steps in the process will prioritize segments of proposed new rail projects to determine when they get built by breaking lines into logical segments and doing traffic modeling to prioritize projects based on cost effectiveness, demand, community impacts, and other criteria. Top segments will then be selected on which to perform a detailed alignment study, explore station options, and decide the priorities for the next RTP and the funds available, with the inclusion of an alternatives analysis.

9

Mr. Schumacher concluded, stating that the study has been underway with a consultant team, Parsons Brinkerhoff, for approximately six months and that updates will be brought back to the TWG as the process continues. Elyse Lowe (Move San Diego) suggested that the Smart Growth Concept Map be included as an overlay to ensure coordination related to smart growth. Kathy Garcia (City of Del mar) commented that there is a transit gap between North and South County and that the current transit network is not an integrated system, highlighting the lack of East-West connectivity aside from the SPRINTER. Mr. Schumacher responded that various strategies to better integrate North County rail and even better connect San Diego County to Los Angeles are being evaluated, but that the Coastal Corridor lacks the densities to support rail investment, suggesting BRT as a potential interim investment. Mr. Schumacher cited Palomar Airport road as an example of a higher density employment area that is overly auto-oriented and would likely not provide pedestrian access to a sufficient number people for it to be viable. Agenda Item 12: Lessons Learned and Next Steps on Del Mar Specific Plan (Information) Kathy Garcia (City of Del Mar) gave a presentation on the process and outcomes of the Del Mar Village Specific plan, which was unanimously approved by the Del mar City Council, but then defeated during a city voter initiative in November 2012. Ms. Garcia discussed various approaches taken by the city to incorporate elements of the plan found favorable by the community. Agenda Item 13: Adjournment and Next Meeting (Information) The next TWG meeting will be held on July 11, 2013, from 1:15 to 3:15 p.m. Action: The TWG meeting was adjourned by Bill Chopyk (City of La Mesa), Chair TWG.

10

San Diego Association of Governments – TransNet Program

INDEPENDENT TAXPAYER OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

July 10, 2013

AGENDA ITEM NO.: 8

Action Requested: RECOMMEND

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM: STATUS UPDATE AND PROPOSED GRANT AMENDMENTS File Numbers 3300100, 3300300 Introduction SANDAG staff provides status updates on TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program projects to the ITOC, Transportation Committee, and Regional Planning Committee on a quarterly basis. The July 19, 2013, Joint Regional Planning and Transportation Committee Report (Attachment 1) provides an overview of the progress made by each grant recipient through March 31, 2013, and a description of three proposed grant amendments as noted below. Recommendation The ITOC is asked to recommend that the Transportation Committee approve a no-cost, time-only schedule extension for the City of National City’s Bicycle Parking Enhancements project. The ITOC also is asked to discuss two proposed budget amendments to reprogram unspent Smart Growth Incentive Program funds from the City of San Diego 4th Avenue/Quince Pedestrian Crossing and Traffic Calming and 4th & 5th Avenues/Nutmeg Pedestrian Crossing and Traffic Calming projects to SANDAG to complete work in these areas as a part of the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program. Next Steps The Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program status update, proposed schedule amendment for the City of National City’s Bicycle Parking Enhancements, and proposed budget amendments for the two City of San Diego projects are scheduled for presentation at the July 19, 2013, Joint Meeting of the Regional Planning and Transportation Committees. The next update on the Smart Growth Incentive and Active Transportation Grant Programs is scheduled for fall 2013. Attachment: 1. Draft July 19, 2013, Joint Regional Planning and Transportation Committee Report:

TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program and Active Transportation Grant Program: Status Update and Proposed Grant Amendments

Key Staff Contact: Suchi Mukherjee, (619) 699-7315, [email protected]

Agenda Item #4 TWG

July 11, 2013

11


JOINT MEETING OF THE REGIONAL PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEES

July 19, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: x

Action Requested: APPROVE

TransNet SMART GROWTH INCENTIVE PROGRAM AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION GRANT PROGRAM: STATUS UPDATE AND PROPOSED GRANT AMENDMENTS File Numbers 3300100, 3300300 Introduction This report provides an update through March 31, 2013, on projects funded by two grant programs included in the TransNet Extension Ordinance and Expenditure Plan: (1) the Smart Growth Incentive Program (SGIP), and (2) the Active Transportation Grant Program (ATGP). This report also provides information regarding ongoing oversight efforts and three proposed grant amendments, including one no-cost, time-only schedule extension for the ATGP and two budget amendments for the SGIP. Discussion The TransNet Extension Ordinance provides 2 percent of the annual TransNet revenues for both the SGIP and ATGP. In addition, the ATGP receives 2 percent of the annual Transportation Development Act (TDA) revenues. This report includes an update on the progress of both grant programs through March 31, 2013 (Attachments 1, 2, and 3), and information regarding ongoing oversight efforts and the current funding cycles for both programs. Smart Growth Incentive Program

The SGIP was established through the TransNet Extension Ordinance “to provide funding for a broad array of transportation-related infrastructure improvements that will assist local agencies in better integrating transportation and land use.” In May 2009, SANDAG awarded $9.4 million in funding to 14 projects (six planning grants and eight capital grants) for the first two-year cycle of the TransNet SGIP. Of the 13 projects that went forward, 6 have been completed and the remaining projects are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 2014 (June 2014) with the exception of two SGIP projects described in the amendments section.

Recommendation

The Transportation Committee is asked to: 1. Approve a no-cost, time-only extension

to the Active Transportation Grant Program project for the City of National City’s Bicycle Parking Enhancements project

2. Approve budget amendments to reprogram unspent SGIP funds of: approximately $100,000 for the City

of San Diego 4th Avenue/Quince Pedestrian Crossing and Traffic Calming project to SANDAG CIP No. 1223022; and

approximately $461,000, for the City of San Diego 4th & 5th Avenues/Nutmeg Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming project to SANDAG CIP No. 1223022.

Attachment 1

12

Active Transportation Grant Program The TransNet Extension Ordinance specifies that ATGP funds be used “for bikeway facilities and connectivity improvements, pedestrian and walkable community projects, bicycle and pedestrian safety projects and programs, and traffic calming projects.” In June 2009, SANDAG awarded $7.8 million in TDA and TransNet funding to 30 projects (12 planning, parking, and education program grants; and 18 capital grants) for the first cycle of this program under the TransNet Extension. Of the 30 projects, 23 have been completed and 5 remaining projects are scheduled to be completed by the end of FY 2014 (June 2014). One project from this cycle was terminated, and another was transferred to SANDAG for completion through the Regional bicycle Plan Early Action Program. In September 2012, SANDAG awarded $8.8 million in TDA and TransNet funding to 25 projects (14 planning, parking, and education program grants; and 11 capital grants) for the second cycle of this program under the TransNet Extension. This report provides the first quarterly status update including these projects. All grant agreements for this cycle have been executed. Currently, scheduled completion dates range between this summer through FY 2016 (June 2016). Of these two cycles, one ATGP project described in the amendments section, is requesting a schedule extension. Proposed Active Transportation Grant Program Schedule Extension The City of National City is requesting a no-cost, time-only schedule extension for the Bicycle Parking Facilities from September 31, 2013, to September 31, 2014 (Attachment 4). The 12-month extension would allow the grantee to pursue an opportunity to more actively engage the local community in the design and installation process for the bicycle racks by partnering with a local non-profit organization and Sweetwater High School students to custom design and fabricate the racks being funded through the grant. The ITOC is scheduled to review the requested schedule amendment at its July 10, 2013, meeting. Proposed Smart Growth Incentive Program Budget Amendments The City of San Diego is requesting to transfer the responsibility for completion of the 4th Avenue/Quince and 4th and 5th Avenues/Nutmeg Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming projects to SANDAG for implementation through the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program (Attachment 5). Due to the planned regional bicycle and pedestrian improvements in the area, City and SANDAG staffs propose transferring the management, design, and completion of these projects for consolidation with the Uptown Regional Bicycle Corridor project, which is currently being managed by SANDAG. To assume these activities, SANDAG staff requests that the Transportation Committee 1) reprogram the unspent funds of approximately $100,000 from the original grant of $231,000 for the 4th Avenue/Quince project and 2) reprogram the unspent funds of approximately $461,000 from the original grant of $577,000 for the 4th and 5th Avenues/Nutmeg project to SANDAG Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project No. 1223022, Bicycle Facilities: Old Town to San Diego, in the FY 2014 Program Budget. The ITOC is scheduled to review the proposed amendment at its July 10, 2013, meeting.

13

Grant Monitoring & Oversight Staff reviews quarterly reports to ensure that grantees are making timely progress with respect to the key milestones identified in their grant agreements. In addition, staff review project deliverables for consistency with the agreed upon scope of work. Quarterly status updates are presented to the ITOC and the Transportation and Regional Planning Committees on a regular basis. Policy Governing Timely Use of Grant Funds (Board Policy No. 035)

Board Policy No. 035: Competitive Grant Program Procedures (Attachment 6) states that all projects must be completed according to the project schedule provided in the grantee’s respective grant contract agreement, and that, at the latest, capital improvement projects must award a construction contract within two years of an executed grant agreement with SANDAG, and complete the project within 18 months thereafter (a maximum of 3.5 years from contract execution). A planning project must award a consultant contract within one year of an executed grant agreement with SANDAG, and complete the project within two years thereafter (a maximum of three years from contract execution). Schedule extension requests of up to six months that do not cause a delay beyond the duration specified in Board Policy No. 035 may be approved by the SANDAG Executive Director or designee. Requests in excess of these parameters must seek a recommendation from the ITOC and approval from the appropriate policy advisory committee. The “Watch List” column in Attachments 1 and 2 is used to identify those grantees in danger of missing their scheduled milestone dates who have not yet worked with staff to take corrective action. Delays in tasks leading up to either the award of a contract or project completion may place grantees on the watch list. Next Steps Pending approval of the proposed requests, staff will process amendments to the grant agreements accordingly. The next status update on the SGIP and ATGP will be prepared in fall 2013.

CHARLES “MUGGS” STOLL Director of Land Use and Transportation Planning Attachments: 1. Status of FY 2009–FY 2010 TransNet SGIP Projects

2. Status of FY 2009–FY 2010 TransNet/TDA ATGP Projects 3. Status of FY 2011–FY 2012 TransNet/TDA ATGP Projects

4. City of National City Schedule Extension Request for Bicycle Parking Enhancements 5. City of San Diego Request to Transfer Completion for 4th & 5th Avenues/Nutmeg

and 4th Avenue/Quince Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming Projects 6. Board Policy No. 035: Competitive Grant Program Procedures

Key Staff Contact: Suchi Mukherjee, (619) 699-7315, [email protected]

14

Status of FY 2009 ‐ FY 2010 TransNet Smart Growth Incentive Program ProjectsReporting period through March 31, 2013

Grantee Project Description of Project Activities Grant Amount Contract

Execution Date

Contract Expiration

Date*

Watch List**

Status

1 Chula VistaPalomar Gateway District Specific Plan & EIR

PLANNING: Plans for smart growth development and the EIR necessary to allow the implementation of transit-oriented development around the Palomar Street Trolley Station.

399,632.00$ 01/25/10 06/30/13 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

2 Lemon Grove Lemon Grove Trolley Plaza

CAPITAL: Improves pedestrian access from buses to the Trolley and integrates planned mixed-use development around the station area.

1,895,000.00$ 12/14/09 11/30/13 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

3 National City8th Street Corridor Smart Growth Revitalization

CAPITAL: Improves bicycle and pedestrian access from the 8th Street Trolley to the National City Town Center and enhances streetscape for public markets and other civic events along the corridor.

2,000,000.00$ 01/26/10 06/30/14 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

4 San DiegoChollas Triangle Master Plan

PLANNING: Provides a master plan with specific land use and mobility recommendations to encourage a mixed-use, transit-oriented village supported by park, open space, and creek enhancements.


5 San Diego

Park Boulevard/City College/San Diego High Pedestrian & Transit Access Improvements

CAPITAL: Improves safety and walkability for pedestrians and improves transit access near the entrances for two urban schools: City College and San Diego High.


6 San Diego

4th & 5th Avenue/Nutmeg Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming

CAPITAL: Enhances pedestrian crossing with curb extensions and in-pavement flashing crosswalks.

577,000.00$ 07/23/10 09/01/13 NoRequest to transfer completion to SANDAG for consolidated implementation through the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program.

7 San Diego4th Avenue/Quince Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming

CAPITAL: Enhances pedestrian crossing with curb extensions and in-pavement flashing crosswalks.

231,000.00$ 07/23/10 09/01/13 NoRequest to transfer completion to SANDAG for consolidated implementation through the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program.

8 Chula Vista

Industrial Boulevard Bike Lane & Pedestrian Improvements

CAPITAL: Provides sidewalk and bicycle improvements near Harborside School and the Palomar Blue Line Trolley Station.

283,900.00$ PROJECT COMPLETE - JULY 2012

9 Chula Vista

Third Avenue Streetscape Implementation Project

CAPITAL: Implements streetscape enhancements, traffic calming, and improved pedestrian crossings in Chula Vista's Third Avenue Village.

2,000,000.00$ PROJECT COMPLETE - MARCH 2013

10 San DiegoMid-City SR 15 BRT Station Area Planning Study

PLANNING: Analyzes the development potential, proposes urban design guidelines, and creates a nonmotorized access plan for the SR 15 BRT station areas in Mid-City.

225,000.00$ PROJECT COMPLETE - FEBRUARY 2013

11 San DiegoEuclid & Market Village Master Plan

PLANNING: Provides a focused mobility and land use master plan for the Orange Line Trolley station area at Market Street.

400,000.00$ PROJECT COMPLETE - MARCH 2013

12 San DiegoImperial Avenue & Commercial Street Corridor Plan

PLANNING: Produces a new land use and mobility strategy for the corridor with urban design guidelines for streetscape and development projects.


13 San Diego

Park Boulevard/Essex Street Pedestrian Crossing & Traffic Calming

CAPITAL: Improves safety, walkability, and transit access for the intersection of Park Boulevard and Essex Street by providing pop-outs and an in-pavement lighted crosswalk.


**Watch List Projects are those grantees not making timely progress toward their milestones (which are defined in Policy No. 35 and Use-It-or-Lose-It) and not yet sought corrective action. Delays in tasks leading up to either the award of a contract or project completion may place grantees on the watch list.

*Contract Expiration Date = Project Completion Date

FY 2009 - FY 2010 Smart Growth Incentive Program Projects (In Progress)

FY 2009 - FY 2010 Smart Growth Incentive Program Projects (Completed)

15

Status of FY 2009 ‐ FY 2010 TransNet /TDA Active Transportation Grant Program ProjectsReporting period through March 31, 2013


Execution Date

Contract Expiration

Date*

Watch List**

Status

1 EscondidoEscondido Creek Bike Path Lighting and Restriping

CAPITAL: Installs lighting and restriping for the existing Class I bike path along Escondido Creek Channel from Broadway to Ash Street.

$ 157,500.00 01/20/11 09/18/13 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

2 San DiegoEIR & Feasibility Study for Bike Master Plan Update

PLANNING: Provides the EIR for the City of San Diego's Bicycle Master Plan Update.

$ 150,000.00 01/03/10 06/30/13 NoStaff-level extension is being processed to November 30, 2013, to allow time to respond to EIR public comments.

3 San Diego

Kelton Road Midblock Pedestrian Improvements Project

CAPITAL: Installs bulbouts and in-pavement lighted crosswalk on Kelton Road between Zircon Street and Luber Street, at the entrance of Johnson Elementary School

$ 248,400.00 06/30/10 07/31/13 NoStaff-level extension is being processed to November 30, 2013, to allow additional time for construction.

4 San DiegoPedestrian & Bicycle Safety Education Program

SUPPORT: Provides pedestrian and bicycle safety classes at elementary and middle schools citywide.


5 San DiegoSan Diego Pedestrian Master Plan Phase 4

PLANNING: Develops a pedestrian master plan for several communities in the City of San Diego, including San Ysidro, Midway, Old Town, Ocean Beach, College, Pacific Beach, and Kensington.


6 Carlsbad

Installation of Audible Pedestrian Signals & Countdown Pedestrian Signals

CAPITAL: Installs audible pedestrian signals & count-down pedestrian signals at twenty-one signalized intersections in the City of Carlsbad.

$ 150,660.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - FEBRUARY 2012

7 Chula VistaChula Vista Bikeway Master Plan Update

PLANNING: Updates the City of Chula Vista's existing bikeway network.


8 Chula Vista

Sidewalk Safety Program - I Street Sidewalk Improvements

CAPITAL: Installs ADA sidewalks and pedestrian ramps. $ 115,220.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - SEPTEMBER 2011

9 CoronadoCoronado Biycle Master Plan

PLANNING: Plans for existing and future bicycle facilities within the City of Coronado.

$ 75,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - MARCH 2011

10 EscondidoDowntown Escondido Bike Racks

BIKE PARKING: Installs bike lockers and decorative bike racks at Escondido City Hall and various locations throught the downtown business and retail core.

$ 14,378.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - OCTOBER 2011

11 EscondidoAsh Street Undercrossing

CAPITAL: Constructs an undercrossing at Ash Street/SR 78 for the Escondido Creek Channel Bike Path.


12 EscondidoEscondido Creek Bike Path

CAPITAL: Installs a Class I bike path from Escondido Transit Center to Centre City Parkway.

$ 524,100.00 Project terminated July 2012 due to the request of the City of Escondido.

FY 2009 - FY 2010 Active Transportation Grant Program Projects (In Progress)

FY 2009 - FY 2010 Active Transportation Grant Program Projects (Completed)

16



Execution Date

Contract Expiration

Date*

Watch List**

Status

13 EscondidoWest Bernado Bike Path & Cantilever

CAPITAL: Installs a Class I bike path and trail connection as the second phase of the Lake Hodges Bikeway Access Project.

$ 1,425,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - MARCH 2011

14 La MesaLa Mesa Bicycle Facilities Master Plan

PLANNING: Plans for existing and future bicycle facilities within the City of La Mesa.


15 La MesaSpring Street Trolley Station Pedestrian Access Improvements

CAPITAL: Provides pedestrian improvements to reduce conflicts between pedestrians entering and exiting the Spring Street Trolley Station and motor vehicles.

$ 88,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - SEPTEMBER 2011

16 La Mesa

La Mesa/El Cajon Boulevards Intersection Improvements & Pedestrian Infrastructure

CAPITAL: Reconfigures the intersection between La Mesa Boulevard and El Cajon Boulevard to reduce pedestrian crossing distances and incorporates additional streetscape enhancements.

$ 361,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - SEPTEMBER 2011

17 National City National City Bicycle Master Plan

PLANNING: Plans for existing and future bicycle facilities within the City of National City.


18 National City

Sweetwater River Bike Path Gap Closure Design - Plaza Bonita Road

CAPITAL: Prepares the Environmental Document and Final Design Plans for a Class I bike path on Plaza Bonita Road.

$ 130,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - DECEMBER 2010

19 San Diego UCSD Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan

PLANNING: Creates a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian plan to link campus commuters to the City of San Diego's bicycle and pedestrian paths, local transit stops, and regional trasit stations.

$ 75,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - APRIL 2012

20 San DiegoBicycle Detection at Signalized Intersections

CAPITAL: Installs bicycle detection systems and pavement markings at 20 signalized locations in the City of San Diego.

$ 73,500.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - MAY 2012

21San Diego/ Caltrans

SR 15 Bike Path Final Desing & Environmental Document

CAPITAL: Provides the final design and environmental documentation for a Class I bikeway along the east side of SR 15 between Camino Del Rio South and Adams Avenue.

$ 350,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - OCTOBER 2012

22 San MarcosBarham Drive Urban Trail Improvement Project

CAPITAL: Designs and constructs an urban trail on the south side of Barham Drive from Twin Oaks Valley Road to the CSUSM SPRINTER Station and provides pedestrian enhancements.

$ 700,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - JANUARY 2012

23 SANDAGBicycle Locker Wireless Communication

SUPPORT: Establishes a wireless connection at transit centers that have electronic bicycle lockers.


24 SANDAGBicycle Locker Retrofits & Upgrades

SUPPORT: Installs electronic lockers at various station locations along the Blue Line Trolley.


17



Execution Date

Contract Expiration

Date*

Watch List**

Status

25 SANDAGBicycle Map Printing & Distribution

PLANNING: Funds the printing and distribution of the San Diego Regional Bike Map.

$ 25,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - JULY 2010

26 SANDAGBayshore Bikeway Segments 7 & 8

CAPITAL: Constructs 1.78 miles of a Class I regional bike facility.

$ 1,078,000.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - MARCH 2012

27 SanteeCarlton Oaks Drive Class II Bike Lanes

CAPITAL: Modifies the existing striping on Carlton Oaks Drive to install new Class II bike lanes.


28 VistaInland Rail Trail Phase IIIB - Right-of-Way Engineering

CAPITAL: Provides the right-of-way engineering for a multi-use facility along the SPRINTER line.

$ 500,000.00 Project transferred April 2013 to SANDAG for implementation through the Regional Bicycle Plan Early Action Program.

29 VistaSafe Pedestrian Crossing at Longhorn Drive

CAPITAL: Builds an enhaced pedestrian crossing in front of Rancho Buena Vista High School.

$ 50,649.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - JUNE 2011

30 VistaBoys & Girls Club Sidewalk Improvements

CAPITAL: Builds new sidewalk and a pedestrian crossing to the Vista Boys and Girls Club and Vista Academy of the Performing Arts.

$ 146,844.00 PROJECT COMPLETE - JUNE 2011

*Contract Expiration Date = Project Completion Date

**Watch List Projects are those grantees not making timely progress toward their milestones (which are defined in Policy No. 35 and Use-It-or-Lose-It) and not yet sought corrective action. Delays in tasks leading up to either the award of a contract or project completion may place grantees on the watch list.

18



Execution Date

Contract End Date*

Watch List**

Status

1 CarlsbadActive Village Campaign

SUPPORT: Develops a multi-media campaign to promote the benefits of walking and biking in Carlsbad and Carlsbad Village, and aims to increase bicycling and walking for everyday trips, improve connectivity and create a pilot program that is scalable for other cities in the region.


2 CarlsbadBike the Village: 100 Racks

BIKE PARKING: Builds upon the Carlsbad Village’s Bike Rack Pilot Program and other related capital improvement projects in the vicinity and installs 80 additional custom racks and 6 bike corrals.


3 Carlsbad Carlsbad CATSPLANNING: Develops an implementation strategy for livable streets. The plan will be tested by implementing up to five pilot projects.


4 CarlsbadCoastal Rail Trail - Reach 1

CAPITAL: Enhances safety and improves circulation and access for all modes of transportation between Carlsbad and Oceanside across a natural barrier and completes the northern sections of the Coastal Rail Trail into Oceanside.


5 Chula VistaMain Street Streetscape Master Plan

PLANNING: Provides a plan using Complete Street principles, and improves access to nearby recreational facilities, and promotes water conservation through improved landscaping features.


6 Del Mar Bike Parking FacilitiesBIKE PARKING: Planning and implementation of bike parking facilities, including bike racks and lockers, throughout the city.


7 Imperial BeachEco-Bikeway 7th & Seacoast

CAPTIAL: Provides construction of Class II and Class III bikeways, and expands the local pedestrian network along Palm Avenue. Provides an important connection from the Bayshore Bikeway to Seacoast Drive.

$ 1,500,000.00 12/11/12 02/28/14 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

8 National City4th Street Community Corridor

CAPITAL: Provides roughly 2.0 miles of Class II bicycle facilities, including bicycle detector loops and bicycle boxes. The project includes installation of high-visibility crosswalks, and traffic calming elements.


9 National CityBicycle Parking Enhancements

BIKE PARKING: Installs bicycle racks throughout National City’s bicycle network, providing cyclists with secure and convenient parking for end-of-trip storage.

$ 50,000.00 03/05/13 09/30/13 NoThe Transportation Committee is requested to extend the project completion date to September 30, 2014.

FY 2011 - FY 2012 Active Transportation Grant Program Projects (In Progress)

19



Execution Date

Contract End Date*

Watch List**

Status

10 National City D Avenue Corridor

CAPITAL: Provides approximately 2.5 miles of Class II and III bicycle facilities, including bicycle detector loops and bicycle boxes at all signalized intersections. The project also includes installation of high-visibility crosswalks and traffic calming elements.


11 Oceanside2 Year Education, Encouragement, and Awareness Project

SUPPORT: Provides adult and student education for active transportation skills and concepts, bilingual Public Service Announcements, and bike route maps of Oceanside bike facilities.


12 OceansideMission Avenue Improvements

CAPITAL: Provides a mix of bicycle, pedestrian, and roadway improvements including: increased sidewalk width with curb bulb-outs, streetscape improvements, and Class III bicycle improvements.

$ 1,500,000.00 03/22/13 05/31/14 No Project is making timely progress toward their milestones.

13 OceansideNorth Coast Transit Station Bike Station

BIKE PARKING: Provides a 200 sq. ft. bike station for 30 bicycles to provide secure, indoor bike parking, which bicyclists can access 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.


14 OceansideOceanside Boulevard Transit Access & Beautification

CAPITAL: Improves the sidewalk and landscaping along Oceanside Boulevard, facilitating pedestrian access to transit stations and destinations.


15 San Diego

Chollas Creek to Bayshore Bikeway - Multi-Use Path Design

CAPITAL: Provides environmental review and design for an envisioned Class I Multi-Use Path to connect between Southeastern San Diego, Barrio Logan, the San Diego Bay and Downtown San Diego for everyday non-motorized travel.


16 San Diego Linda Vista CATS

PLANNING: Develops a Comprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS) for the Linda Vista Community Planning Area, providing direct and convenient connections to various destinations, while increasing bicyclist and pedestrian safety.


17 San DiegoMicrowave Bicycle Detection (The Intersector)

CAPITAL: Installs microwave-based bicycle detection devices at 17 intersections that distinguish between bicycles and vehicles and adjusts signal timing to better accommodate cyclists.


18 San Diego

San Diego River Bike Path & Mission Center Boulevard Improvement: Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon

CAPITAL: Improves pedestrian safety with the installation of the Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon using the ‘Hawk Signal’ at the project intersection.


20



Execution Date

Contract End Date*

Watch List**

Status

19 San DiegoDowntown Complete Streets Mobility Plan

PLANNING: Establishes a comprehensive Complete Streets approach for downtown San Diego.


20 San MarcosBicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan

PLANNING: Identifies needed improvements to the existing network and new routes to provide bicycle and pedestrian connectivity.


21 San Marcos

San Marcos Boulevard Complete Street Multi-Way Boulevard

PLANNING: Project creates a multi-modal transportation corridor and prepares a set of Complete Street concepts for the future re-development of San Marcos Boulevard.


22 SanteeSan Diego River Trail - South Side of the San Diego River

CAPITAL: Improves trail by installing a Class I bike path with decomposed granite shoulders for pedestrians.


23 Santee

Town Center Parkway/ Olive Lane/ Prospect Avenue Bike Project

CAPITAL: Improves safety for bicyclists by installing Class II bike lanes, narrowing vehicle lanes, adding bike lanes at intersections and adjusting video detection to detect bicycles.


24 Solana BeachComprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS)

PLANNING: Comprehensive update of the bicycle master plan, and consideration of pedestrian facilities and traffic calming needs, especially around schools, transit and commercial neighborhoods.


25 Vista Bicycle Master Plan

PLANNING: Updates the City of Vista’s 2002 Bicycle Master Plan. Provides connections to neighboring bikeways in adjacent communities of Oceanside, Carlsbad, San Marcos, and unincorporated parts of the County.


*Watch List Projects are those grantees not making timely progress toward their milestones (which are defined in Board Policy No. 035 and Use-It-or-Lose-It) and not yet sought corrective action. Delays in tasks leading up to either the award of a contract or project completion may place grantees on the watch list.

21

TDA/TransNet Active Transportation Grant Program QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT

Qtr. Reporting Period Due Date

1 July 1 – Sept. 30 Oct. 15th 2 Oct. 1 – Dec. 31 Jan. 15th 3 Jan. 1 – March 31 April 15th 4 April 1 – June 30 July 15th

Stephen Manganiello City of National City

Engineering Department 1243 National City Boulevard

National City, CA 91950 (619) 336-4380

Contract #: 5001751

Invoice Date: N/A

Invoice #: N/A Invoice Period: 1/1/2013 to 3/31/2013 Description of Activity for Invoice Period Task 1 – Baseline Data Collection

1. Work Accomplished this Invoice Period - Held meetings to discuss data collection strategy.

2. Work Anticipated for Next Invoice Period - Complete baseline data collection.

3. Challenges or Problems Experienced and Actions Toward Resolution

- None.

Task 2 – Construction Bidding, Award & Management 1. Work Accomplished this Invoice Period

- Met with local non-profit organization to discuss developing a Community-based project for design and fabrication of bicycle racks.

2. Work Anticipated for Next Invoice Period - Finalize scope of work.

3. Challenges or Problems Experienced and Actions Toward Resolution

- Community-based effort will require an amendment to the project scope of work and schedule.

22

Summary of Progress Task Scheduled

Start Date Scheduled Completion

Date (per amendment)

Completed This Invoice

Period? (mark x)

Start Next

Invoice Period? (mark x)

Complete Next

Invoice Period? (mark x)

Anticipated Completion

Date (if not as

scheduled)* Task 1 3/13 5/13 X Task 2 3/13 9/13 9/14 Task 3 5/13 9/13 9/14 Task 4 7/13 7/16 Action/s requested to SANDAG (check appropriate box/es):

No action requested

Amendment to*: Scope of Work

Describe: The original scope of work for the National City Bicycle Parking Enhancements Project involves selecting a preferred bicycle rack design and specification, then contracting out the fabrication and installation to the lowest bidder. In order to better engage the Community, staff has decided to partner with ARTS (A Reason to Survive), a local non-profit organization based in National City, for design and fabrication of custom bike racks. ARTS will use its workshop to host welding classes for Sweetwater High School students for the 2013-2014 school year. Through our partnership with ARTS, part of the curriculum will involve having the students design and fabricate custom bike racks for schools, parks and other key locations throughout National City, consistent with the National City Bicycle Master Plan. The materials for the bike racks will be funded through the Active Transportation Grant. The use of recycled / “green” materials will be encouraged. All designs will be submitted to SANDAG for consistency review prior to authorizing fabrication. This change in scope of work will also require a revision to the project schedule as summarized below.

Project Budget

Describe:

Project Schedule Describe: Staff is requesting a one-year extension for project completion to

incorporate two full semesters of the welding program for design and fabrication of the bike racks, installation and project close-out. It is the Grantee’s responsibility to ensure compliance with Board Policy No. 35 (Use-It-or-Lose-It) milestones and grant agreement terms and conditions. Amendment requests are subject to SANDAG’s approval.

* Note that any changes from scheduled start and completion dates are subject to approval by SANDAG. Please refer to Board Policy No. 35 in your grant agreement regarding milestones that fall behind schedule, and the actions required for schedule adjustments.

23

24

25

BOARD POLICY NO. 035 COMPETITIVE GRANT PROGRAM PROCEDURES Applicability and Purpose of Policy This Policy applies to the following grant programs administered through SANDAG, whether from TransNet or another source: Smart Growth Incentive Program, Environmental Mitigation Program, Bike and Pedestrian Program, Senior Mini Grant Program, Job Access Reverse Commute, New Freedom, and Section 5310 Elderly & Persons with Disabilities Transportation Program. Nothing in this Policy is intended to supersede federal or state grant rules, regulations, statutes, or contract documents that conflict with the requirements in this Policy. There are never enough government grant funds to pay for all of the projects worthy of funding in the San Diego region. For this reason, SANDAG awards grant funds on a competitive basis that takes the grantees’ ability to perform their proposed project on a timely basis into account. SANDAG intends to hold grantees accountable to the project schedules they have proposed in order to ensure fairness in the competitive process and encourage grantees to get their projects implemented quickly so that the public can benefit from the project deliverables as soon as possible.

Procedures

1. Project Milestone and Completion Deadlines

1.1. When signing a grant agreement for a competitive program funded and/or administered by SANDAG, grant recipients must agree to the project delivery objectives and schedules in the agreement. In addition, a grantee’s proposal must contain a schedule that falls within the following deadlines. Failure to meet the deadlines below may result in revocation of all grant funds not already expended. The final invoice for capital, planning, or operations grants must be submitted prior to the applicable deadline.

1.1.1. Funding for Capital Projects. If the grant will fund a capital project, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary construction contract must be awarded within two years following execution of the grant agreement, and construction must be completed within eighteen months following award of the construction contract. Completion of construction for purposes of this policy shall be when the prime construction contractor is relieved from its maintenance responsibilities. If no construction contract award is necessary, the construction project must be complete within eighteen months following execution of the grant agreement.

1.1.2. Funding for Planning Grants. If the grant will fund planning, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary consultant contract must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and the planning project must be complete within two years following award of the consultant contract. Completion of planning for purposes of this policy shall be when grantee approves the final planning project deliverable. If no consultant contract award is necessary, the

26

planning project must be complete within two years of execution of the grant agreement.

1.1.3 Funding for Operations Grants. If the grant will fund operations, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary services contract for operations must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and the operations must commence within six months following award of the operations contract. If no services contract for operations is necessary, the operations project must commence within one year of execution of the grant agreement.

1.1.4 Funding for Equipment or Vehicles Grants. If the grant will fund equipment or vehicles, the project must be completed according to the schedule provided in the grant agreement, but at the latest, any necessary purchase contracts for equipment or vehicles must be awarded within one year following execution of the grant agreement, and use of the equipment or vehicles for the benefit of the public must commence within six months following award of the purchase contract.

2. Project Milestone and Completion Deadline Extensions

2.1. Schedules within grant agreements may include project scopes and schedules that will identify interim milestones in addition to those described in Section 1 of this Policy. Grant recipients may receive extensions on their project schedules of up to six months for good cause. Extensions of up to six months aggregate that would not cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 may be approved by the SANDAG Executive Director. Extensions beyond six months aggregate or that would cause the project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 must be approved by the Policy Advisory Committee that has been delegated the necessary authority by the Board. For an extension to be granted under this Section 2, the following conditions must be met:

2.1.1. For extension requests of up to six months, the grantee must request the extension in writing to the SANDAG Program Manager at least two weeks prior to the earliest project schedule milestone deadline for which an extension is being requested. The Executive Director or designee will determine whether the extension should be granted. The Executive Director’s action will be reported out to the Board in following month’s report of delegated actions.

2.1.2. A grantee seeking an extension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule, explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grantee proposes.

2.1.3. If the Executive Director denies an extension request under this Section 2, the grantee may appeal within ten business days of receiving the Executive Director’s response to the responsible Policy Advisory Committee by sending the appeal to the SANDAG Program Manager.

2.1.4. Extension requests that are rejected by the Policy Advisory Committee will result in termination of the grant agreement and obligation by the grantee to return to SANDAG any unexpended funds within 30 days. Unexpended funds are funds for project costs not incurred prior to rejection of the extension request by the Policy Advisory Committee.

27

3. Project Delays and Extensions in Excess of Six Months

3.1. Requests for extensions in excess of six months, or that will cause a project to miss a completion deadline in Section 1 (including those projects that were already granted extensions by the Executive Director and are again falling behind schedule), will be considered by the Policy Advisory Committee upon request to the SANDAG Program Manager.

3.2 A grantee seeking an extension must document previous efforts undertaken to maintain the project schedule, explain the reasons for the delay, explain why the delay is unavoidable, and demonstrate an ability to succeed in the extended time frame the grantee proposes. The grantee must provide the necessary information to SANDAG staff to place in a report to the Policy Advisory Committee. If sufficient time is available, and the grant utilized TransNet funds, the request will first be taken to the Independent Taxpayer Advisory Committee (ITOC) for a recommendation. The grantee should make a representative available at the meeting to present the information to, and/or answer questions from, the ITOC and Policy Advisory Committee.

3.3 The Policy Advisory Committee will only grant an extension under this Section 3 for extenuating circumstances that the grantee could not have reasonably foreseen.

4. Resolution and Execution of the Grant Agreement

4.1 Two weeks prior to the review by the Policy Advisory Committee of the proposed grants, prospective grantees must submit a resolution from their authorized governing body that includes the provisions in this Subsection 4.1. Failure to provide a resolution that meets the requirements in this Subsection 4.1 will result in rejection of the application and the application will be dropped from consideration with funding going to the next project as scored by the evaluation committee. In order to assist grantees in meeting this resolution deadline, when SANDAG issues the call for projects it will allow at least 90 days for grant application submission.

4.1.1 Grantee governing body commits to providing the amount of matching funds set forth in the grant application.

4.1.2 Grantee governing body authorizes staff to accept the grant funding and execute a grant agreement if an award is made by SANDAG.

4.2 Grantee’s authorized representative must execute the grant agreement within 45 days from the date SANDAG presents the grant agreement to the prospective grantee for execution. Failure to meet the requirements in this Subsection 4.2 may result in revocation of the grant award.

5. Increased Availability of Funding Under this Policy

5.1. Grant funds made available as a result of the procedures in this Policy may be awarded to the next project on the recommended project priority list from the most recent project selection process, or may be added to the funds available for the next project funding cycle, at the responsible Policy Advisory Committee’s discretion. Any project that loses funding due to failure to meet the deadlines specified in this Policy may be resubmitted to compete for funding in a future call for grant applications.

Adopted: January 2010

28



29


Action Requested: DISCUSSION

ALTERNATIVE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS AND EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES File Number 3100200 Introduction As part of the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and its Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS) adopted in 2011, the SANDAG Board of Directors committed to preparing alternative land use and transportation scenarios to explore a range of options of what it would take to further reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions between 2035 and 2050. More recently, SANDAG policymakers have directed staff to examine the role of emerging technologies in the scenario development process and evaluate their potential to reduce GHG emissions. The scenario planning and emerging technology efforts will inform the SCS and the preferred Revenue Constrained Transportation network to be included in San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. An important component of this effort will be to develop an understanding of which existing, emerging, and advanced technologies could be included in the plan and to what degree they could be applied and modeled. This item provides an opportunity to update the TWG on the status of the land use scenarios and begin exploring the development of emerging transportation technologies that could relate to the scenarios and potentially help the region further reduce GHG emissions through its long-range planning process. Land Use and Transportation Scenario Efforts The first phase of developing the land use and transportation scenarios consists of focusing on alternative land use concepts that could be tested with the 2050 RTP/SCS transportation network. A joint TWG/CTAC workshop was held in May to brainstorm on initial land use scenario ideas, ranging from a concentrated-core land use pattern to a regionally-dispersed land use pattern. A San Diego Forward workshop was held on June 21, 2013, where feedback was solicited from the public on some of these initial concepts as well as on emerging technologies and other related topics. Staff will update the working group on the outcomes of the workshop, and on the proposed land use scenarios that will be presented to the Regional Planning and Transportation Committees in July. Emerging Technologies The SANDAG Regional Planning and Transportation Committees have requested that emerging transportation technologies be incorporated into the scenario planning process and into San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. Staff developed an initial list of emerging transportation technologies for potential exploration and shared this list at the June 27, 2013, Joint CTAC/TWG meeting. This list has been revised to incorporate comments and ideas resulting from that meeting (Attachment 1).

It is envisioned that these technologies will initially be considered in the scenario planning efforts, as described above, and then be integrated into the preferred transportation network for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan and subsequent transportation model runs. Many of the technology concepts are derived from the SANDAG Intelligent Transportation System Strategic Plan, which focuses on the short-term application of transportation technologies, but complements the longer term strategic initiatives and vision contained within the 2050 RTP/SCS. However, this list has been expanded in an attempt to envision additional transportation technologies that may be available out to the year 2050, the final horizon year addressed in the long-range plan. Next Steps Staff will initiate discussions on the interrelationships between emerging technologies and the alternative scenarios with the Regional Planning and Transportation Committees on July 19, 2013. Research currently being conducted on the application of emerging technologies in other planning agencies across the country also will be included in the July 19 report as background and context. At a proposed August 1, 2013, CTAC/TWG meeting, staff will provide an update on this process and will bring any follow-up issues for further discussion and input. Attachment: 1. Emerging Transportation Technologies Key Staff Contacts: Carolina Gregor, (619) 699-1989, [email protected] Phil Trom, (619) 699-7330, [email protected] James Dreisbach-Towle, (619) 699-1914, [email protected] Alex Estrella, (619) 699-1928, [email protected].

30

mailto:[email protected]




1 | P a g e

Existing, Emerging, and Advanced Transportation Technologies Research for Possible Inclusion & Application to Regional Plan and Land Use and Transportation Scenarios

A. Roadway Capacity Strategies Transportation Technology Application to GHG

Reduction When? Model

Application (Y/N)

Primary Responsible Party

Description

1. Vehicle Automation/ Semi-Automation

Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling Near*, Mid, and Long-Term

Y Public/Private Vehicles are partially or fully automated or able to navigate without human input improving roadway performance and safety

2. Real-Time Traveler Information Via Personal Devices

Fewer SOV Trips More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/ Vanpool

Near-Term* Y Public/Private Provides real-time traveler and parking information, available on-the-fly, to influence mode choice, route choice and time of travel

3. Arterial, Freeway, and Transit Management System

Fewer SOV Trips Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool

Near-Term* Y Public Extension of the Integrated Corridor Management concept for real time and multi-agency congestion management to proactively improve mobility and corridor travel efficiency

4. Green GPS Fleet Tracking Systems

Fewer SOV Trips Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling

Near-Term N Public Reduces GHG emissions and operating costs by using real-time tracking to monitor fuel consumption, route efficiency, etc.

5. Corridor Level Signal Timing

Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling

Near-Term* Y Public Improvements to real-time data collection and arterial management, operations, and coordination.

6. Dynamic Lanes on Arterials to Support HOV Access

Fewer SOV Trips Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool

Near-Term* Y Public Infrastructure and lane control that enables arterial lanes to be switched on-the-fly from general purpose, to HOV use, for certain time periods or based on demand

7. Smart Intersections Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling More Bike/Walk Trips

Near-Term* N Public Improvements to intersection infrastructure to allow real-time and pro-active signal timing operations and support Multi-Agency Arterial Management. Improved mobility and efficiency

Attachment 1

31

2 | P a g e

B. Vehicle and Personal Strategies Transportation Technology

Application to GHG Reduction When Model Application (Y/N)


Description

1. Car Sharing Fewer SOV Trips More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool Increased Fuel Efficiency

Near-Term Y Public/Private Transportation service that provides communities with a neighborhood based fleet of shared vehicles available to members for a fee.

2. Variable Speed Limits on Freeway Network


Near-Term* Y Public Speed limits vary in real-time to respond to congestion levels and roadway conditions to maintain smooth and consistent traffic flow

3. Personal Technology

Fewer SOV Trips More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool

Mid, Long-Term Y Public/Private Transit ticketing via personal devices; trip-tracking and reward reclamation via personal devices

4. Universal Transportation Account (UTA)


Near-Term* Y Public Fully integrated account for accessing all transportation services (transit, bikeshare, carshare, bikelockers, FasTrak, vanpool etc).

5. On-the-Fly Trip Planning and Ride Matching


Near-Term N Public/Private Multi-modal trip planning and ridematching in real-time via personal devices enabling travelers to find a ride, where and when they need it, using the mode and time that fits best

6. Enhanced Virtual Office/Telework


Near-Term N Private Expansion of virtual collaboration technologies that facilitate telework

32

3 | P a g e

C. Infrastructure Strategies

Transportation Technology

Application to GHG Reduction

When? Model Application (Y/N)


Description

1. Automated Truck Corridors

Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling Increased fuel efficiency

Near-Term

N Private Hybrid, fuel-cell, battery, corridor-level, etc. for energy efficiency

2. Alternative Fueling Stations

Increased Fuel Efficiency Near-Term

N Private Fuels under CA’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard

3. Solar Highways & Parking Lots

Increased Fuel Efficiency

Long-Term

N Public Road surfaces and parking lots that generate electricity by solar power

4. Eco-Driving Less Stop-N-Go/Reduced Idling

Mid-Term

N Public/Private Technologies that control and maintain vehicle speed for optimal fuel efficiency and reduced carbon emission

5. Mobility Hub – Shared Vehicles

Fewer SOV Trips More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool Increased Fuel Efficiency

Mid-Term

N Public/Private Interconnected “mobility hubs,” integrate regional transit services with communities. Mobility hubs provide a source of shared vehicles and services including cars, neighborhood electric vehicles, personal electric vehicles, and bicycles, along with supporting amenities and technologies.

6. Electric Vehicle En-Route Charging


N Public/Private Transition to fully electric bus/vehicle fleets

7. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations


N Public/Private Expansion of efficient vehicle charging stations to support an increase in electric cars and light duty trucks

8. Rail Technologies


Near-Term

N Public/Private Electric catenary rail systems, dual-mode locomotives, etc.

9. Bike Sharing or Other Shared Services

Fewer SOV Trips More Bike/Walk Trips More Transit/Carpool/Vanpool Increased Fuel Efficiency

Near-Term

N Public/Private Expand shared transportation services such public bike and car sharing and peer-to-peer carsharing.

“*” Included in the Intelligent Transportation System for the San Diego Region (SANDAG) Near-Term = 2013-2020; Mid-Term = 2020-2030; Long-Term = 2030-2050

33



34


Action Requested: INFORMATION/DISCUSSION

SAN DIEGO FORWARD: THE REGIONAL PLAN: TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA File Number 3102000

Introduction The SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the vision and goals for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan on May 10, 2013. In past regional transportation plans (RTPs) SANDAG has utilized project evaluation criteria and performance measures informed by the plan goals as elements of a multistep process to evaluate and prioritize transportation projects in the development of the revenue constrained multimodal transportation network. Project rankings, along with other factors such as funding availability, project readiness, and overall network connectivity, will be considered when developing the proposed multimodal transportation network alternatives for the regional plan. At the Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG) June 13, 2013, meeting SANDAG staff provided an information item discussing the process for developing the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan preliminary draft transportation project evaluation criteria and sought input from the group.

Discussion SANDAG staff has considered initial feedback from SANDAG working groups, community-based outreach partners, other stakeholders, and the general public; in the development of the preliminary draft transportation project evaluation criteria. The preliminary draft transportation project Evaluation criteria for highway corridors, high occupancy vehicle (HOV) connectors, freeway-to-freeway connectors, transit services, rail grade separations, and goods movement are included as Attachment 1. The preliminary draft criteria incorporate capabilities of recent enhancements to SANDAG’s regional modeling tools including the Activity-Based Model (ABM) and the Production, Exchange, and Consumption Allocation System (PECAS). Efforts have been made to harmonize the criteria across modal categories where appropriate and new criteria have been added to assess projects effects on physical activity and air quality. The methodologies for a number of existing criteria have been refined to provide for more comprehensive analysis. Active Transportation criteria also are being developed for prioritizing bicycle and pedestrian projects in the Regional Plan. The criteria utilized in Riding to 2050, the San Diego Regional Bike Plan (Attachment 2) will serve as a starting point for the Active Transportation criteria development. Bicycle and pedestrian projects in the regional plan will include Safe Routes to Transit

35

projects, which will improve bicycle and pedestrian access around transit stations, and access improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians in highway project areas, such as freeway interchanges. The active transportation evaluation criteria will address these combined bicycle and pedestrian projects, as well as bicycle projects identified in Riding to 2050. TWG members are invited to review the draft Active Transportation criteria at a workshop which will be held on July 29, 2013, from 3 to 4:30 p.m. at SANDAG.

Next Steps SANDAG staff is currently in the process of collecting feedback on the preliminary draft evaluation criteria from SANDAG working groups, partner agencies, other stakeholders, and the general public. An expert panel also will review the preliminary draft evaluation criteria in August 2013, and a revised draft set of criteria will be developed to address comments received. In September 2013, the Transportation Committee would be asked to recommend the criteria to the Board of Directors and action by the Board would be requested in October 2013. Once the multimodal transportation network alternatives have been developed, performance measures will be applied to evaluate each network alternative and help in the comparison across alternatives. The organizational structure of the performance measures will be consistent with the goals of the regional plan. In fall 2013, SANDAG staff will present information to the TWG on potential revisions to the plan performance measures. The plan performance measures are expected to be approved by the Board in January 2014. Attachments: 1. Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria 2. Riding to 2050, the San Diego Regional Bicycle Plan Evaluation Criteria Summary Key Staff Contact: Rachel Kennedy, (619) 699-1929, [email protected]

Preliminary Draft Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria

Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationHighway Corridor

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 Located in a High Crash Rate Area Is the project located in an area with a high vehicular crash rate?

Regional percentage of crash rate measured against statewide average

2 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts

Does the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?

Proximity analysis of preserve areas, native habitats, and residential housing stock (more than 2 dwelling units per acre)

A) What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing the project?

Change in CO2 emissions

B) What is the change in smog forming pollutants from implementing the project?

Change in smog forming pollutants

4 Physical Activity Does the project increase physical activity? Increase in time engaged in moderate transportation‐related physical activity

A) What percentage of the project users are from communities of concern?

Select link used to determine origins and destinations served, communities of concern proportion of total users estimated

B) What is the number of daily person‐hours saved for communities of concern?

Daily person‐hours saved for communties of concern population

6 Provides Accessibility to Indian Reservations

What percentage of users of the project access Indian Reservations?

Select link used to determine origins and destinations served, total trips to/from Indian reservation areas calculated

Innovative Mobility & Planning 7 Provides Congestion Relief What is the change in person‐hours saved from implementing the project?

Change in person‐hours saved

8 Serves Daily Trips What is the number daily person trips served by the facility?

Person volume on facility

9 Provides Access to Evacuation Routes Does the project provide evacuation access for regional hazard areas including federally recognized Indian reservations?

Proximity analysis of hazard areas (weighted by population and employment)

10 Serves RCP Smart Growth Areas What are the share of trips on the facility serving RCP Smart Growth Areas?

Share of trips on facility serving existing/planned Metropolitan Center, Urban Center is calculated, using select link analysis

11 Facilitates Fastrak/Carpool and Transit Mobility

Does the project contain Fastrak/carpool/Managed Lane facilities and/or regional or corridor transit service?

Projects will recieve points if they include Fastrak/carpool/Managed Lane facility, and/or regional or corridor transit services identified in the Regional Plan which is then weighted by combined carpool person volume + transit person volume

Vibrant Economy 12 Access to Jobs Does the project improve access to jobs? Weighted average number of jobs accessible in 30 minutes by auto

A) How many trucks are served by the project? Number of medium and heavy truck trips served by facility

B) Does the project improve average travel time for freight?

Total travel time savings for medium and heavy truck classes.

14 Project Cost‐Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs + project life operations and maintenance

3 GHG and Pollutant Emissions

13 Serves Goods Movement and Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/Capacity Constraints

Provides Accessibility and Congestion Relief to Communities of Concern

5

Attachment 1

36


Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationHOV Connector

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts

Does the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?








Innovative Mobility & Planning 4 Serves Regional and/or Corridor Transit Routes

What is the 2050 daily transit passenger ridership? Range of transit ridership using the connector

5 Provides Congestion Relief What is the number of daily person‐hours saved? Number of person‐hours saved

Vibrant Economy 6 Project Cost‐Effectiveness What is the cost effectiveness of the project? Weighted project evaluation criteria divided by annualized capital costs + project life operations and maintenance

Freeway ConnectorHealthy Environment & Communities 1 Minimizes Habitat and Residential

ImpactsDoes the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?






3 Located in a High Crash Rate Area Is the project located in an area with a high vehicular crash rate?

Regional percentage of crash rates measured against statewide averages



Innovative Mobility & Planning 5 Provides Congestion Relief What is the change in person‐hours saved from implementing the project?

Change in person‐hours saved

Vibrant Economy 6 Serves Goods Movement How many trucks are served by the project? Number of medium and heavy truck trips served by facility




37


Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationTransit Services

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 GHG Emissions What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing the project?


2 Physical Activity Does the project increase physical activity? Increase in time engaged in moderate transportation‐related physical activity

3 Serves RCP Smart Growth Areas What are the share of trips on the transit service serving RCP Smart Growth areas?

Share of trips on transit service serving existing/planned Metropolitan Center, Urban Center is calculated, using select link analysis

4 Provides Accessibility to Communities of Concern

Does the project increase transit usage by communities of concern?

Change in total transit trips by communities of concern population

5 Provides Accessibility to Federally Recognized Indian Reservations

Does the transit service serve federally recognized Indian reservations?

Change in total transit trips to/from Indian reservations

Innovative Mobility & Planning 6 Provides Time Competitive/Reliable Transit Service

What is the percentage of the route located in priority treatment?

Analysis of percentage or transit route within dedicated transit guideway; dedicated arterial lane, interrupted rail, or Managed Lane; or HOV lane or arterial spot treatment

7 Serves Daily Trips What is the number of additional daily transit trips resulting from the project?

Change in daily transit linked trips

8 Daily System Utilization What is the daily transit utilization? Daily passenger miles/daily service seat miles (system wide)

Vibrant Economy 9 Access to Jobs Does the project increase work trips by transit? Change in daily transit linked work trips


38


Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationRail Grade Separation

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 Accident History Accident history in the past five years involving vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles with trains, not including accidents involved in attempted suicides

Number of qualifying accidents

2 Peak‐Period Exposure Index (PPEI) Factor

Product of the existing high directional traffic and the total measured blocking delay during the same three hours of the day experiencing the highest congestion at the crossing

Calculation based on vehicle traffic during a selected three hour period, total blocking delay during same period, and mathematical constant for time period

3 Proximity to Noise Sensitive Receptors

Assign points using rules based on proximity to sensitive receptors

Proximity analysis based on rail crossing located within 200‐500 feet of sensitive receptors

4 Benefit to Emergency Services Assign points based on proximity to emergency service provider and lack of nearby alternative grade‐separated crossing

Proximity analysis based on emergency service providers and alternative grade separation crossing

5 GHG Emissions What is the change in CO2 emissions from implementing the project?

Difference in GHG based on base year with/without project.

Innovative Mobility & Planning 6 Peak‐Day Total Delay Exposure Index (PDEI) Factor

Product of the existing average daily traffic (ADT), the total number of trains, and an average train crossing delay time factor

Calculation based on average daily traffic, total number of trains, train crossing delay factor, and mathematical constant

7 Pedestrian Benefits Assign points based on number of pedestrians served in top 4 hours

Grade separation pedestrian crossing counts

8 Bus Operations Benefits Assign points based on number of buses served an hour, as well as proximity to transit center

Grade separation number of buses served

9 Provides Congestion Relief for Communities of Concern

What is the share of communities of concern population in the proximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within 1/2 mile of project to community of concern share of regional population

Vibrant Economy 10 Truck Freight Operations Assign points based on the % of daily traffic of Class 4‐Class 13 (as defined by FHWA)

Percentage of daily truck traffic

11 Funding Request Points awarded for the percentage of total project costs contributed by the local agency including funds already committed from state, federal, or other source

Percentage of local contribution


Regional Housing Needs Assesment (RHNA) 13 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

How many low income housing units are produced by the jurisdiction?

Based on number of lower income housing units produced in accordance with RHNA Alternative 3

39


Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationGoods Movement: Maritime Project

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 Improves freight system and/or modal safety

Does the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/or enhance national security?

Analysis whether project increases movement of military cargo; provides a buffer between freight and non‐freight modes; and enhances safety

2 Minimizes Community Impacts Does project minimize/address community impacts? Proximity analysis of freight and residential development


Does the project minimize/address environmental/habitat impacts?


4 Minimizes Communities of Concern Impacts

What is the share of Communities of Concern in the proximity of the project?

Ratio of Communities of Concern share of population within 1/2 mile of project to Communities of Concern share of regional population

5 GHG Emissions Does the project reduce externalities to include emissions related to idling, noise and/or visual impacts?

Assign points if project reduces externalities to include emissions related to idling, noise and/or visual impacts

Innovative Mobility & Planning 6 Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/Capacity Constraints and Reduces Delay

Does the project improve average travel time for freight?

Based on idle times for trucks entering/exiting the port and velocity of cargo unit in the Port or on a connecting road

7 Improves Freight System Management/Efficiency

Does the project include freight management systems, strategies, and/or technologies to improve efficiency, velocity?

Based on facilitation of information transmittal improving network integration

Vibrant Economy 8 Throughput How much additional freight can be accommodated by the project?

Capacity for additional freight

9 Project Cost‐Effectiveness How does the project rank against others with respect to cost/project capacity?

Total capital costs/increased capacity in tons, and available outside funding sources

Goods Movement: Rail IntermodalHealthy Environment & Communities 1 Improves freight system and/or

modal safetyDoes the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/or enhance national security?

Based on whether project includes risk abatement features or safety enhancements





4 Minimizes Communities of Concern Impacts

What is the share of communities of concern population in the proximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within 1/2 mile of project to communities of concern share of regional population





Based on intermodal transfer time and travel time





Capacity for different car loads


Total capital costs/increased capacity in tons, and available outside funding sources

40


Mode San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan Goals No. Criteria Description Proposed CalculationGoods Movement: Air Cargo

Healthy Environment & Communities 1 Improves freight system and/or modal safety

Does the project accommodate features that enhance safety and/or enhance national security?

Analysis whether project provides a buffer between freight and non‐freight modes; enhances national security; and enhances safety





4 Minimizes Communities of Concerns Impacts

What is the share of communities of concern populations in the proximity of the project?

Ratio of communities of concern share of population within 1/2 mile of project to communities of concern share of regional population





Based on velocity of cargo unit in the airport or on a connecting road





Capacity for additional freight


Total capital costs/increased capacity, and available outside funding sources

41

RIDING TO 2050: THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL BICYCLE PLAN EVALUATION CRITERIA SUMMARY

The following is a summary of the evaluation criteria used to prioritize projects for inclusion in the

Regional Bicycle Network identified in Riding to 2050. The criteria include three components:

1. Demand‐based Criteria

2. Facilities‐based Criteria

3. Cost‐to‐Need Ratio

Demand‐based Criteria

Location in Metropolitan Center/Urban Center/Town Center Smart Growth Opportunity Areas

Facilities‐based Criteria

1. Fills in facility gaps

2. Existence of funding for unbuilt segment

3. Crash density in project area

4. Number of public comments received regarding segment

Cost‐to‐Need Ratio

Cost‐to‐Need Ratio = (Demand‐based score + Facilities‐based score)/Cost weighted by facility type

These criteria will be significantly refined to address the variety of bicycle and pedestrian projects that

will be included in the Regional Plan.

Attachment 2

42



43



SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT REGIONAL PLAN: File Number 3300202 PROPOSED STOP AND STATION AREA TYPOLOGIES

Introduction

The Safe Routes to Transit Regional Plan is a major component of the Active Transportation Implementation Strategy. The 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy included a Board of Directors action to develop an Active Transportation Implementation Strategy that includes development of a Safe Routes to Transit Regional Plan. Safe Routes to Transit projects that provide enhanced bicycle and pedestrian access in transit stop and station areas will be identified in the development of San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan. Staff will present proposed transit stop/station area typologies for the purpose of classifying potential project areas and eventually identifying appropriate levels of bicycle and pedestrian improvements for each area. The proposed typologies describe bus stop and transit station areas within the context of the land uses that surround them, as well as the type of transit service provided.

Discussion

Land Use and Transit Service Variables

The need for pedestrian and bicycle access facilities varies from transit station to transit station, depending on a variety of factors. Typologies help to categorize the over 6,000 stop and station areas in the region into a meaningful framework. The purpose of identifying station typologies in the context of the Safe Routes to Transit Regional Plan is to develop and target a set of access enhancements appropriate to the location, land use, and transit service context of a station.

Typologies can be considered within the context of variables that will inform the development of Safe Routes to Transit enhancements: variables that differentiate transit stations based on land use and urban context, and variables related to transit service type.

Land Use/Urban Context

Land Use Intensity Land use intensity is an important variable that affects the propensity for transit usage, as well as pedestrian and bicycle activity.

Centers The presence of destinations (employment centers, special use centers like Universities) in a particular area will affect transit, pedestrian, and bicycle usage.

The place types described in the Smart Growth Concept Map provide a potential basis for Safe Routes to Transit typologies, as they capture both land use intensity and the concept of centers. As a framework for understanding bicycle and pedestrian access needs in transit stop and station areas, it is proposed that the Smart Growth Place Types be grouped into three categories as follows:

1. Metropolitan Center

2. Centers & Corridors

a. Urban Center

b. Town Center

c. Community Center

d. Special Use Center

e. Mixed-Use Transit Corridor

3. Outside Centers

a. Rural Village

b. All stop and station areas outside Smart Growth Opportunity Areas (No designated Smart Growth place type)

This grouping would mean that levels of bicycle and pedestrian access improvements would be consistent within the Centers and Corridors category, i.e. that Urban Centers and Mixed-Use Transit Corridors would have the same level of access improvements at transit stop and station areas.

Transit Service

The transit services in the region provide a variety of choices for transit riders who are traveling locally, on shorter trips with high frequency service, as well as those travelling regionally, on longer distance, higher speed, or limited stop services. Since there are a wide variety of transit service types, access needs can be considered in terms of two categories for the purpose of this analysis:

1. Local Access, and

2. Regional Access

Further descriptions of the transit service variables can be found in Attachment 1.

44

Local Access A transit rider traveling locally in smart growth centers typically has more than one transit option, and may have the opportunity to take higher frequency service. This type of service, due to its frequency and coverage, provides ample opportunities for distributed pedestrian access.

In these locations, improvements to station or stop access must serve multiple local destinations and origins, many of which are expected to be in relatively close proximity and many of which already benefit from short blocks, frequent crossings, and existing sidewalk networks. Proposed Local Access service types include:

• Light Rail Transit/Streetcar

• Rapid Bus

• Local Bus

Regional Access Regional service, typically is oriented towards work commute hours, may have more limited routing options and less frequent service. It will often run in corridors that aren’t always most directly accessed from local destinations (for example BRT service operating on freeway HOV corridors). Regional service will typically have higher peak factors for passengers than local service, and can generate concentrated pedestrian flows during select hours of the day. Regional service will typically draw from a large catchment area, which may make pedestrian access options more limited, but could be well served by connecting bicycle facilities.

Accordingly, in these regional access locations, improvements to the station or stop access should consider fewer, and potentially longer and/or lower-stress access improvements to extend the catchment area, increased emphasis on addressing major infrastructure barriers such as wide arterial crossings, and increased emphasis on station and stop waiting area improvements to serve longer wait times. Regional Access Service Types include:

• COASTER Commuter Rail

• Freeway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

• Express Bus

Proposed Safe Routes to Transit Stop and Station Area Typologies

It is proposed that the typologies correspond to the existing Smart Growth Concept Map place types. This framework for considering levels of bicycle and pedestrian access improvements in transit stop and station areas could potentially inform future iterations of the Smart Growth Concept Map. The proposed typologies below apply the land use and transit service variables above, within the context of the Smart Growth Concept Map place types. Examples of transit stop and station areas by proposed typology are included as Attachment 2.

The six proposed typologies are listed in the table below:

45

TABLE 1

PROPOSED SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT STOP/STATION TYPOLOGIES

TYPOLOGY URBAN CONTEXT MINIMUM LAND USE

INTENSITY TRANSIT CONTEXT

EXAMPLES

Metropolitan

Center (Local

Access)

Downtown San Diego Residential: 75 d.u./acre

Employment: 80 empl./acre

• Shorter

distance,

locally serving

• MTS local/rapid

bus

• San Diego

Trolley

• County

Center/Little

Italy

• 5th and

Broadway

Metropolitan

Center (Regional

Access)

Downtown San Diego Residential: 75 d.u./acre

Employment: 80 empl./acre

• Longer

distance,

regionally

serving

• COASTER

• BRT

• Express Bus

• Santa Fe

Depot

• 1st &

Broadway

Centers &

Corridors (Local)

• Medium to high

density

• Subregional

destinations

• Urban Center

• Town Center

• Community

Center

• Special Use

Center

• Mixed-Use Transit

Corridor

Residential: 20-40 d.u./acre

Employment: 30-50

empl./acre

• Shorter

distance,

locally serving

• MTS local/rapid

bus

• San Diego

Trolley

• 8th & National

City Blvd.

(National City

1-C)

• Grand Ave. &

State St.

(Carlsbad 3-A)

Centers &

Corridors

(Regional)

• Medium to high

density

• Subregional

destinations

• Urban Center

• Town Center

• Community

Center

• Special Use

Center

• Mixed-Use Transit

Corridor

Residential: 20-40 d.u./acre

Employment: 30-50

empl./acre

• Longer

distance,

regionally

serving

• COASTER

• BRT

• Express Bus

• Oceanside

Transit Center

(Oceanside

1-B)

Outside Centers

(Local Access)

• Lower density

• Rural Village

• Otherwise not

categorized as

Smart Growth

Opportunity Area

• <20 d.u./acre

• Limited or no

employment

• Local bus

• Light rail

Poway and

Carriage

46

TYPOLOGY URBAN CONTEXT

MINIMUM LAND USE INTENSITY

TRANSIT CONTEXT

EXAMPLES

Outside Centers

(Regional

Access)

• Lower density

• Rural Village

• Otherwise not

categorized as

Smart Growth

Opportunity Area

• <20 d.u./acre

• Limited or no

employment

• Longer

distance,

regionally

serving

• BRT

• Express Bus

Carmel Mountain

and Rancho

Carmel

Table 2 summarizes the distribution of stations and stops in the region by proposed typology.

TABLE 2

TRANSIT STATION/STOP TYPOLOGY DISTRIBUTION

Transit Service Type

Combined Smart Growth Place Type

Metropolitan Center

Centers & Corridors Outside Centers

Stops/ Stations %

Stops/ Stations %

Stops/ Stations %

Regional 14 0.4% 72 2.0% 140 3.8%

Local 98 2.7% 1,122 31.1% 2,166 60.0%

Total 112 3.1% 1,194 33.1% 2,306 63.8%

Sources: SANDAG shapefiles; analysis by Chen Ryan Associates and Fehr & Peers

Special Cases

Within each typology, there may be multiple station or stop areas that warrant further categorization; specifically, transit centers and end of line stations as described below. Levels of access improvements will be identified for these special cases as well.

Transit Centers There are several transit centers in the San Diego region, most notably Santa Fe Depot, where a variety of local and regional services come together. These centers may have high levels of transfer activity, but lower levels of pedestrian and bicycle access, or may have levels of both transfer activity and pedestrian and bicycle access. They may draw from a large catchment area than other stations and stops, due to the number of available transit service choices.

Due to the unique transit service context of transit centers, their access needs may draw from strategies for both Local Access and Regional Access typologies. The special characteristics will be accounted for as access concepts are developed.

End of Line Stations End of line rail and Express Bus/BRT stations/stops, such as the San Ysidro Trolley Station have the potential for drawing from a longer catchment area than interim stations, drawing from areas where riders may travel longer distances to ride higher quality transit. Access modes may include park and ride, but could potentially include longer distance bicycle access as well. Special characteristics will be accounted for as access concepts are developed.

47

Next Steps

Staff will incorporate feedback received from the Regional Planning Technical Working Group (TWG). Levels of bicycle and pedestrian improvements will be identified for each typology. In September, staff will return to the TWG to present proposed levels of improvements by typology. Projects will then be identified in 2050 RTP/SCS transit station areas using the typologies and level of improvements, to develop cost estimates. The projects will be ranked as part of the San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan evaluation criteria process.

Attachments: 1. Transit Service Variables 2. Proposed Safe Routes to Transit Typology Examples Key Staff Contact: Christine Eary, (619) 699-6928, [email protected]

48

Attachment 1

TRANSIT SERVICE VARIABLES

Local Access

• Light Rail Transit/Streetcar—Light Rail in the San Diego Region consists of San Diego Trolley service operated by MTS, and SPRINTER service operated by NCTD. While light rail can serve both short local trips, and longer regional trips from residential areas to job centers, because of its close station spacing (one to two miles), and higher frequency of service, it has been classified as Local Access. The characteristics of San Diego Trolley Stations (e.g. those in Downtown San Diego versus in La Mesa, are captured in the land use/urban context variables of the place typologies described above). Due to its land use context and lower frequency service, SPRINTER service has characteristics in common with some of the Regional Access services described below. However, because of its closer stop spacing, of one to two miles (the 22-mile line has 15 stations), it has been included under Local Access.

• Rapid Bus—Rapid Bus service is a higher frequency more limited stop service (stop spacing every mile) that operates on key arterial corridors. Rapid Bus utilizes a range of signal priority treatments, short segments of transit-only lanes, and limited station stops to achieve faster travel times. While Rapid Bus service better serves commute trips because of its higher speeds, due to its frequent stop spacing, it has been included under Local Access.

• Local Bus—Local Bus services facilitate mid- to short-distance tripmaking within local communities with closer station spacing (less than a mile). Local bus service is the primary transit mode for much of the San Diego region. Given its focus on local trips, this service type has been categorized as Local Access.

Regional Access

• COASTER Commuter Rail—The COASTER Commuter Rail provides service between Oceanside and Downtown San Diego, with six interim stations. Service is primarily oriented to serve weekday commuters. Due to the distance, limited stop, and commuter orientation of this service, the COASTER has been classified as Regional Access.

• Freeway Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) — BRT service facilitates longer distance, higher-speed, regional trip-making. High operating speeds are achieved by long station spacing (4-5 miles on average) and maximizing use of dedicated rights-of-way that bypass congested areas such as the I-15 managed lanes. Due to these service characteristics, and their orientation towards regional commuting, this service type has been classified as Regional Access.

• Express Bus—Express bus service typically operates longer distance routes with limited stops oriented towards commuters traveling from residential areas to major employment districts such as Downtown San Diego. Service typically operates on weekdays only, or with more limited weekend service. Due to these service characteristics, Express Bus has been classified as Regional Access.

49

Attachment 2

PROPOSED SAFE ROUTES TO TRANSIT TYPOLOGY EXAMPLES

1. Metropolitan Center (Local Access) — The urban context for this typology is Downtown San Diego, with the highest density residential and employment in the region (minimum residential density of 75 dwelling units per acre; minimum employment density of 80 employees per acre). The transit context for this typology is shorter distance, locally serving service, such as local or rapid bus routes operated by MTS, or the San Diego Trolley. Example stops/stations of this typology include:

• County Center/Little Italy Trolley Station — The San Diego Trolley Green Line serves this station, providing service through Downtown San Diego, as well as to Mission Valley, El Cajon, and Santee. MTS Line 83 operating on Kettner Blvd provides local bus service adjacent to the station.

The predominant land uses around the station are restaurants, retail, hotels and mid and high rise residential. Adjacent destinations include the harbor, Little Italy, and the County Administration Center.

• 5th & Broadway — This stop is served by ten bus routes operated by MTS, with connections to North Park, Hillcrest, La Mesa, SDSU, UCSD, Old Town, Pacific Beach, Kearny Mesa, Coronado, Imperial Beach, and Otay Mesa, in a variety of local and circulator services.

The predominant land uses around the stop are mid and high rise office, retail, and commercial. Horton Plaza is a primary destination adjacent to this station. The Fifth Avenue Trolley Station is located two blocks away.

2. Metropolitan Center (Regional Access) —The urban context for this typology is Downtown San Diego, as described above. The transit context for this typology is longer distance, regionally serving service, such as Coaster Commuter Rail, BRT, or Express Bus. Example stops/stations of this typology include:

• Santa Fe Depot — This station is the regional transit hub for Downtown San Diego. It is the current southern terminus of the Coaster Commuter Rail, with service to Sorrento Valley, Solana Beach, Encinitas, Carlsbad, and Oceanside. It is the southern terminus of Amtrak’s Pacific Surfliner, with rail service to Orange County, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. The San Diego Trolley Green Line also serves the station, as does the Orange Line, with service to Lemon Grove, La Mesa, and El Cajon. At the adjacent America Plaza Trolley Station, the Blue Line provides Trolley service to National City, Chula Vista, Imperial Beach, and San Ysidro. Nine connecting MTS bus lines are accessed at the American Plaza Trolley Station.

The predominant land uses around Santa Fe Depot are high rise office, residential, and hotels. Adjacent destinations include the USS Midway Museum, the Broadway Pier, and the harbor.

• 1st & Broadway — This bus stop serves 15 MTS bus routes, include local routes as well as regional express bus routes (which is why it has been classified as Regional Access). Regional routes include Premium Express bus service (Routes 810, 820, 850, 860 that operate in the managed lanes on the I-15 freeway providing service

50

between Downtown San Diego and Escondido, Poway, Rancho Peñasquitos, and Carmel Mountain Ranch.

The predominant land uses around the stop are mid and high rise office, retail, and commercial. Horton Plaza, the US District Court, and the Civic Center are adjacent primary destinations. The Civic Center Trolley Station is located two blocks away.

3. Centers & Corridors (Local Access) — The urban context for this typology is community centers and corridors outside the Metropolitan Center that have a higher concentration of residential and/or employment than surrounding areas, as well more sub regional destinations. These include are universities, town centers, and other community centers. Minimum residential densities range from 20 to 40 dwelling units per acre, and minimum employment densities range from 30 to 50 employees per acre, for centers that are employment focused. The transit context for this typology is shorter distance, locally serving service, such as local or rapid bus routes operated by MTS, or the San Diego Trolley. Example stops/stations of this typology include:

• 8th & National City Boulevard (National City) — The stops adjacent to this intersection are served by five MTS bus lines that provide service to SDSU, San Ysidro, Chula Vista, National City, and Spring Valley, along with several Trolley Stations.

The predominant land uses are low to mid rise residential, hotel, and commercial, service, and commercial.

• Grand Avenue & State Street (Carlsbad) — The stop adjacent to this intersection is served by one NCTD bus line that provides local circulator service within Carlsbad.

The predominant land use is one and two-story retail. The shops of Carlsbad Village, as well as the Carlsbad Village Coaster Station are the primary destinations.

4. Centers & Corridors (Regional Access) — The urban context for this typology is described above. The transit context for this typology is longer distance, regionally serving service, such as Coaster Commuter Rail, BRT, or Express Bus. Example stops/stations of this typology include:

• Oceanside Transit Center—This station is the northern terminus of the Coaster Commuter Rail line, and the southern terminus for the Metrolink Orange County and Inland Empire-Orange County lines. The station is also served by the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner. While the station provides regional access, it also includes adjacent local access routes, including buses operated by NCTD, as well as the Sprinter Light Rail line.

The predominant land uses are low to mid rise residential and commercial. The primary destination is Downtown Oceanside, and the Oceanside Pier.

5. Outside Centers (Local Access) — The urban context for this typology includes much of the San Diego region. These are areas with lower density (well less than 20 dwelling units per acre) with limited or no employment. Most of these areas have not been categorized as a Smart Growth Opportunity Area, though select locations have been classified as the Rural

51

Village place type. The transit context for this typology is primarily local bus service, with a few existing or planned stops/stations with, higher quality transit service (such as light rail). Example stops/stations of this typology include:

• Poway & Carriage—The stops adjacent to this intersection are served by two local bus routes operated by MTS that provide circulator service within the Poway area.

The predominant land uses are single family residential and single story strip retail/commercial.

6. Outside Centers (Regional Access)—The urban context for this typology is described above. The transit context for this typology is longer distance, regionally serving service, primarily BRT or Express Bus.

• Carmel Mountain & Rancho Carmel—The stops adjacent to this intersection are served by one express bus route operated by MTS that provides express bus service to Kearney Mesa and Downtown San Diego

The predominant land uses are shopping center and single family residential. The primary destination is the Carmel Mountain Plaza Shopping Center.

52



53



SERIES 13 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST: DRAFT SUBREGIONAL FORECAST File Number 3100900

Introduction During the past 12 months, SANDAG staff and representatives and elected officials from each of the San Diego region’s nineteen jurisdictions have worked together to develop a long-range growth forecast for the San Diego region and its neighborhoods. The Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast1 will serve as the foundation for San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan including the alternative land use and transportation scenarios and other planning documents (e.g., water, general plans) across the region. The preliminary results of that effort are described in detail below.

Overview of Forecasted Regional Growth SANDAG projects the region’s population will grow by nearly one million people by 2050. This forecast is consistent with previous expectations although future growth rates have been reduced due to increased domestic migration out of the region. The growth in population will drive job growth and housing demand within the region – adding nearly 500,000 jobs and more than 330,000 housing units by 2050.

Table 1: Series 13 San Diego Regional Growth Forecast Population Housing Units Jobs

Total

Percent Average Annual Change Total

Percent Average Annual Change Total

Percent Average Annual Change

20102 3,095,313 - 1,158,076 - 1,421,941 - 2012 3,143,429 0.8% 1,165,818 0.3% 1,450,913 1.0% 2020 3,435,713 1.1% 1,249,654 0.9% 1,624,124 1.4% 2035 3,853,698 0.8% 1,394,688 0.7% 1,769,938 0.6% 2050 4,068,759 0.4% 1,491,804 0.4% 1,911,405 0.5%

2010-2050 973,446 0.7% 333,728 0.6% 489,464 0.7%

1 SANDAG denotes forecasts by a sequential series number. The current working forecast is known as the Series 13: 2050

Regional Growth Forecast. The forecast used in the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) adopted by the Board of Directors in October 2011 was the Series 12: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast.

2 Data from 2010 are included as reference to the U.S. Census for population. 2010 Housing and Jobs are sourced from the SANDAG land inventory system and California Employment Development Department. San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan will use 2012 as its reference year.

54

Much of the region’s growth will be driven by natural increase, total births minus deaths. Longer life expectancies will contribute to the aging population seen in the outer years of the forecast, while the trends of increased deaths (as a result of the older population) and net out-migration will factor into the slower growth rates anticipated in the future. By 2050 it is expected that nearly 20 percent of the population will be ages 65 and over, compared with just 12 percent today. In terms of the race and ethnic composition of the region, significant changes are on the horizon. The 2010 census revealed San Diego to now be a majority-minority region - meaning no single race or ethnic group comprises more than 50 percent of the total population. In 2010 the two dominant race and ethnic groups were non-Hispanic whites and Hispanics, accounting for 48 percent and 32 percent of the region’s total population, respectively. By 2050, however, it is expected that Hispanics will account for over 46 percent of the total population while the non-Hispanic White population will decline to approximately 30 percent. The Asian population is expected to increase to 15 percent; up from 11 percent in 2010. Non-Hispanic blacks, two or more races, and “other” groups each comprise less than 5 percent of the total population today and are expected to remain relatively unchanged out to 2050.

Changing Local Plans This forecast represents a continuing trend in the San Diego region to provide more housing and job opportunities in the existing urbanized areas of the region. Since 1999, more than three quarters of the 19 jurisdictions have made or are in the process of making significant updates to their general plans. In 1999, SANDAG projected 21 percent of future housing growth would occur in the unincorporated areas of the county under the local general plans at the time. Today, SANDAG expects 17 percent of growth to occur in the unincorporated areas and much of that is focused in existing villages such as Lakeside, Valley Center, Ramona, and Alpine. As a result of these updates, SANDAG has identified sufficient housing opportunities in the existing general plans for the first time in nearly two decades. The forecasted growth also reflects more sustainable general plans from the local jurisdictions. At the turn of the century, about 90 percent of vacant residential land in the cities was planned for single family use. The Series 13 Forecast shows 84 percent of housing growth by 2050 being multifamily. Local and regional conservation programs also continue to protect more of San Diego’s sensitive lands. Currently, over 50 percent of the region is preserved as open space, parks, or habitat, and SANDAG forecasts that an additional 20,000 acres will be preserved by 2050.

General Intensification of Existing Uses As a result of changing local plans, SANDAG forecasts a general intensification of existing land uses within urban communities and along key transportation corridors. For example, National City’s general plan update results in opportunities for over 10,000 additional multifamily units near the Blue Line Trolley and planned trolley connecting San Ysidro and UTC via National City. San Marcos has drafted Specific Plans for the San Marcos Creek and University districts adding mixed use developments near Cal State-San Marcos and the SPRINTER Rail Corridor. Finally, over half of the growth in new housing will occur in the city of San Diego. Downtown will continue to thrive over the next few decades and the growth will start to spill over into areas of Barrio Logan, Golden Hill, and Uptown communities.

55

In terms of jobs, SANDAG expects the existing employment centers to continue to thrive. The University Towne Centre (UTC) / Sorrento Valley / Torrey Mesa employment cluster will continue to be the largest job center in the region. SANDAG expects downtown to add another 30,000 jobs by 2050. The Otay Mesa border area will become a much larger job center growing from just over 15,000 jobs today to over 45,000 by 2050. Finally, Chula Vista will add nearly 50,000 new jobs as the Chula Vista Bayfront, downtown investments, and new planned communities in eastern Chula Vista come online. More detailed results of this growth forecast are shown by jurisdiction in Attachment 1.

SANDAG Forecasting Process The SANDAG forecast is completed in two steps. The first is the development of a regional forecast of population, housing and jobs. The regional forecast establishes the framework for the next step, the subregional forecast. The regional forecast is developed by SANDAG with input from expert demographers, economists, developers, local planning directors, and natural resource managers. These experts review economic and demographic assumptions about fertility, migration, inflation, and other indicators. In addition to the traditional expert panel review SANDAG conducts, SANDAG also has reviewed the forecast with key stakeholders across the region including transportation, land use, and economic development advocates. SANDAG uses its Demographic and Economic Forecasting Model (DEFM) to develop the regional forecast. DEFM was first developed to support the Series 4 forecast in the late 1970s. DEFM uses a standard demographic (i.e., cohort-survival) economic modeling technique to estimate future growth. Forecasts developed using DEFM have had strong accuracy; since Series 4 (1977), on average DEFM regional forecasts have been within 4 percent of observed population growth. The DEFM results feed the subregional allocation models to develop city and community level forecasts. The Series 13 subregional forecast employs a new tool called the Production, Exchange, Consumption, and Allocation System (PECAS). This new model offers several enhancements beyond the subregional forecasting models used in prior forecasts by introducing economic conditions and return on investment calculations into the projections of development, redevelopment, and infill. PECAS, in addition to new data sources, continues to rely upon the land use plans, policies, and zoning ordinances of the 18 cities, the County of San Diego, and other land use authorities. For the development of the subregional forecast, SANDAG staff works extensively with each jurisdiction to collect and verify detailed land use inputs down to the parcel level. The data collected includes information on remaining housing capacity, zoning, existing and planned land use, as well as constraints to development (steep slopes, habitat lands, floodplains, etc). In addition to providing land use information, each jurisdiction is asked to provide guidance on the most likely development patterns for their jurisdiction by 2050. A preliminary draft of the subregional forecast was presented to the Technical Working Group on June 13, 2013. SANDAG staff consulted with each jurisdiction to review these numbers and incorporate any necessary changes to the revised draft subregional forecast

56

Next Steps The Regional Planning Technical Working Group is asked to review and provide feedback on the subregional forecast in advance of the Board of Directors meeting on July 26, 2013. Attachment: 1. Subregional Tables Key Staff Contact: Kirby Brady, (619) 699-6924, [email protected]

Draft Series 13 Subregional Growth ForecastDisclaimer: This forecast represents one possibility for future growth in the San Diego region. It is intended to represent a likely prediction of future growth, but it is

not intended to be a prescription for growth. The Series 13 Regional Growth Forecast represents a combination of economic and demographic projections

and existing plans and policies.

POPULATION

Actual

2010 2020 2035 2050 2010-2020 2020-35 2035-50 Total Percent Avg Ann

Carlsbad 105,185 118,241 123,634 123,942 13,056 5,393 308 18,757 17.8% 0.4%

Chula Vista 243,916 286,744 320,297 343,752 42,828 33,553 23,455 99,836 40.9% 0.9%

Coronado 24,697 23,633 24,145 24,286 (1,064) 512 141 (411) -1.7% 0.0%

Del Mar 4,161 4,412 4,668 4,784 251 256 116 623 15.0% 0.3%

El Cajon 99,478 102,745 109,222 115,419 3,267 6,477 6,197 15,941 16.0% 0.4%

Encinitas 59,518 62,829 64,718 66,178 3,311 1,889 1,460 6,660 11.2% 0.3%

Escondido 143,951 165,051 172,890 173,253 21,100 7,839 363 29,302 20.4% 0.5%

Imperial Beach 26,324 27,510 30,354 31,579 1,186 2,844 1,225 5,255 20.0% 0.5%

La Mesa 57,065 61,092 70,151 77,411 4,027 9,059 7,260 20,346 35.7% 0.8%

Lemon Grove 25,320 26,821 28,774 30,796 1,501 1,953 2,022 5,476 21.6% 0.5%

National City 58,582 62,265 74,343 85,424 3,683 12,078 11,081 26,842 45.8% 0.9%

Oceanside 167,344 177,929 188,865 190,129 10,585 10,936 1,264 22,785 13.6% 0.3%

Poway 47,811 50,010 52,670 52,860 2,199 2,660 190 5,049 10.6% 0.3%

San Diego 1,301,617 1,454,150 1,664,684 1,766,700 152,533 210,534 102,016 465,083 35.7% 0.8%

San Marcos 83,781 98,940 108,470 112,323 15,159 9,530 3,853 28,542 34.1% 0.7%

Santee 53,413 59,488 63,518 66,279 6,075 4,030 2,761 12,866 24.1% 0.5%

Solana Beach 12,867 13,409 14,311 14,941 542 902 630 2,074 16.1% 0.4%

Vista 93,719 96,973 112,175 126,508 3,254 15,202 14,333 32,789 35.0% 0.8%

Unincorporated 486,564 543,471 625,809 662,195 56,907 82,338 36,386 175,631 36.1% 0.8%

Region Total 3,095,313 3,435,713 3,853,698 4,068,759 340,400 417,985 215,061 973,446 31.4% 0.7%

HOUSING

Actual


Carlsbad 44,422 48,390 49,978 50,212 3,968 1,588 234 5,790 13.0% 0.3%

Chula Vista 78,384 89,063 98,924 107,471 10,679 9,861 8,547 29,087 37.1% 0.8%

Coronado 9,581 9,667 9,702 9,799 86 35 97 218 2.3% 0.1%

Del Mar 2,606 2,639 2,650 2,667 33 11 17 61 2.3% 0.1%

El Cajon 35,884 36,180 38,126 40,766 296 1,946 2,640 4,882 13.6% 0.3%

Encinitas 25,481 26,131 26,633 27,667 650 502 1,034 2,186 8.6% 0.2%

Escondido 47,971 53,563 55,512 55,827 5,592 1,949 315 7,856 16.4% 0.4%

Imperial Beach 9,860 10,014 10,928 11,520 154 914 592 1,660 16.8% 0.4%

La Mesa 25,954 26,463 30,036 33,374 509 3,573 3,338 7,420 28.6% 0.6%

Lemon Grove 8,840 9,100 9,685 10,517 260 585 832 1,677 19.0% 0.4%

National City 16,200 17,423 21,090 24,812 1,223 3,667 3,722 8,612 53.2% 1.1%

Oceanside 65,014 67,965 70,812 71,248 2,951 2,847 436 6,234 9.6% 0.2%

Poway 16,476 16,853 17,602 17,800 377 749 198 1,324 8.0% 0.2%

San Diego 515,426 559,197 640,194 691,629 43,771 80,997 51,435 176,203 34.2% 0.7%

San Marcos 28,174 32,622 35,596 37,118 4,448 2,974 1,522 8,944 31.7% 0.7%

Santee 19,900 21,489 22,687 23,903 1,589 1,198 1,216 4,003 20.1% 0.5%

Solana Beach 6,521 6,583 6,870 7,118 62 287 248 597 9.2% 0.2%

Vista 30,875 31,015 35,369 40,201 140 4,354 4,832 9,326 30.2% 0.7%

Unincorporated 170,507 185,297 212,294 228,155 14,790 26,997 15,861 57,648 33.8% 0.7%

Region Total 1,158,076 1,249,654 1,394,688 1,491,804 91,578 145,034 97,116 333,728 28.8% 0.6%

JOBS

Actual


Carlsbad 64,956 77,431 83,938 85,718 12,475 6,507 1,780 20,762 32.0% 0.7%

Chula Vista 64,035 82,966 100,096 114,435 18,931 17,130 14,339 50,400 78.7% 1.5%

Coronado 28,535 29,116 29,247 29,273 581 131 26 738 2.6% 0.1%

Del Mar 4,431 4,542 4,691 4,725 111 149 34 294 6.6% 0.2%

El Cajon 37,626 41,412 45,146 49,780 3,786 3,734 4,634 12,154 32.3% 0.7%

Encinitas 25,643 27,276 28,364 29,542 1,633 1,088 1,178 3,899 15.2% 0.4%

Escondido 47,869 53,495 57,479 59,061 5,626 3,984 1,582 11,192 23.4% 0.5%

Imperial Beach 3,592 4,556 4,805 4,830 964 249 25 1,238 34.5% 0.7%

La Mesa 24,729 28,677 33,847 36,527 3,948 5,170 2,680 11,798 47.7% 1.0%

Lemon Grove 6,639 7,320 7,987 8,653 681 667 666 2,014 30.3% 0.7%

National City 26,826 30,293 32,660 39,785 3,467 2,367 7,125 12,959 48.3% 1.0%

Oceanside 41,142 48,208 52,927 54,091 7,066 4,719 1,164 12,949 31.5% 0.7%

Poway 30,235 34,012 35,809 37,199 3,777 1,797 1,390 6,964 23.0% 0.5%

San Diego 764,671 867,567 934,806 1,009,177 102,896 67,239 74,371 244,506 32.0% 0.7%

San Marcos 36,857 45,793 55,207 64,282 8,936 9,414 9,075 27,425 74.4% 1.4%

Santee 14,229 16,501 18,212 18,565 2,272 1,711 353 4,336 30.5% 0.7%

Solana Beach 7,417 8,156 8,509 8,802 739 353 293 1,385 18.7% 0.4%

Vista 35,124 40,971 48,007 48,812 5,847 7,036 805 13,688 39.0% 0.8%

Unincorporated 157,385 175,832 188,201 208,148 18,447 12,369 19,947 50,763 32.3% 0.7%

Region Total 1,421,941 1,624,124 1,769,938 1,911,405 202,183 145,814 141,467 489,464 34.4% 0.7%

Attachment 1

Projections Numeric Change by Increment Change 2010 - 2050



57

Documents

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA · 1:15 to 3:15 p.m. SANDAG, Conference Room 7 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231 Staff Contacts: Carolina Gregor (619) 699-1989 [email protected]