MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDAPUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDERS GROUP The Public Health Stakeholders Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda. Thursday, January 17, 2013 3 to

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA

PUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDERS GROUP The Public Health Stakeholders Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda. Thursday, January 17, 2013 3 to 5 p.m. SANDAG, Conference Room 7 401 B Street, Suite 800 San Diego, CA 92101-4231

Staff Contact: Stephan Vance (619) 699-1924 [email protected]

AGENDA HIGHLIGHTS

• SANDAG HEALTH ANALYSIS PROJECTS

• WALKSANDIEGO SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL GRANT PROJECTS

• REGIONAL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION

• 2050 REGIONAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

SANDAG offices are accessible by public transit. Phone 511 or see www.511sd.com for route information. 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.

2

PUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDERS GROUP

Thursday, January 17, 2013

ITEM # RECOMMENDATION

1. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

The Public Health Stakeholder Group co-chairs will call the meeting to order and request introductions.

2. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Members of the public shall have the opportunity to address the Public Health Stakeholder Group (PHSG) on any issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG that is not on this agenda. PHSG members also may provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

+3. OCTOBER 25, 2012, MEETING SUMMARY APPROVE

Members of the Public Health Stakeholder Group (PHSG) are asked to review and approve the meeting summary of the October 25, 2012, PHSG Meeting.

CONSENT

4. REGIONAL PLAN: DRAFT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN (David Hicks) DISCUSSION

The draft Public Involvement Plan (PIP) was released for public review and comment on January 7, 2013, for a thirty day review period, and is available at www.sandag.org/regionalplan. Developed with input from stakeholders and the public, as well as SANDAG working groups, policy advisory committees, and the Board of Directors, the draft PIP outlines an innovative and energetic approach for engaging the community in the process of developing the regional plan. Comments should be e-mailed to [email protected] by February 7, 2013.

REPORTS

+5. SANDAG HEALTH ANALYSIS PROJECTS (Heather Cooper) INFORMATION

SANDAG completed its first Health Impact Assessment (HIA) as part of Healthy Works Phase I in March 2012. SANDAG has recently initiated work on the Health Benefits and Impacts Analysis Program, a component of Healthy Works Phase II, to continue to support health analysis projects in the region. SANDAG staff will provide an overview of the first HIA project completed and discuss next steps for the Health Benefits and Impacts Analysis Program.

http://www.sandag.org/regionalplan

3

6. WALKSANDIEGO SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL GRANT PROJECTS

(Leah Stender, Program Manager) INFORMATION

WalkSanDiego is a leader in implementing Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs in the San Diego region. We recently kicked-off four SRTS Programs. Two of these are Federal SRTS grant programs, and are comprehensive projects that encompass all SRTS “5 E’s”: Education, Encouragement, Enforcement, Engineering, and Evaluation. The projects are in Lemon Grove and San Ysidro. The remaining two programs are through Caltrans’ Community Based Transportation Planning grant program and have a stronger focus on Engineering and creating a Safe Routes to School Plan for the community. WalkSanDiego partnered with the cities of Santee and Encinitas on these projects.

+7. REGIONAL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION (Bridget Enderle)

INFORMATION

On March 2, 2012, the Transportation Committee accepted the Regional Safe Routes to School Strategic Plan (Regional SRTS Plan) for planning purposes and incorporation into the forthcoming Active Transportation Early Action Program. The Regional SRTS Plan outlines a strategy to support the region’s local communities in pursuing new Safe Routes to School projects and programs, as well as sustaining and expanding upon the many existing initiatives. A brief overview of the plan and implementation process will be presented.

+8. 2050 REGIONAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS (Stephan Vance/ Phil Trom)

DISCUSSION

SANDAG is combining the update of its 2004 Regional Comprehensive Plan with the next update of the Regional Transportation Plan that was adopted in October 2011. An overview of this process and role public health will have in the plan will be presented.

+9. 2050 REGIONAL PLAN: TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATOIN CRITERIA (Scott Strelecki/Rachel Kennedy)

DISCUSSION

The process for identifying the top priority transportation projects in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) begins by establishing the criteria that will be used to evaluate projects within each mode of transportation. The criteria from the last RTP will be presented along with the process for updating the criteria for the next RTP. The Public Health Stakeholders Group will be asked to provide input on how these criteria should take into account the relationship between transportation decisions and public health outcomes.

10. SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS INFORMATION

The next Public Health Stakeholder Group (PHSG) meeting is scheduled for April 18, 2013, from 3 to 5 p.m. A PHSG working session on the Regional Plan Evaluation Criteria for Public Health will be held in February. Additional information to be provided.

+ next to an agenda item indicates an attachment

San Diego Association of Governments

PUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDER GROUP

4

January 17, 2013 AGENDA ITEM NO.: 3

Action Requested: APPROVE

OCTOBER 25, 2012, MEETING SUMMARY Please note: Audio file is available on the SANDAG Web Site (www.sandag.org/cppw) on the PHSG site.

Meeting Attendees Jordan Carlson Active Living Research Debra Kelley American Lung Association David McCullough American Society of Landscape Architects Dan Wery APA Joy Williams Environmental Health Coalition Shreya Sasaki Kaiser Permanente Sergeant Joel McMurrin Local Law Enforcement Carla Blackmar Public Health Institute Mary Beth Moran Rady Children’s Hospital Shelley Saitowitz San Diego County HHSA Andy Hanshaw SD County Bicycle Coalition Sherry Ryan SDSU/School of Public Affairs Mike Strong TWG Rep./Co-Chair Diem Do TWG Rep./Co-Chair Chris Schmidt Caltrans Selina Brollini County of San Diego, East Region Kristine Schindler Independent Katie Judd County of San Diego HHSA Tina Zenzola County of San Diego HHSA

ITEM #1: WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Stephan Vance (SANDAG) called the Public Health Stakeholder Group (PHSG) meeting to order and introduced the co-chairs, Mike Strong representing the City of Encinitas, Diem Do representing the City of Chula Vista, and Bryan Jones (not present) representing the City of Carlsbad. Mr. Strong requested all members and attendees make self-introductions.

ITEM #2: PUBLIC COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Members of the public had the opportunity to address the PHSG on any issue within the jurisdiction of SANDAG that was not on the agenda. PHSG members also were able to provide information and announcements under this agenda item.

5

Mr. Vance announced that SANDAG is currently recruiting for a Public Health Planning Specialist to support the Healthy Works projects.

CHAIR’S REPORT (Item 3)

ITEM #3: PHSG CHARTER AND PROPOSED MEETING SCHEDULE All working groups at SANDAG are formed through a charter that establishes the membership, its roles and responsibilities, and how it will operate. Mr. Vance and Co-Chair Strong jointly presented the PHSG Charter and proposed meeting schedule. There were no public comments. Action: This item was presented for information only.

REPORTS (Items 4 through 6)

ITEM #4: PUBLIC HEALTH AND REGIONAL PLANNING – THE COMMUNITY TRANSFORMATION GRANT Mr. Vance and Shelley Saitowitz with the County Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) co-presented the Work Program for the Community Transformation Grant and discussed the involvement of the PHSG in the process. Several comments and questions arose regarding how the outcomes of the Healthy Works program will result in reductions in health disparities, and whether the new modeling efforts such as the Activities Based Model (ABM) will assist with addressing health outcomes. The PHSG also inquired by what methods staff expects to monitor both short-term and long-term outcomes of the Healthy Works project. There was discussion regarding the implementation of the automated bike and pedestrian counters in the San Diego region, and the importance of this data collection effort to monitor outcomes of project implementation, inform forecasting, and address some health outcomes, such as levels of physical activity. Additional discussion occurred regarding the ability of SANDAG and other local agencies to leverage existing resources to support healthy planning efforts at the regional, local, and community level. Members also noted the importance lobbying and funding controls have on integrating health in planning and transportation project prioritization. Kaiser Permanente commented on their recent collaboration with the City of Lemon Grove through a grant opportunity resulting in environmental and policy changes for public health planning activities. Future presentation requests included: 1. Automated bike and pedestrian counters program recently implemented in the San Diego region. 2. ABM as it relates to bicycle and pedestrian planning. Action: This item was presented for discussion only.

6

ITEM #5: SANDAG AGENCYWIDE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN By federal law, SANDAG is required to prepare and maintain an agencywide Public Participation Plan (PPP) that serves as an umbrella document for all planning efforts conducted by the agency. The current PPP was adopted in 2009. One of the first steps in updating the plan is soliciting input and ideas from stakeholders for how they would like to be involved in SANDAG planning efforts. The PHSG was asked to provide ideas for public involvement for the PPP, and to inform a more specific public involvement plan (PIP) for the Regional Plan (Item 6). Paula Zamudio (SANDAG) presented this item to the PHSG. There will be a 45-day public comment period once the draft PPP is released. The PHSG will receive notification when the public comment period is open. The PHSG provided numerous suggestions for public involvement such as, considering the vision report process utilized by the San Diego Foundation, leveraging Parent Teacher Associations, implementing more outreach activities in town hall settings, engaging youth, providing demonstrations, and utilizing technologies to provide instant voting results. Action: This item was presented for discussion only.

ITEM #6: 2050 REGIONAL PLAN: DRAFT WORK PROGRAM AND SCHEDULE AND DRAFT PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN (A) Draft Work Program and Schedule In May 2012, the SANDAG Board approved merging the Regional Comprehensive Plan update with the next Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Based on the Board’s action, staff has prepared a draft Work Program and Schedule for the combined Regional Plan scheduled for adoption in July 2015. The PHSG was asked to discuss and provide input on the draft Work Program. The draft Work Program will be presented to the policy advisory committees, as well as to the various working groups and community-based organizations. Feedback from all groups will be incorporated into a revised Work Program, which will be presented to the SANDAG Board of Directors this fall. (B) Draft Public Involvement Plan In conjunction with the development of the Work Program and Schedule discussed above, SANDAG also is developing a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) specifically tailored to the Regional Plan. Building upon the agencywide PPP currently under development (Item 5), SANDAG is soliciting input from SANDAG working groups, policy advisory committees, and community-based organizations for the Regional Plan PIP. In addition, a workshop to solicit input from the general public and interested stakeholders was held on October 19, 2012. The PHSG was asked to provide ideas for public involvement for the Regional Plan. Feedback from all groups will be incorporated into a draft PIP, which will be presented to the SANDAG Board of Directors this fall. SANDAG staff Carolina Gregor and Elisa Arias co-presented items 6A and 6B.

7

Several questions were raised regarding how public health will be integrated into the overall Regional Plan update, and what opportunities exist for the PHSG to comment on other policy areas of the Regional Plan, specifically, the Healthy Environment section. The PHSG also noted the importance of documenting and distributing all the ideas proposed throughout the plan development, even those not ultimately incorporated into the plan. Staff noted that the development of the Public Health Policy White Paper is the first step to defining public health in the context of land use and transportation planning, and will guide how health is integrated in the Regional Plan update. Although the Public Health Policy White Paper is a priority work product of the PHSG, members also will have the opportunity to review, provide input, and comment on other policy areas throughout the process to update the Regional Plan. Action: This item was presented for discussion only.

ITEM #7: SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS The next PHSG meeting is scheduled for January 17, 2013, from 3 to 5 p.m. at SANDAG offices. Key Staff Contact: Stephan Vance, (619) 699-1924, [email protected]



8


Action Requested: INFORMATION

SANDAG HEALTH ANALYSIS PROJECTS File Number 3300800

Background In March 2010, the San Diego County Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) was awarded a $16 million Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW) grant, also referred to as Health Works Phase I, from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to combat obesity and tobacco use. HHSA awarded $3 million of the grant funds to SANDAG to carry out six different project initiatives aimed at integrating health in built environment and regional planning efforts to support healthier communities. One outcome of Healthy Works Phase I was that SANDAG was able to implement the region’s first Health Impact Assessment (HIA) and provide HIA trainings to local agencies, community members and staffs. In September 2011, HHSA was awarded a second CDC grant, the Community Transformation Grant (CTG), and chose to collaborate with SANDAG again to build on the successes of the first phase of Healthy Works projects. In July 2012, SANDAG and HHSA initiated Healthy Works Phase II. One of the CTG-funded projects is the Health Benefits and Impacts Analysis program aimed at building capacity within the region to conduct health assessments by providing technical assistance and developing protocols and resources for future implementation of HIA and other health analysis techniques.

Discussion A growing body of public health research suggests a link between transportation policies, plans and projects, and health outcomes. For example, transportation decisions could influence exposure to air pollution or levels of physical activity. Since the built environment – where people live, work, and play – can heavily impact the health of a community, agencies throughout the country have begun to explore opportunities to comprehensively address health in land use and transportation planning, project development and decision-making processes to ensure health is not negatively impacted. One approach to address the potential effects of a proposed project on community health is Health Impact Assessment (HIA). HIA addresses a variety of issue areas such as land use, transportation, environment, housing, etc., in terms of health determinants such as air quality and access to affordable housing and healthy foods. The HIA process also recommends mitigations to protect health. In July 2011, SANDAG conducted the region’s first HIA on a regional Bus Rapid Transit station project. The final I-805 Bus Rapid Transit 47th Street Trolley Station Area Planning: A Health Benefits

9

and Impacts Analysis report was released January 11, 2013, and is available for download on the SANDAG website www.sandag.org. In addition, SANDAG was able to provide two trainings on HIA to local agency staffs, community-based organizations and consultants. As noted previously, SANDAG will be implementing the Health Benefits and Impacts Assessment program under CTG aimed at regional capacity building as well as developing tools and resources to support the implementation of HIAs or other forms of health assessments in the San Diego region. The Health Benefits and Impacts Analysis program work will begin in January 2013 and continue through the duration of the CTG program, ending September 2015. SANDAG staff anticipates bringing health assessment related work products to the PHSG for review and input throughout the duration of the CTG program. This item provides an opportunity for initial feedback or comments from the PHSG on the SANDAG HIA program under CTG. Key Staff Contact: Heather Cooper, (619) 595-5611, [email protected]


PUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDER GROUP

10


Action Requested: INFORMATION

REGIONAL SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION File Number 3300800

Introduction “Safe Routes to School” refers to a spectrum of built environment improvements and programs used together to foster opportunities for students to walk and bike to school safely and routinely. With the overarching goals of improving safety and encouraging active transportation, Safe Routes to School efforts improve health, reduce transportation costs, and decrease school-related vehicle trips, thus improving air quality and reducing traffic congestion near schools. Safe Routes to School efforts also teach children healthy lifestyle skills and heighten public awareness about the benefits of active transportation. To further realize these benefits, the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan (2050 RTP) – which includes the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) – outlines a framework and calls for the development of a Regional Safe Routes to School Strategic Plan (Regional SRTS Plan). On March 2, 2012, the Transportation Committee accepted the Regional SRTS Plan for planning purposes and incorporation into the Regional Active Transportation Early Action Program (EAP).

Discussion SANDAG began developing the Regional SRTS Plan in October 2010 with funding through the County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency (HHSA) Healthy Works program. The planning process engaged key stakeholders in the development of the plan through a variety of venues, including two presentations to the Public Health Stakeholder Group (PHSG) to solicit input on the plan’s content. The final Regional SRTS Plan contains the following chapters: • The Introduction describes the purpose and history of Safe Routes to School, summarizes the

plan development process, and its relationship to other plans and policies.

• Existing Issues and Opportunities discusses the role of Safe Routes to School in addressing certain transportation, built environment, air quality, and public health issues currently impacting the region.

• Existing Safe Routes to School Efforts describes the region’s existing Safe Routes to School resources and programs implemented at the local as well as regional level.

11

• Moving Forward – a Regional Safe Routes to School Strategy presents a strategy to

support the creation and maintenance of Safe Routes to School efforts. The Regional SRTS Plan builds on the efforts already underway by local agencies, nonprofit organizations, health care providers, and others. It proposes a regional strategy that establishes a framework to coordinate with these efforts through, among other channels, the region’s Safe Routes to School Coalition. It also describes how data collection and evaluation can be improved, and identifies education and encouragement strategies that could be implemented. The strategy suggests a role for SANDAG in Safe Routes to School planning and implementation by providing technical assistance to Safe Routes to School implementers. Also included in the Appendix of the plan is a list of resources from the national, state, and local level. The plan can be downloaded from the SANDAG Web site at www.sandag.org/SRTS.

Next Steps With support from Healthy Works Phase II, SANDAG is collaborating with local jurisdictions, school districts, non-profit organizations and other key stakeholders to begin implementing the Regional SRTS Plan. An initial step is to prioritize the plan recommendations and identify areas across the region to focus on implementation based on criteria such as social equity, built environment characteristics, presence of existing programs, and health impact considerations. A phasing and financing strategy will then be developed in conjunction with the Active Transportation EAP. Key Staff Contact: Bridget Enderle, (619) 595-5612, [email protected]



12


Action Requested: DISCUSSION

2050 REGIONAL PLAN DEVELOPMENT PROCESS File Number 3100000/3100400

Introduction In May 2012, the Board of Directors approved merging the Regional Comprehensive Plan update with the next Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS). Combining these two major planning efforts will give citizens a single, easily accessible document that includes an overall vision for the San Diego region, as well as a concrete implementation program for a large portion of that vision. A presentation on the draft work program and schedule for the combined Regional Plan (slated for adoption in July 2015) was presented to the Public Health Stakeholders Group (PHSG) on October 25, 2012, along with other working groups during the months of September and October 2012. The final work program and schedule will be provided to the SANDAG Board of Directors on January 25, 2013. Discussion Over the next two and a half years, there will be several opportunities for the Public Health Stakeholders Group (PHSG) to provide input on the development of the Regional Plan. Staff anticipates that public health will be incorporated in several key components of the plan. As such, PHSG feedback will be requested during the development of several important plan milestones. These components, with estimated timeframes are listed below: Project Evaluation Criteria & Performance Measures (July 2012 – December 2013): A description of this task and the involvement of the PHSG are included in Agenda Item #8 of this meeting. Regional Growth Forecast (July 2012 – June 2013): The regional forecast is based on local land use plans and policies, and is meant to reasonably identify where growth is projected to occur in the region over the long-term. The forecast is completed through a multi-step, collaborative process that involves input from local jurisdictions, citizens, and elected officials. The PHSG will receive information on how the forecasts are incorporated with other Regional Plan deliverables. Prior RTP Commitments (July 2012 – December 2014): This element includes the commitments from the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS) approved in 2011. Some of the commitments that have a relationship to public health include: alternative land use and transportation scenarios that could further reduce greenhouse gas emissions including potential parking strategies; the Regional Transit Oriented Development Strategy and Updated Smart Growth Concept Map; Active Transportation Implementation Strategy;

13

Regional Complete Streets Policy; Public Health Policy Framework/Analysis; and Performance Monitoring. The PHSG will be updated as these commitments are developed. Public Health Policy White Paper (January 2013 – February 2014): The growing connection between public health and transportation planning will be evaluated and developed with input from the PHSG for this policy white paper. The paper will include background information as well as a description of the interrelationships between health and other policy areas given the comprehensive nature of public health within the regional planning context. Estimated Costs and Revenues (July 2013 – March 2014): The PHSG will receive information on the estimated costs for projects, programs, and services and revenue sources for the plan. Transportation Scenarios Development and Evaluation (January 2014 – September 2014): After the completion of the project evaluation phase, alternative transportation scenarios will be designed and evaluated against the plan performance measures. The PHSG will review the scenarios as they are developed in early 2014. Draft Chapter Development (September 2014 – February 2015): Draft chapters of the plan will be written from September 2014 through February 2015, which overlaps with the development of the Public Health Policy White Paper. This overlap is intentional since one of the goals of the white paper is to inform the development of the chapter or chapters of the plan that reference public health. Draft Plan Review (March 2015 – May 2015): The review of the overall Draft Regional Plan will take place in early spring 2015. The PHSG will be asked to provide input on the draft plan, including edits to the public health components developed previously during the policy white paper and draft chapter development phases of the planning process. Next Steps The Public Health Stakeholders Group will receive a presentation on the overall “Project Evaluation Criteria and Performance Measures” task on January 17, 2012. Based on the feedback given at the January meeting, draft project evaluation criteria will be presented to the PHSG in April along with an overview of previous performance measures. The PHSG will be asked to provide feedback on the development of plan performance measures at that time. In July, staff will present the draft performance measures, including public health revisions for further discussion. Attachment: 1. Final Regional Plan Schedule: FY2013 – FY 2016 Key Staff Contact: Phil Trom, (619) 699-7330, [email protected]

Q1: July – Sept 2012 Q2: Oct – Dec 2012 Q3: Jan – March 2013 Q4: April – June 2013 Q1: July – Sept 2013 Q2: Oct – Dec 2013 Q3: Jan – March 2014 Q4: April – June 2014 Q1: July – Sept 2014 Q2: Oct – Dec 2014 Q3: Jan – March 2015 Q4: April – June 2015 Q1: July – Sept 2015

FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

January 2013

November 2014

June 2015

» APPLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA & DEVELOP SCENARIOS

September 2013

December 2013

March 2014

July 2014

September 2014

December 2013

June 2013

» DEVELOP REGIONAL PLAN WORK PROGRAM

» ENGAGE IN PUBLIC OUTREACH & INVOLVEMENT

» PREPARE 2050 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST UPDATE (SERIES 13)

» UPDATE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA

» ISSUE NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR EIR December 2012

» DEVELOP DRAFT AIR QUALITY DETERMINATION

» ADDRESS COMMENTS & PREPARE DRAFT FINAL REGIONAL PLAN & FINAL EIR

» UPDATE PERFORMANCE MEASURES INCLUDING ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

» UPDATE TRANSPORTATION COST ESTIMATES

» EVALUATE TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS & SELECT PREFERRED SCENARIO

» PREPARE & RELEASE DRAFT REGIONAL PLAN INCLUDING SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY AND DRAFT EIR

March 2015

» DEVELOP TRANSPORTATION REVENUE PROJECTIONS

» FINALIZE PRIOR PLANNING COMMITMENTS FROM THE 2050 RTP/SCS

» REFINE & DEVELOP POLICY AREAS

» ESTABLISH REGIONAL VISION, GOALS, & OBJECTIVES

Regional Transit Oriented Development Policy

Regional Complete Streets Policy

Active Transportation Implementation Strategy (Bike Early Action Program, Safe Routes to School, Safe Routes to Transit)

Travel Demand Model Enhancements

Land Use/Transportation Scenarios & GHG Target Setting

Public Health

Land Use, Regional Growth, Urban Form, and Housing

Healthy Environment (Energy, Climate Change and Adaptation, Habitat Conservation, Shoreline Preservation, Water Quality, and Air Quality)

Infrastructure/Public Facilities (Access to Educational Facilities, Water Supply, Waste Water, Solid Waste)

Social Equity and Environmental Justice

Economic Strategies

Borders (Binational, Tribal, and Interregional)

Transportation

Military

February 2014

» DEFINE UNCONSTRAINED MULTIMODAL TRANSPORATION NETWORK

July 2013

» ADOPT FINAL 2050 REGIONAL GROWTH FORECAST July 2015

» ADOPT FINAL REGIONAL PLAN, ADOPT AIR QUALITY CONFORMITY DETERMINATION, CERTIFY FINAL EIR

July 2015

LEGEND:

DRAFT January 10, 2013

Major Task Sub-Task Sub-Task Component Milestone»

FINAL 2050 REGIONAL PLAN SCHEDULE

1559B 01/13

1

2

3

5

7

6

8

9

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

10

4

a

a

b

b

c

c

d

d

e

e

f

g

h

i

Attachment 1

14



15


Action Requested: DISCUSSION

2050 REGIONAL PLAN: TRANSPORTATION PROJECT File Number 3100000/3100400 EVALUATION CRITERIA

Introduction The SANDAG Board of Directors will establish the 2050 Regional Plan vision, goals, and policy objectives in spring 2013. In past Regional Transportation Plans (RTP) SANDAG has utilized project evaluation criteria and performance measures informed by these goals as elements of a multistep process to develop 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 Regional Plan multimodal transportation network alternatives. As part of the Regional Plan development, SANDAG will be reviewing and updating the current transportation project evaluation criteria and performance measures. The focus of this meeting’s discussion will be to collect input and/or ideas for potential public health evaluation criteria and methods, for consideration in the comprehensive project evaluation criteria development process. Included as Attachment 1 are the adopted 2050 RTP/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria for reference. Currently, project evaluation criteria include public health-related criteria such as GHG emissions and accessibility to Smart Growth areas, jobs, and transit services. As part of the criteria development process, staff will review the current criteria and work to incorporate revised methodologies and new criteria that are compatible with SANDAG modeling capabilities. Once the multimodal transportation network alternatives have been established, performance measures will be applied to compare and evaluate each network alternative. The performance measures organizational structure will be consistent with the Regional Plan goals. Next Steps At the April 18, 2013, Public Health Stakeholders Group meeting, staff will provide the draft project evaluation criteria, including public health revisions for further discussion. Additionally at this meeting, staff will present the plan performance measures for input and feedback. At the July 18, 2013, Public Health Stakeholders Group meeting, staff will provide the draft plan performance measures, including public health revisions for further discussion.

16

The 2050 Regional Plan transportation project evaluation criteria are expected to be approved by the Board of Directors in September 2013, while the plan performance measures are expected to be approved in December 2013. Attachment: 1. Technical Appendix 4 – Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria Key Staff Contact: Rachel Kennedy, (619) 699-1929, [email protected]

TA 4-2 Technical Appendix 4: Transportation Evaluation Criteria and Rankings

2050 Regional Transportation Plan

Introduction This technical appendix describes the

process for developing evaluation criteria

for prioritizing highway, high occupancy

vehicle (HOV) connectors, freeway

connectors, transit, and goods movement

projects included in the Unconstrained

Transportation Network of the 2050 Regional

Transportation Plan (RTP). This appendix also

includes information on the creation of

criteria to prioritize regional rail grade

separations, and screening criteria for the

regional arterial system.

Informed by the 2050 RTP goals set by the

Board of Directors, the project evaluation

criteria are one element of a multistep process

used to develop the revenue constrained

multimodal transportation network for the

RTP. Project rankings; along with other factors

such as funding availability, project readiness,

and overall network connectivity; were

considered when developing the proposed

2050 RTP network alternatives.

The Board of Directors approved the

transportation project evaluation criteria for

highway corridors, freeway and HOV

connectors, transit services, and freight

projects on June 11, 2010.

Transportation Project Evaluation Criteria SANDAG utilized criteria for evaluating and

ranking highway, transit, freeway connector

and HOV connectors in the previous 2030

RTP: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP). As

part of the development of the 2050 RTP, the

Executive Director and the Chair of the Board

of Directors established the Transportation

Project Evaluation Criteria Ad Hoc Working

Group (TPEC) to review and update the

transportation project evaluation criteria. A

comprehensive update of the regional arterial

screening criteria was done for the 2030 RTP

and was not modified for the 2050 RTP.

The TPEC was composed of representatives

from a number of standing SANDAG working

groups, including the Bicycle-Pedestrian

Working Group (BPWG), Cities/County

Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC),

Regional Planning Stakeholders Working

Group (SWG), Regional Planning Technical

Working Group (TWG), Tribal Transportation

Technical Working Group, as well as staff

from Caltrans, MTS, NCTD, the San Diego

County Regional Airport Authority, and

Port of San Diego. The TPEC met on a

monthly basis beginning in September

2009 and created and updated evaluation

criteria to analyze regional transit service,

highway, freeway connector, and HOV

connector projects.

The revisions to the RTP criteria were intended

to support the vision of the Regional

Comprehensive Plan (RCP) and address the

updated goals of the 2050 RTP. Where

appropriate, efforts also were taken to

simplify and standardize the criteria across

different modal categories. New criteria were

also added to address emerging issues such as

greenhouse gas (GHG) and to enhance social

equity analysis. The criteria are structured with

a standard 100-point scoring system.

The TPEC organized the updated criteria into

three major categories: Serves Travel Needs,

Develops Network Integration, and Addresses

Sustainability. The Serves Travel Needs

category contains criteria that focus on the

movement of people and goods and awards

points for projects that serve peak-period

trips, goods movement, or congested

corridors. The Network Integration criteria

give credit for projects that provide

connectivity between surrounding land uses

and the transportation network. Criteria in

this category include measures such as serving

Attachment 1

17

SANDAG 2050 Regional Transportation Plan TA 4-3

RCP Smart Growth Areas, incorporation of

transit and/or Managed or HOV lanes, and

linking high frequency transit. The Addresses

Sustainability category focuses on criteria that

fall within the “3 Es” of healthy environment,

economic prosperity and social equity. These

criteria provide for a comprehensive

assessment of the annual capital, operation,

and maintenance costs of the project in

relation to the number of people moved or

person hours saved.

The same three criteria categories are used for

transit services, highway, freeway connector,

and HOV connector criteria, with variations in

the individual criteria. Within each of the

three categories, weighting for each of the

individual criteria also was determined. The

individual criteria descriptions, weighting, and

score details are listed in Tables TA 4.1 to

TA 4.16.

Highway Corridors SANDAG has used criteria for evaluating and

ranking highway corridor projects since 1997.

Using the 2030 RTP criteria as a starting point,

the TPEC created a set of revised highway

corridor evaluation criteria which reflect

SANDAG Board-adopted principles on smart

growth, social equity, GHG reductions, and

the Urban Area Transit Study.

The fifteen highway evaluation criteria

presented in Tables TA 4.1 and TA 4.2

quantify project traffic usage, evacuation

route access, travel time savings, cost, critical

linkages, safety, goods movement, access to

employment, smart growth, carpool lane

integration, transit integration, greenhouse

gas emissions, social equity, habitat

preservation, and residential impacts.

SANDAG staff has worked with Caltrans,

MTS, NCTD, the TPEC members and their

respective working groups to revise and

update the criteria. Table TA 4.3 describes the

highway evaluation criteria weighting.

The highway network corridor evaluation was

used to develop the Revenue Constrained

Network alternatives and project phasing

included in the 2050 RTP. The

46 unconstrained highway corridors originally

evaluated for the 2050 RTP are listed in

priority order in Table TA 4.4.

The prioritized list of highway projects was

used as a tool in assembling logical

transportation networks of highway projects

that complement transit and arterial projects.

Priority order is not necessarily strictly

followed. Rather, emphasis is placed upon

developing meaningful networks in

accordance with the 2050 RTP goals

and objectives.

High Occupancy Vehicle Connectors HOV connectors will facilitate direct HOV

to HOV access and allow for continuous

movement on the HOV or Managed Lanes

network from freeway to freeway. The

HOV connector criteria and weighting are

shown in Tables TA 4.5 through 4.7. The

HOV Connectors are ranked by pair and

shown in Table TA 4.8. Nine HOV

connectors are included in the Revenue

Constrained Scenario.

Freeway-to-Freeway Connectors The TPEC also updated the Freeway-to-

Freeway Connector criteria. The TPEC

provided input that resulted in the use a

number of the same criteria that were used to

evaluate highway projects. The nine criteria

shown in Tables TA 4.9 though 4.11 quantify

project area accident rates, goods movement,

mobility, congestion relief, transit integration,

and cost effectiveness. The ranked projects

are shown in Table TA 4.12.

18


Transit Services The TPEC, with key input from MTS and

NCTD staff, updated the Transit Services

Evaluation criteria in order to prioritize new

transit services. Building on the criteria

developed for use in the 2030 RTP, the TPEC

recommended a number of modifications

which integrate the Regional Comprehensive

Plan and transit connectivity. The evaluation

of the 53 regional transit services was used to

develop the Revenue Constrained Network

alternatives and project phasing included in

the 2050 RTP.

Tables TA 4.13 and 4.14 describe the transit

services evaluation criteria and detailed

scoring. Table TA 4.15 describes the transit

services criteria weighting. All transit routes

evaluated for the 2050 RTP are listed in

priority order in Table TA 4.16.

Goods Movement The 2050 Goods Movement Strategy (GMS)

considers the growing importance of freight

and goods movement to the region’s

economic prosperity and seeks to balance

regional and national freight priorities. The

unconstrained goods movement network

consists primarily of road and truckway

projects (accommodating more than

90 percent of freight by volume) that

comprise the backbone of the freight

distribution network. The unconstrained

network outlined in the 2050 GMS also

includes several maritime, rail, border, air

cargo, intermodal, and pipeline related

projects. Projects included in the GMS

were evaluated using evaluation criteria

approved by the Board of Directors on

June 11, 2010, and a prioritized GMS list

of projects was developed.

An Ad Hoc Freight Stakeholders Group was

formed to provide input on the development

of the 2050 GMS to include feedback on

evaluation criteria, and related goods

movement planning activities. The Ad Hoc

Freight Stakeholders Group was comprised of

members representing the Port of San Diego

and Port users; San Diego County Regional

Airport Authority, and shippers and carriers

using the airport; San Diego and Arizona

Eastern Railway; BNSF Railway; regional

truckers; warehouse operators; San Diego

Regional and Otay Mesa Chambers of

Commerce; San Diego World Trade Center;

Caltrans; and others interested in efficient

goods movement in the San Diego region.

Additionally, two members from the

Cities/County Transportation Advisory

Committee (CTAC), representing the Public

Works Directors in the San Diego region, were

appointed to participate on the Ad Hoc

Freight Stakeholders Group.

The evaluation criteria for the 2050 GMS

follow the policy goals established by the

Board of Directors for the 2050 RTP. The

evaluation criteria also consider the two

overarching themes for the 2050 RTP: Quality

of Travel & Livability, and Sustainability. The

goods movement project evaluation criteria

are grouped into three focus areas, as follows:

Serves Freight System Needs

Develops Freight Network Integration

Addresses Sustainability

The “Serves Freight System Needs” and

“Develops Network Integration” focus areas

generally correspond to the Quality of Travel

& Livability theme while “Addresses

Sustainability” is linked to the Three “Es”

(Social Equity, Healthy Environment, and

Prosperous Economy).

Staff worked with the Ad Hoc Freight

Stakeholder Group to develop scores and

weights for the individual criteria included

under each of the three focus areas.

19


Tables TA 4.17 through 4.21 provide a list of

the evaluation criteria focus areas and

descriptions for each criterion.

Changes to the evaluation criteria weightings

from the 2030 Goods Movement Action Plan

(GMAP) were driven by the addition of the

Sustainability focus area. Additionally the

evaluation criteria weightings were adapted

for each individual mode to account for

significant differences in scale among modes.

The final project list ranked by mode is

included in Table 4.22.

Evaluation criteria developed for goods

movement projects were used to rank freight

projects by mode, including Maritime (seaport

related), Rail and Intermodal Facilities,

Truck/Roadway, and Airport projects that

facilitate goods movement and integrate the

region’s freight network. The ranked projects

were used to develop the prioritized lists of

goods movement projects by mode to be

incorporated into the 2050 RTP. In addition to

the ranked projects, pipeline projects and

goods movements projects located on the

Mexican side of the border were listed as

“projects of interest” but not evaluated nor

ranked for funding.

Rail Grade Separation Criteria The Cities/County Transportation Advisory

Committee (CTAC) developed regional rail

grade separation prioritization criteria that

stress congestion relief, safety, and funding

needs as the primary elements with additional

consideration of other factors, including

effects on pedestrian traffic, bus transit

operations, emergency services, truck freight

operations, and noise.

In preparation for the development of the

criteria, staff conducted a literature search of

other rail grade separation prioritization

criteria. These included the California Public

Utilities Commission criteria, other states’

criteria, the federal government, as well as

articles published in research journals. The

findings formed the basis for the initial

discussions within CTAC.

The intent of the implementation of a

regional rail grade separation program is to

provide funding for construction of significant

traffic congestion relief projects through the

implementation of rail grade separations

where other more economical alternatives are

demonstrably not feasible or practical.

Elimination of crossings is considered a

potentially practical alternative. Program

allocations will need to be considered in

conjunction with other regional transportation

funding priorities and needs, and will be

dependent on the availability of funding from

federal, state, and local sources.

The rail grade separation prioritization criteria

were accepted by the SANDAG Board of

Directors for inclusion in the 2030 RTP on

October 13, 2006. For the 2050 RTP minor

revisions were made to the criteria after a

review was conducted by a working group

formed by the San Diego Regional Traffic

Engineers Council.

Projects were prioritized based on two criteria

categories: project-specific criteria and

Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)

housing production. The project-specific

criteria are worth 75 percent, and the RHNA

housing production criteria comprises

25 percent of the total project score. The

criteria are shown in Table TA 4.23. The final

rankings are included in Table TA 4.24.

Regional Arterial System The Regional Arterial System constitutes that

part of the local street and road network

which, in conjunction with the system of

highways and transit services, provides for a

significant amount of mobility throughout the

region. The Regional Arterial System defines

20


Table TA 4.3 – Highway Corridor Project Evaluation Criteria Weighting

Focus Areas

2050 RTP Goals Criteria Description

Max. Score

Total Percent

Serves Travel Needs

System Preservation &

Safety Reliability

Located in a High Accident Rate Area

Is the project located in an area with a high vehicular crash rate?

5

40

System Preservation &

Safety

Provides Access to Evacuation Routes

Does the project provide evacuation access for regional hazard areas including federally recognized Indian reservations?

5

Mobility, Prosperous Economy

Serves Goods Movement

Does the project accommodate goods movement and provide for congestion relief?

10

Mobility Serves Daily Person Trips

What is the number of potential daily person trips located within one mile of the highway corridor?

5

Mobility Provides Mobility and Congestion Relief

What is the increase in person capacity resulting from the project?

10

Mobility, Healthy Environment

Provides Congestion Relief

What is the number of daily person-hours saved?

5

Develops Network Integration

Mobility, Healthy Environment

Serves RCP Smart Growth Areas

Does the project serve RCP Smart Growth Areas?

5

20

Mobility Facilitates Carpool and Transit Mobility

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

5

Healthy Environment

Minimizes Habitat and Residential Impacts

Does the project minimize negative habitat and residential impacts?

5

Mobility, Reliability

Critical Linkage Is the project located in a high volume freeway corridor and/or lacking a continuous parallel arterial listed in the Regional Arterial System to provide congestion relief?

5

21


Table TA 4.3 Highway Corridor Project Evaluation Criteria Weighting (Continued)

Focus Areas 2050 RTP

Goals Criteria Description Max. Score

Total Percent


Prosperous Economy

Cost-Effectiveness of Congestion Relief

What is the annual public capital and operating project cost divided by person-hours saved?

20

40

Healthy Environment

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

10

Social Equity, Mobility

Provides Accessibility to Low-Income/Minority/ Senior (75+) Areas Including Federally Recognized Indian Reservations

Does the highway corridor serve low-income/minority/senior (75+) areas including federally recognized Indian reservations within one mile of the project?

4


Provides Accessibility to Federally Recognized Indian Reservations

Does the highway corridor serve federally recognized Indian reservations within one mile of the project?

1

Prosperous Economy,


Access to Jobs What is the number of projected 2050 jobs served within one mile of the project?

5

22


Table TA 4.15 – Transit Services Project Evaluation Criteria Weighting



Total Percent

Serves Travel Needs

Reliability, Healthy

Environment

Serves Congested Areas

Does the route serve the more congested highway corridors or arterials in the region?

10

35

Mobility Serves Peak Period Trips

What are the number of potential transit trips within the capture areas of the transit stations/stops and park-and-ride facilities?

5

Mobility, Reliability

Provides Time Competitive/ Reliable Transit

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

10

Mobility Peak Transit Ridership

What is the morning and afternoon peak-period transit utilization?

10

Mobility Off-Peak Transit Ridership

What is the midday off-peak transit utilization?

N/A

Develops Network Integration

Mobility, Reliability, Healthy

Environment

Links High-Frequency Transit Services

How many other high-frequency (timed transfer service or at least 15 minute service) transit routes does the route connect to?

15

25

Healthy Environment

Serves RCP Smart Growth Areas

Does the route serve existing/planned/pending and/or potential RCP Smart Growth areas?

10

23


Table TA 4.15 – Transit Services Project Evaluation Criteria Weighting (Continued)



Total Percent


Prosperous Economy

Cost Effectiveness

What is the annual public project capital and operating cost divided by passenger miles?

20

40

Healthy Environment

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

10

Social Equity,

Mobility

Provides Accessibility to Low-Income/Minority/ Senior (75+) Areas Including Federally Recognized Indian Reservations

Does the transit service serve low-income/minority areas including federally recognized Indian reservations within ½ mile and senior (75+) areas including federally recognized Indian reservations within ¼ mile of the transit route’s stations/stops?

4

Social Equity,

Mobility

Provides Accessibility to Federally Recognized Indian Reservations

Does the transit service serve federally recognized Indian reservations within ½ mile of the transit route’s stations/stops

1

Prosperous Economy,

Social Equity,

Mobility

Access to Jobs What is the total number of projected 2050 jobs served within ½ mile of the transit route’s stations/ tops?

5

24


Table TA 4.21 – Freight Project Evaluation Criteria and Weighting

Focus Area Criteria Description

Max. Score

Total Percent

Serves Freight System Needs

Throughput How much additional freight can be accommodated by the project? 20

45

Relieves Freight System Bottlenecks/Capacity Constraints and Reduces Delay

Does the project improve average travel time for freight?

20

Improves freight system and/or modal safety

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

5

Develops Freight

Network Integration

Improves Freight System Management/Efficiency

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

10

20

Provides Critical Modal/ Intermodal Link/Connectivity

Does the project integrate the local freight system? 10


Cost-Effectiveness (Project Lifecycle)

How does the project rank against others with respect to project cost/capacity? Does project have outside funding sources to leverage public funds?

15

35 Minimizes Community Impacts; Improves Safety, Reduces Hazards

Does the project minimize/address community impacts?

10

Minimizes Environmental/Habitat Impacts

Does the project minimize/address environmental/habitat impacts? 10

25

Documents

MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDAPUBLIC HEALTH STAKEHOLDERS GROUP The Public Health Stakeholders Group may take action on any item appearing on this agenda. Thursday, January 17, 2013 3 to