PROPOSED DECISION Agenda ID #16363 (Rev

ALJ/GK1/jt2 PROPOSED DECISION Agenda ID #16363 (Rev. 1) Ratesetting 4/26/18 Item #15 Decision PROPOSED DECISION OF ALJ KELLY (Mailed 3/15/18) BEFORE THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Application of the San Diego Association of Governments for an order authorizing construction of two light-rail vehicle tracks grade separated above I-5 (South), I-5 (North) Application 17-01-005 and grade separated below I-8, SR-52 in the City of San Diego, San Diego County, California. Application 17-01-006 And Related Matters. Application 17-01-007 Application 17-01-008 Application 17-01-009 DECISION APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE COMMISSION’S SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AUTHORIZING THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO CONSTRUCT 35 GRADE-SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CROSSINGS IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, AS PART OF THE MID-COAST CORRIDOR LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT AND AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT 15 ADDITIONAL AT-GRADE CROSSINGS AT THE NINE NEW PROPOSED STATIONS 213218877 - 1 - A.17-01-005 et al. ALJ/GK1/jt2 PROPOSED DECISION (Rev. 1) Table of Contents Title Page DECISION APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE COMMISSION’S SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AUTHORIZING THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO CONSTRUCT 35 GRADE-SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CROSSINGS IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, AS PART OF THE MID-COAST CORRIDOR LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT AND AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT 15 ADDITIONAL AT-GRADE CROSSINGS AT THE NINE NEW PROPOSED STATIONS ................................................................................................... 1 Summary ............................................................................................................................ 2 1. Background ................................................................................................................ 2 2. Scope of the Proceeding ........................................................................................... 5 3. Terms of the Settlement Agreement ...................................................................... 6 4. The Settlement ........................................................................................................... 7 5. Resolution of Issues Presented in the Scoping Memo....................................... 10 6. Issues Not Resolved by the Settlement Agreement ........................................... 10 7. Agreement Concerning Submission of Application Material.......................... 14 8. Crossing Identification Numbers ......................................................................... 15 9. Environmental Review and CEQA Compliance ................................................ 19 10. Filing Requirements and Staff Recommendations ............................................ 21 11. Categorization and Need for Hearings ............................................................... 21 12. Comments on Proposed Decision ........................................................................ 21 13. Assignment of Proceeding .................................................................................... 22 Findings of Fact ............................................................................................................... 22 Conclusions of Law ........................................................................................................ 23 ORDER ........................................................................................................................... 24 Attachment A - Partial Settlement Agreement Between the Safety and Enforcement Division and the San Diego Association of Governments on Issues Presented in Application 17-01-005 et al. - i - A.17-01-005 et al. ALJ/GK1/jt2 PROPOSED DECISION (Rev. 1) DECISION APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS AND THE COMMISSION’S SAFETY AND ENFORCEMENT DIVISION AUTHORIZING THE SAN DIEGO ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS TO CONSTRUCT 35 GRADE-SEPARATED PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CROSSINGS IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, AS PART OF THE MID-COAST CORRIDOR LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT AND AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT 15 ADDITIONAL AT-GRADE CROSSINGS AT THE NINE NEW PROPOSED STATIONS Summary This decision approves the proposed Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement) between the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) and the Commission’s Safety and Enforcement Division. We find that the Settlement Agreement is reasonable in light of the whole record, consistent with law, and in the public interest, and approve it. SANDAG is authorized to construct 35 grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossings in the City of San Diego, located in San Diego County as part of the Mid-Coast Corridor Light-Rail Transit Project. The additional crossings at each of the nine proposed stations are at-grade crossings and are subject to the California Public Utilities Code provisions, the California Public Utilities Commission’s (Commission) Rules of Practice and Procedure, and the Commission’s General Orders. SANDAG submitted sufficient information with the Settlement Agreement for us to approve the 15 additional crossings associated with the nine new stations. The consolidated proceedings are closed. 1. Background On January 4, 2017, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) filed Applications (A.) 17-01-005, A.17-01-006, A.17-01-007, A.17-01-008 and A.17-01-009, seeking authorization from the California Public Utilities - 2 - A.17-01-005 et al. ALJ/GK1/jt2 PROPOSED DECISION (Rev. 1) Commission (Commission) to construct 35 grade-separated pedestrian and bicycle crossings of two light-rail vehicle tracks, all in the city of San Diego, located in San Diego County California, all of which are part of the Mid-Coast Corridor Light Rail Transit Project (Mid-Coast Project).1 Additionally, the Project will include nine new stations along the extension, four at-grade and five aerial, where the light-rail vehicles will stop to allow passengers to board and disembark from the trains. The Commission’s Safety and Enforcement Division (SED) filed protests2 to A.17-01-005, A.17-01-006, A.17-01-007 and A.17-01-009 on February 10, 2017. 1 The Mid-Coast Project includes an extension of the San Diego Trolley Blue Line from San Diego’s Old Town to University Towne Center in University City. In A.17-01-005 SANDAG requests authorization from the Commission to construct 12 grade-separated crossings of two light-rail tracks below Interstate 8 and State Route 52 and above Interstate 5 South and Interstate 5 North. In A.17-01-006 SANDAG requests authorization from the Commission to construct nine grade-separated crossings of two light rail-tracks above Ocean Beach Bike Path, Friars Road, Balboa Avenue, Genesee Ave/Regents Road, Eastgate Mall, Executive Drive, Executive Square, La Jolla Village Drive (East), and Esplanade Court. In A.17-01-007 SANDAG requests authorization from the Commission to construct eight grade-separated crossings below Tecolote Road and Clairemont Drive, La Jolla Colony Drive and Nobel Drive and above four segments along La Jolla Village Drive. In A.17-01-008 SANDAG requests authorization from the Commission to construct two light-rail vehicle only tracks grade-separated above the Los Angeles – San Diego – San Luis Obispo Rail (LOSSAN) Corridor tacks. In A.17-01-009 SANDAG requests authorization from the Commission to construct five grade-separated crossings of two light-rail tracks above Gilman Drive (South), Sixth Lane, Gilman Drive (North), Campus Point Drive, and Voigt Drive. 2 SED supported the construction of the grade separated rail crossings as well as the proposed design submitted in SANDAG’s application where the design physically separates vehicles and pedestrians from the proposed transit tracks. However, SED’s protest contends that other aspects of the design; such as the proposed pedestrian stations, requires pedestrians to cross the new light rail tracks at-grade. Therefore SED believes that SANDAG must obtain authority from the Commission prior to implementing the crossings at the proposed pedestrian stations. Specifically, SED contends that SANDAG needs authority from the Commission for the crossings at the following proposed pedestrian stations: Tecolote, Clairemont, Balboa, Nobel Drive, VA Hospital, Pepper Canyon, Voigt Drive, Executive Drive and UTC Transit Center. SANDAG disputes that pedestrian stations are crossings and contends that they are Footnote continued on next page - 3 - A.17-01-005 et al. ALJ/GK1/jt2 PROPOSED DECISION (Rev. 1) SED filed a motion to consolidate these applications.3 SANDAG filed a response to SED’s protests on February 21, 2017. A PHC was held in San Diego, California on March 3, 2017. SANDAG and SED were present at the PHC. SANDAG did not oppose the motion to consolidate, but requested that A.17-01-008 also be consolidated. The ALJ granted the motion to consolidate at the PHC and followed up with a ruling approving the consolidation on April 24, 2017. On March 23, 2017, SANDAG filed a motion for summary judgment (MSJ). On April 14, 2017, SED filed a response to the MSJ. On April 28, 2017, SANDAG filed a reply to SED’s response. On May 3, 2017, SED sought leave to file a response to SANDAG’s reply. The ALJ denied this request by e-mail ruling on May 5, 2017. The MSJ was denied by the ALJ on May 18, 2017. An evidentiary hearing was held on August 14, 2017 in San Diego. On November 16, 2017, SANDAG and SED filed

Load more