Travel Forecasting Results Report

August 2014

Prepared by

Travel Forecasting Results Report August 2014

Prepared by: The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PREFACE ...... P-1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1-1 1.1 Purpose of the Report ...... 1-1 1.2 Description of the Mid-Coast Corridor ...... 1-2 1.3 Alternatives under Consideration ...... 1-2 1.3.1 No-Build Alternative ...... 1-2 1.3.2 Build Alternative ...... 1-12 2.0 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL AND TRAVEL DEMAND...... 2-1 2.1 Travel Demand Model ...... 2-1 2.2 Travel Analysis Districts ...... 2-2 2.3 Travel Demand Forecasts ...... 2-4 2.4 Major Transit Markets ...... 2-6 3.0 ALTERNATIVES FROM A TRAVEL FORECASTING PERSPECTIVE ...... 3-1 3.1 No-Build Alternative ...... 3-1 3.2 Build Alternative ...... 3-2 3.2.1 Operating Plan ...... 3-2 3.2.2 Station Parking ...... 3-3 3.2.3 Background Transit System...... 3-3 3.2.4 Travel Times ...... 3-3 4.0 TRAVEL FORECASTING RESULTS ...... 4-1 4.1 Transit Results ...... 4-1 4.1.1 Daily Trips by Mode ...... 4-1 4.1.2 Daily Transit Boardings ...... 4-4 4.1.3 Passenger Miles ...... 4-25 4.1.4 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets ...... 4-26 4.1.5 Parking Demand...... 4-27 4.2 Highway Results ...... 4-27 4.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled ...... 4-28 4.2.2 Vehicle Hours of Travel ...... 4-28 4.2.3 Average Speed...... 4-28 4.3 Highway and Transit Travel Times ...... 4-31 5.0 TRANSIT USER BENEFITS ...... 5-1 5.1 The Concept of User Benefits ...... 5-1 5.2 New Starts Baseline Alternative ...... 5-2 5.3 New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Trip Purpose and Time Period ...... 5-4 5.3.1 Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative ...... 5-4 5.3.2 Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative ...... 5-6 5.4 New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Major Transit Market ...... 5-7 5.4.1 Build Alternatives Compared to No-Build Alternative ...... 5-7 5.4.2 Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative ...... 5-9 5.5 Thematic Maps ...... 5-11 5.5.1 Development of Thematic Maps ...... 5-11

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 i Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

5.5.2 Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative for all Income Levels Combined...... 5-12 5.5.3 Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative for Low-Income Travelers Only ...... 5-21 5.5.4 Summary ...... 5-30 6.0 RESULTS FOR ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH THE PROJECT ...... 6-1 6.1 Transit Results ...... 6-1 6.1.1 Daily Trips by Mode ...... 6-1 6.1.2 Daily Transit Boardings ...... 6-4 6.1.3 Passenger Miles ...... 6-8 6.1.4 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets ...... 6-15 6.1.5 Parking Demand...... 6-17 6.2 Highway Summary ...... 6-17 6.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled ...... 6-20 6.2.2 Vehicle Hours of Travel ...... 6-20 6.2.3 Average Speed...... 6-20 7.0 REFERENCES ...... 7-1

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT ii August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

List of Appendices

APPENDIX A MODE OF ACCESS AND EGRESS TABLES ...... A-1 Table A-1. Station Boardings by Access Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) ...... A-1 Table A-2. Station Alightings by Egress Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) ...... A-4 Table A-3. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project Alternative (in PA Format) ...... A-7 Table A-4. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project (in PA Format) ...... A-9 Table A-5. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format) ...... A-11 Table A-6. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format) ...... A-13 Table A-7. No-Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) ...... A-15 Table A-8. No Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) ...... A-17 Table A-9. Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) ..... A-19 Table A-10. Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) ...... A-21 Table A-11. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) ...... A-23 Table A-12. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) ...... A-25 APPENDIX B USER BENEFITS BY TRAVEL ANALYSIS DISTRICT ...... B-1 Table B-1. User Benefits by Travel Analysis District ...... B-1

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 iii Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

List of Figures

Figure 1-1. Mid-Coast Corridor...... 1-3 Figure 1-2. No-Build Alternative Transportation Improvements ...... 1-5 Figure 1-3. No-Build Alternative Major Bus Routes ...... 1-7 Figure 1-4. No-Build Alternative Bus Route 150 ...... 1-8 Figure 1-5. No-Build Alternative Trolley Operating Plan in 2030 ...... 1-10 Figure 1-6. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project ...... 1-13 Figure 1-7. Conceptual Plan and Profile of Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project ...... 1-15 Figure 1-8. Genesee Avenue Design Concepts ...... 1-20 Figure 1-9. Visual Simulation of Genesee Avenue with Center Columns ...... 1-21 Figure 1-10. Visual Simulation of Genesee Avenue with Straddle Bents ...... 1-21 Figure 1-11. Site Concept for Tecolote Road Station ...... 1-23 Figure 1-12. Site Concept for Clairemont Drive Station ...... 1-24 Figure 1-13. Site Concept for Balboa Avenue Station ...... 1-25 Figure 1-14. Site Concept for Nobel Drive Station ...... 1-26 Figure 1-15. Site Concept for Optional VA Medical Center Station ...... 1-27 Figure 1-16. Site Concepts for UCSD West Station (Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option) ...... 1-28 Figure 1-17. Site Concept for UCSD East Station ...... 1-29 Figure 1-18. Site Concepts for Executive Drive Station, with and without Genesee Avenue Design Option ...... 1-30 Figure 1-19. Site Concepts for UTC Transit Center, with and without Genesee Avenue Design Option ...... 1-32 Figure 1-20. Existing Traction Power Substation at Mission Valley Center Station ...... 1-33 Figure 1-21. Traction Power Substation Layout ...... 1-34 Figure 1-22. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Opening Year Trolley Operating Plan ...... 1-37 Figure 1-23. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 2030 Trolley Operating Plan ...... 1-39 Figure 2-1. San Diego Travel Analysis District System...... 2-3 Figure 2-2. Transit Travel Demand between Major Transit Markets ...... 2-8 Figure 4-1. Route 150 and Trolley Blue Line Daily Boardings and Alightings ...... 4-9 Figure 4-2. Trolley Green Line Daily Boardings and Alightings...... 4-13 Figure 4-3. Trolley Orange Line Daily Boardings and Alightings ...... 4-15 Figure 4-4. No-Build Alternative—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 4-19 Figure 4-5. No-Build Alternative—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress ...... 4-19 Figure 4-6. Build Alternative—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 4-21 Figure 4-7. Build Alternative—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress ...... 4-21 Figure 4-8. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 4-23

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT iv August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

Figure 4-9. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress ...... 4-23 Figure 5-1. New Starts Baseline Alternative ...... 5-3 Figure 5-2. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones ...... 5-13 Figure 5-3. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones ...... 5-14 Figure 5-4. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones ...... 5-15 Figure 5-5. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones ...... 5-16 Figure 5-6. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones ...... 5-17 Figure 5-7. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones ...... 5-18 Figure 5-8. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones...... 5-19 Figure 5-9. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones ...... 5-20 Figure 5-10. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-22 Figure 5-11. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-23 Figure 5-12. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-24 Figure 5-13. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-25 Figure 5-14. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-26 Figure 5-15. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-27 Figure 5-16. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers ...... 5-28 Figure 5-17. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers...... 5-29 Figure 6-1. Existing Conditions Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 6-9 Figure 6-2. Existing Conditions Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress ...... 6-9 Figure 6-3. Existing Conditions with the Project Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 6-11

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 v Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

Figure 6-4. Existing Conditions with the Project Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress ...... 6-11 Figure 6-5. Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Medical Center Station Option Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access ...... 6-13 Figure 6-6. Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Medical Center Station Option Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress...... 6-13

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT vi August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

List of Tables

Table 1-1. No-Build Alternative Bus Operating Plan in 2030 ...... 1-9 Table 1-2. No-Build Alternative Trolley Operating Plan ...... 1-11 Table 1-3. Traction Power Substations Locations ...... 1-34 Table 1-4. Trolley Operating Plans...... 1-36 Table 1-5. Build Alternative Bus Routes Serving Trolley Stations ...... 1-40 Table 2-1. Daily Person Trip Productions from the Mid-Coast Corridor ...... 2-5 Table 2-2. Daily Person Trip Attractions to the Mid-Coast Corridor ...... 2-6 Table 3-1. Park-and-Ride Capacity for the Trolley Blue Line Extension ...... 3-3 Table 3-2. Build Alternative Operating Plan for Major Transit Routes in the Mid- Coast Corridor ...... 3-4 Table 3-3. Station-to-Station Travel Times and Distances ...... 3-7 Table 4-1. 2030 System-Wide Daily Trips ...... 4-2 Table 4-2. 2030 System-Wide Daily Transit Trips by Purpose ...... 4-3 Table 4-3. 2030 Daily Transit Boardings ...... 4-5 Table 4-4. 2030 Daily Boardings by Station ...... 4-7 Table 4-5. 2030 Transit Passenger Miles ...... 4-25 Table 4-6. 2030 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets ...... 4-26 Table 4-7. Parking Demand Summary for Alternatives...... 4-27 Table 4-8. 2030 Daily Highway System Measures for Region ...... 4-29 Table 4-9. 2030 Daily Highway System Measures for Mid-Coast Corridor ...... 4-30 Table 4-10. 2010 and 2030 Travel Time Summary ...... 4-32 Table 5-1. Route 150 and Route 156 Service Headways in the New Starts Baseline Alternative ...... 5-2 Table 5-2. 2030 Daily New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Trip Purpose (Build Alternatives Compared to No-Build Alternative) ...... 5-5 Table 5-3. 2030 Daily New Transit Trips and Daily User Benefits by Trip Purpose (Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative) ...... 5-6 Table 5-4. Summary of Daily New Transit Trips by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative) ...... 5-8 Table 5-5. Summary of Daily User Benefits by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative) ...... 5-8 Table 5-6. Summary of Daily New Transit Trips by Major Transit Market (Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative) ...... 5-10 Table 5-7. Summary of Daily User Benefits by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative) ...... 5-10 Table 6-1. 2010 System-Wide Daily Trips ...... 6-2 Table 6-2. 2010 System-Wide Daily Transit Trips by Purpose ...... 6-3 Table 6-3. 2010 Daily Transit Boardings ...... 6-4 Table 6-4. 2010 Daily Boardings by Station ...... 6-6

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 vii Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

Table 6-5. 2010 Transit Passenger Miles ...... 6-15 Table 6-6. 2010 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets ...... 6-16 Table 6-7. 2010 Parking Demand Summary ...... 6-17 Table 6-8. 2010 Daily Highway System Measures for Region ...... 6-18 Table 6-9. 2010 Daily Highway System Measures for Mid-Coast Corridor ...... 6-19

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT viii August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

Abbreviations

The following acronyms, initialisms, and short forms are used in this report.

2030 RTP 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future 2050 RTP 2050 Regional Transportation Plan: Our Region, Our Future ADA Americans with Disabilities Act C&S communications and signaling CEQA California Environmental Quality Act DARs direct-access ramps FTA Federal Transit Administration HOV High-Occupancy Vehicle I- Interstate LOSSAN Los Angeles—San Diego—San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency LRT Light Rail Transit LRV light rail vehicles mph miles per hour MTDB Metropolitan Transit Development Board MTS Metropolitan Transit System MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices NCTD North County Transit District NTSA New Trolley Service Area OCS overhead catenary system OTTC Old Town Transit Center PA Production-Attraction SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments SEIS/SEIR Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report SR State Route TAPs Transit Access Points TPSS traction power substations UCSD University of California, San Diego UTC University Towne Centre VA Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 ix Travel Forecasting Results Report Table of Contents

VHT Vehicle Hours Traveled VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT x August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Preface

PREFACE

Refined Build Alternative The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) and supporting technical reports were circulated for a 60-day public review and comment period between May 17, 2013 and July 17, 2013. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Board of Directors approved the Refined Build Alternative for evaluation in the Final SEIS/SEIR on November 15, 2013 and amended the Refined Build Alternative on May 9, 2014, as documented in the Mid- Coast Corridor Transit Project Final Refined Build Alternative Report (SANDAG, 2014). The Refined Build Alternative generally reflects the Build Alternative with the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option evaluated in the Draft SEIS/SEIR; however, it also includes some additional refinements.

Section 2.4 in Chapter 2.0 of the Final SEIS/SEIR provides a detailed description of the Refined Build Alternative. The process of developing the refinements is discussed in Section 2.3 of Chapter 2.0 of the Final SEIS/SEIR. Validation of Technical Analysis SANDAG evaluated whether the refinements incorporated into the Refined Build Alternative would change the travel forecasting results described for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option in the Draft SEIS/SEIR. Specifically, SANDAG considered whether the following changes would materially affect the analysis and conclusions in this technical report:

· Changing the locations of the traction power substations · Modifying the layout of the Clairemont Drive, Nobel Drive, and UCSD East Stations · Adjusting the alignment near Voigt Drive · Removing the straddle bents at the Interstate 5 crossing near Nobel Drive · Modifying the location and configuration of several retaining walls · Adding two segments of aerial structure north of La Jolla Colony in place of a retaining wall · Adding one and removing four construction staging and laydown areas

SANDAG concluded that because the project refinements did not change the parking supply, background bus system, operating plan, or substantially change the station spacing, new forecasting results for the Refined Build Alternative were not required. As a result, the technical report prepared in support of the Draft SEIS/SEIR was retained in its original form, and the conclusions reached for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option reflected in the report are applicable to the Refined Build Alternative in the Final SEIS/SEIR.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 P-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Preface

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT P-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) have prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/SEIR) for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project in San Diego, California. The SEIS/SEIR supplements the following environmental documents: the Mid-Coast Corridor Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Environmental Impact Report (Metropolitan Transit Development Board [MTDB], 1995a); the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mid-Coast Corridor (MTDB, 1995b); and the Mid-Coast Corridor Project Balboa Extension and Nobel Drive Coaster Station Final Environmental Impact Statement (MTDB, 2001). The FTA is serving as lead agency for the SEIS in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, and SANDAG is serving as lead agency for the SEIR in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970.

The Draft SEIS/SEIR includes an analysis of the affected environment and potential impacts on the social, economic, cultural, and natural environment that would result from constructing and operating the alternatives under consideration within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The alternatives being considered and analyzed for potential impacts include a No-Build Alternative and a Build Alternative.

The Build Alternative is the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, or project, as it is planned to operate in 2030. The project consists of extending the existing San Diego Trolley (Trolley) Blue Line from the Santa Fe Depot north to the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC), via the existing Trolley tracks, and then north along new tracks to the University Towne Centre (UTC) Transit Center in University City, with eight new stations at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, Nobel Drive, University of California, San Diego (UCSD) West Campus, UCSD East Campus, Executive Drive, and the UTC Transit Center.

The Build Alternative includes two options for consideration. One option provides an additional station at the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center and the other is a design option for the aerial alignment along Genesee Avenue in University City. 1.1 Purpose of the Report This technical report presents the results of the travel forecasting analysis conducted for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. The travel forecasting analysis was performed using the SANDAG Series 11 Regional Travel Demand Forecasting Model (Series 11 model) (SANDAG, 2008b) and the FTA Summit program for calculation of transit user benefits. The Series 11 model was refined for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft SEIS/SEIR analysis of alternatives and FTA New Starts funding application for entry into Preliminary Engineering.

This technical report contains the following chapters:

· Introduction · Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand · Alternatives from a Travel Forecasting Perspective

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

· Travel Forecasting Results · Transit User Benefits · Results of Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project · References 1.2 Description of the Mid-Coast Corridor The Mid-Coast Corridor is the area centering on Interstate (I-) 5 and extending from Downtown San Diego on the south to UCSD and University City on the north (Figure 1-1). Located entirely within the City of San Diego, the corridor is bounded by the Pacific Ocean on the west and by I-805 and State Route (SR) 163 on the east. The Mid-Coast Corridor is topographically diverse, with terrain ranging from coastal beaches and bays to inland areas containing steep hillsides and narrow canyons.

The Mid-Coast Corridor is characterized by dense urban centers and an abundance of regional activity centers and other major trip generators. Dense population and employment centers currently anchor both the northern and southern ends of the Mid- Coast Corridor. The UCSD campus, the Westfield UTC shopping center, and regional hospitals are clustered in the north part of the corridor and represent the second most dense land uses in the county. At the south end of the corridor is the region’s only identified Metropolitan Center—Downtown San Diego—with the region’s densest land uses and high-rise development.

Other major land uses within or immediately adjacent to the corridor (Figure 1-1) include:

· Regional hospitals: Scripps Green Hospital, Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla (Scripps Hospital), UCSD Thornton Hospital, VA Medical Center, UCSD Medical Center Hillcrest, and Scripps Mercy Hospital · Major colleges and universities: UCSD, University of San Diego, San Diego Mesa College, and San Diego City College · Regional shopping centers: Westfield UTC, Fashion Valley, and Westfield Horton Plaza · Major parks and visitor attractions: Mission Bay Park, San Diego Zoo, SeaWorld San Diego, Old Town San Diego State Historic Park, Balboa Park, the Gaslamp Quarter, San Diego Convention Center, Petco Park, Rose Canyon Open Space Park, and Marian Bear Memorial Park · San Diego International Airport 1.3 Alternatives under Consideration This section describes the No-Build and Build Alternatives, and Build Alternative options that were selected for consideration in this report.

1.3.1 No-Build Alternative This section describes the transportation improvements assumed in the No-Build Alternative within the Mid-Coast Corridor that are evaluated in this technical report and carried forward

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-1. Mid-Coast Corridor

Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: The Trolley lines shown represent the 2010 Trolley operating plan.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

into the Draft SEIS/SEIR, as well as 2030 horizon year conditions resulting from projected development and changes in population and employment.

1.3.1.1 Highway and Transit Facility Improvements from the 2030 RTP The No-Build Alternative is evaluated in the context of the existing transportation facilities and services in the Mid-Coast Corridor (as characterized in 2010) and other facilities and services identified in the Revenue Constrained Scenario of the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP) (SANDAG, 2007). Since the No- Build Alternative provides the background transportation network against which the Build Alternative’s impacts are identified and assessed, the No-Build Alternative excludes the Mid- Coast Corridor Transit Project but does include continued and enhanced bus service on Route 150. The No-Build Alternative that was originally developed for the Draft SEIS/SEIR, and presented during the CEQA and NEPA scoping processes, was derived from the 2030 RTP. In October 2011, the SANDAG Board of Directors adopted a new regional transportation plan that extended the planning horizon from 2030 to 2050, the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan: Our Region, Our Future (2050 RTP) (SANDAG, 2011). However, the 2030 RTP has been retained as the basis for the No-Build Alternative because, as discussed below, no substantive differences exist between the 2030 and 2050 RTPs that would alter the environmental analysis.

The 2050 RTP was reviewed to determine if it includes any additional funded projects planned for implementation in the Mid-Coast Corridor by 2030 and not included in the 2030 RTP. The only major new project in the Mid-Coast Corridor is the extension of the Trolley Blue Line from the UTC Transit Center to Mira Mesa via the Sorrento Mesa/Carroll Canyon area. This extension is not an alternative to the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project since it is dependent on the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project’s implementation. The Mira Mesa/Sorrento Mesa extension has not been considered in a corridor-level alternatives analysis. Future analysis under NEPA and CEQA also would be required. Thus, this extension is not included in either the No-Build Alternative or the Build Alternative.

The 2050 RTP also was reviewed to determine if it includes any Mid-Coast Corridor projects that are assumed in the No-Build Alternative that are not in the 2030 phase of the 2050 RTP. The only major project not in the 2030 phase of the 2050 RTP is the addition of high- occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes in the segment of I-5 from I-8 to La Jolla Village Drive. The 2050 RTP defers the implementation of the HOV lanes in this segment until the decade ending in 2050. Because the 2050 RTP only defers implementation of the HOV lanes, but still includes them, they are assumed in the design and analysis of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project under the No-Build and Build Alternatives. The other Mid-Coast Corridor projects in the 2050 RTP that are not in the 2030 RTP and that are scheduled for implementation by 2030 are minor projects (e.g., minor adjustments to bus routes, increased bus frequency) and are not expected to have any substantial bearing on the analysis of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project.

Figure 1-2 shows the location of the major projects included in the Revenue Constrained Scenario of the 2030 RTP located within the Mid-Coast Corridor and assumed to exist in the No-Build Alternative. These include the following major improvements from the 2030 RTP:

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-2. No-Build Alternative Transportation Improvements

Source: SANDAG, 2013

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

· Double tracking of the Los Angeles—San Diego—San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor Agency (LOSSAN) tracks and other rail improvements, with an increase in frequency of COASTER service to every 20 minutes during peak periods and to every 60 minutes during off-peak periods in both directions. · HOV lanes on I-5 from I-8 north to Oceanside, with direct access ramps (DARs) at various locations, of which the DARs at Voigt Drive would be located within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The HOV lanes would be restricted to vehicles with two or more occupants. · Combination of HOV and Managed Lanes on I-805 from I-5 to South Bay, with DARs at Carroll Canyon Road and Nobel Drive. · Trolley low-floor system improvements to the Trolley Blue and Orange Lines, including station platform, power, and signaling improvements to allow extension of the Trolley Green Line to the 12th and Imperial Avenue Transit Center and use of low-floor vehicles systemwide.

1.3.1.2 Transit System Improvements The No-Build Alternative transit system within the Mid-Coast Corridor assumes services planned to be in operation in or by 2030. As with the existing transportation system, the No- Build Alternative transit system consists of Trolley services operated by the Metropolitan Transit System (MTS), Amtrak intercity passenger rail services, North County Transit District (NCTD)- operated COASTER commuter rail services, and MTS and NCTD bus transit services. MTS- operated bus services include local, express, limited express, and BRT services.

Under the No-Build Alternative, the 2030 Trolley operating plan would result in operation of the Trolley Blue Line from the San Ysidro Transit Center at the U.S.–Mexico International Border through Downtown San Diego to the Santa Fe Depot; the Trolley Green Line would operate north and east from the 12th and Imperial Avenue Transit Center through the OTTC and Mission Valley to Santee. The Trolley Orange Line would operate from Gillespie Field through Downtown San Diego to America Plaza.

Figure 1-3 shows the major MTS bus routes serving the Mid-Coast Corridor under the No- Build Alternative. Table 1-1 provides bus route information on fares and service frequency during both peak (i.e., 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) and off-peak (i.e., 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) periods. Service hours after 6:00 p.m. would be similar to existing operations.

In addition to existing transit services, the No-Build Alternative assumes improvements to existing bus transit and light rail transit (LRT) services operated by MTS. The following sections describe these improvements.

1.3.1.3 Bus Transit Service Improvements The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project is excluded from the No-Build Alternative to represent corridor conditions without the project. Without the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, more direct transit service would be needed to connect Downtown San Diego, the OTTC, and University City. To meet this need, continuing service on the existing Route 150, which provides bus transit services between Downtown San Diego, the OTTC, and University City, was added to the No-Build Alternative to replace the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. Figure 1-4 shows the bus route and station locations for Route 150 under the No-Build Alternative.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-3. No-Build Alternative Major Bus Routes

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-4. No-Build Alternative Bus Route 150

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Table 1-1. No-Build Alternative Bus Operating Plan in 2030

Frequency of Service Peak Off-Peak (6:00 to 9:00 a.m.) (9:00 a.m. to Route Description (3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) 3:00 p.m.) Fare 8 OTTC to Garnet and Bayard 15.0 15.0 $2.00 9 Garnet and Bayard to OTTC 15.0 15.0 $2.00 25 Clairemont Mesa to Fashion Valley Trolley Station 15.0 15.0 $2.00 27 Mission and Felspar to Clairemont Mesa 15.0 15.0 $2.00 30 UTC Transit Center to B and 9th Street 10.0 10.0 $2.25 31 Mira Mesa Transit Center to UTC Transit Center 15.0 15.0 $2.00 41 Fashion Valley Transit Center to UCSD West 10.0 10.0 $2.25 44 OTTC to Morena Blvd and Balboa Ave 7.5 7.5 $2.25 50 Park Blvd and Broadway to UTC Transit Center 15.0 15.0 $2.50 105 OTTC to UTC Transit Center 15.0 15.0 $2.25 120 Kearny Mesa Transit Center to 3rd and Market St 15.0 15.0 $2.25 150* 5th and Broadway to UTC Transit Center 15.0 30.0 $2.50 201/202 SuperLoop 7.5 7.5 $2.25** 276 UCSD Route—Voigt Drive Loop 15.0 15.0 ** 284 UCSD Route—UCSD West to Scripps Institution of Oceanography 15.0 15.0 ** 921 Mira Mesa Transit Center to UCSD West 15.0 15.0 $2.25 960 UTC Transit Center to Euclid Avenue Trolley Station 25.0 No service $2.50 Source: SANDAG, 2012 Notes: * Not included in 2030 RTP ** = Free for UCSD students and faculty OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre

Under the No-Build Alternative, the existing Route 150 would be modified to operate along Broadway in Downtown San Diego and along Pacific Highway from Downtown San Diego north to the OTTC. From the OTTC north, Route 150 would be modified to operate within the proposed I-5 HOV lanes north to Nobel Drive. This modification to Route 150 would improve travel times over the existing Route 150, which operates in the general-purpose lanes on I-5 north to Gilman Drive. Route 150 would operate at a frequency of 15 minutes during peak periods and 30 minutes during off-peak and midday periods. The service would be operated using articulated buses. Fares are assumed to be $2.50 for a one-way trip.

1.3.1.4 Trolley Service Improvements In addition to the bus service improvements, the No-Build Alternative assumes service frequency improvements to the existing Trolley system, as identified in the Revenue Constrained Scenario of the 2030 RTP and shown in Figure 1-5. Under the No-Build Alternative, the frequency of service on the Trolley Blue Line would increase from 15 to 7.5 minutes during off-peak periods. Thus, the Trolley Blue Line would operate 7.5- minute service all day, and the Trolley Orange and Green Lines would continue to operate at 15-minute service all day.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-5. No-Build Alternative Trolley Operating Plan in 2030

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Table 1-2 presents a summary of the Trolley operating plans for existing conditions and for the No-Build Alternative. The operating plans identify the service frequency during peak (i.e., 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) and off-peak (i.e., 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.) periods, vehicle type, and fares for the Trolley Green, Blue, and Orange Lines. Service after 6:00 p.m. would be similar to existing operations.

Table 1-2. No-Build Alternative Trolley Operating Plan

Off-Peak Peak Frequency Frequency Fare (6:00. to 9:00 a.m.) (9:00 a.m. to Vehicle (each Route (3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) 3:00 p.m.) Type way) 2010 Operating Plan (Existing Conditions) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center to OTTC 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit Center to OTTC 7.5 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 12th and 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Imperial Transit Center 2030 Operating Plan (No-Build Alternative) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center to 12th and 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Imperial Transit Center Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit Center to Santa 7.5 7.5 Trolley $2.50 Fe Depot Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to America Plaza 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: OTTC = Old Town Transit Center

1.3.1.5 Trolley Vehicle Fleet and Maintenance Facilities Operation of the No-Build Alternative Trolley operating plan in 2030 would require a fleet of 142 light rail vehicles (LRVs) including reserve, spare, and special-service vehicles. This represents an increase of eight vehicles over the existing fleet of 134 LRVs.

The maintenance shops located at 1255 Imperial Avenue in San Diego provide service and maintenance to the LRV fleet. The facility has the capacity to store approximately 200 vehicles, or 66 additional vehicles. The maintenance facilities would not require expansion under the No-Build Alternative.

1.3.1.6 Regional Growth and Development The No-Build Alternative assumes regional growth and development consistent with the 2030 RTP, which uses the Series 11: 2030 Regional Growth Forecast Update adopted by SANDAG. This forecast is used as a basis for land use and demographic information in the transportation and traffic modeling. The Series 11: 2030 Regional Growth Forecast Update: Process and Model Documentation (SANDAG, 2008) presents a basic description of the SANDAG forecast models used in the 2030 Regional Growth Forecast Update. The conditions created by the No-Build Alternative in 2030, as predicted by the Series 11 forecast (adjusted to exclude the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project), include the expected effects of development projects consistent with adopted land use plans.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-11 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

1.3.2 Build Alternative The Build Alternative consists of the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. This section describes the project, including minor modifications to bus services to improve access to stations and eliminate duplication of service with the extension of the Trolley Blue Line.

The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project provides for the extension of the Trolley Blue Line from the Santa Fe Depot in Downtown San Diego to the UTC Transit Center in University City. With the extension of the Trolley Blue Line, construction of the project would provide for continuous service on the Trolley Blue Line from the San Ysidro Transit Center at the U.S.–Mexico International Border to University City.

Figure 1-6 shows the project alignment and station locations and the VA Medical Center Station Option and the Genesee Avenue Design Option. The project would use the existing Trolley tracks for approximately 3.5 miles, from the Santa Fe Depot to a point just north of the OTTC and south of the San Diego River. The Trolley Blue Line trains would share the tracks with the Trolley Green Line trains. North of this point, the project includes construction of 10.9 miles of new double track extending to the terminus at the UTC Transit Center in University City.

In addition to the new double-track extension, the project includes eight new stations, upgrades to existing systems facilities between the Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC, and the acquisition of new Trolley vehicles for the extended project operation. Stations would be located at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, Nobel Drive, UCSD West Campus, UCSD East Campus, Executive Drive, and the UTC Transit Center. The project also includes an option for an additional station at the VA Medical Center.

The following sections describe the project alignment, stations, vehicles, power system and signaling, operating plan, and schedule for implementation of the project.

1.3.2.1 Alignment The project alignment would follow the LOSSAN tracks within the existing MTS and City of San Diego right-of-way from the Santa Fe Depot to approximately 3,500 feet south of the I-5/Gilman Drive/La Jolla Colony Drive interchange. The alignment would then leave the LOSSAN right-of-way, enter California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) right- of-way, and parallel the east side of the I-5 corridor north to the I-5/Gilman Drive/La Jolla Colony Drive interchange. North of the interchange, the alignment would parallel the I-5 corridor, traveling partially within Caltrans right-of-way and partially on private property. At about 2,500 feet south of Nobel Drive, the alignment would transition to an aerial structure and cross over to the west side of I-5 south of Nobel Drive. From Nobel Drive, the alignment would continue north to the UCSD West Campus, then cross back over to the east side of I-5 along Voigt Drive and terminate on Genesee Avenue at the UTC Transit Center. The alignment’s total length from the south side of the San Diego River to the terminus at the UTC Transit Center is 10.9 miles.

Plan and profile drawings for the project alignment and Genesee Avenue Design Option are provided in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft SEIS/SEIR Plan Set (SANDAG, 2013a), referred to as Draft SEIS/SEIR plan set. Right-of-way plans showing existing and proposed rights-of-way and temporary construction easements for the project and Genesee

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-12 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-6. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project

Source: SANDAG, 2013

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-13 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Avenue Design Option alignment, stations, and supporting facilities also are contained in the Draft SEIS/SEIR plan set. The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Property Acquisitions Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013b) identifies property acquisitions and structures to be demolished as part of the project. The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Construction Impacts Technical Report (SANDAG, 2013c) describes the construction methods, activities, and durations.

Figure 1-7 presents a conceptual plan and profile drawing of the project alignment, stations, and supporting facilities. The alignment for the project with the Genesee Avenue Design Option is basically the same as for the project without the design option. The only difference is that the Genesee Avenue Design Option uses straddle bents1 rather than columns to support the aerial structure and stations, and has different locations of special trackwork on Genesee Avenue.

Alignment North of OTTC to UTC Transit Center North of the OTTC, the project alignment would be located primarily at grade within the existing MTS right-of-way, north to the vicinity of Gilman Drive/La Jolla Colony Drive. This railroad corridor is used by the COASTER commuter rail, Amtrak intercity rail, and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe freight rail. The project alignment would be located east of the existing LOSSAN tracks, from the OTTC to south of SR 52, with at-grade stations at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, and Balboa Avenue.

The project alignment would use bridges to cross the San Diego River, Tecolote Creek, and Rose Creek, and would be grade separated over Friars Road and Balboa Avenue. South of SR 52, the alignment would transition to an aerial structure and would cross the existing LOSSAN tracks, continuing at grade west of the existing LOSSAN tracks. To accommodate the alignment along the westerly right-of-way, the existing LOSSAN tracks would be relocated east but would still be located within the MTS right-of-way. Just south of Gilman Drive/La Jolla Colony Drive, the alignment would leave the MTS right-of-way and enter the I-5 right-of-way. Along the I-5 corridor, the project alignment would be designed so as not to preclude the future widening of I-5.

Upon entering the I-5 right-of-way north of SR 52, the project alignment would extend at grade along the east side of I-5, crossing under La Jolla Colony Drive in an approximately 200-foot-long cut-and-cover underpass. North of that underpass, the alignment would continue at grade along the east side of I-5, generally within or adjacent to the I-5 right-of-way, and transition to an aerial structure to cross to the west side of I-5, south of Nobel Drive. The aerial alignment would continue north along the west side of I-5 to an aerial station at La Jolla Village Square (Nobel Drive Station).

Continuing north from the Nobel Drive Station, the project alignment would remain on an aerial structure, travel for approximately 160 feet along the southeast corner of the shopping center on the north side of Nobel Drive, then enter the I-5 right-of-way and travel along the west side of I-5 within the I-5 right-of-way. It would return to grade just

1 A straddle bent refers to a type of structure used to avoid a situation where the column would cause an obstruction (such as a fly-over ramp where the column might land in the roadway below). The straddle bent, as its name implies, straddles the roadway or other obstruction. It consists of a beam supported by columns on the outside.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-14 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-7. Conceptual Plan and Profile of Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project

Source: SANDAG, 2013a

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-15 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-16 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-7. Conceptual Plan and Profile of Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project (continued)

Source: SANDAG, 2013a

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-17 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-18 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

north of the I-5/La Jolla Village Drive interchange. North of this interchange, the alignment would run at-grade for approximately 460 feet along the west side of I-5 and the east side of the VA Medical Center. An optional at-grade station would be located at the VA Medical Center. The station would be within the I-5 right-of-way, with access provided from the VA Medical Center property.

South of Gilman Drive, the project alignment would transition back to an aerial structure and enter the UCSD West Campus, crossing Gilman Drive and the surface parking lot located north of Gilman Drive on the UCSD campus. The aerial alignment would then cross Pepper Canyon and continue to an aerial station on the UCSD West Campus.

North of the UCSD West Station, the project alignment would turn east on an aerial structure on the UCSD campus and cross to the north side of Voigt Drive. It would continue east on the UCSD campus, crossing over I-5 and the corner of the Scripps Hospital surface parking lot located on the east side of I-5 and the north side of Voigt Drive. Column supports would be required along the west side of Warren Field and along the parking lots on the north side of Voigt Drive, both on the UCSD West Campus and at Scripps Hospital. The alignment would be located north of the existing northerly curb line of Voigt Drive to allow for future widening of Voigt Drive, which is proposed as part of the Caltrans I-5 North Coast Corridor Project currently under environmental review. The I-5 North Coast Corridor Project proposes to construct HOV DARs that connect to the north side of Voigt Drive. Construction of the DARs is scheduled for completion by 2020. To provide the required vertical clearance between the LRT alignment and the future DARs at Voigt Drive, the project alignment crossing I-5 would be located at an elevation higher than Voigt Drive.

On the east side of I-5, the project alignment would continue on aerial structure and cross to the south side of Voigt Drive in the vicinity of the Scripps Hospital driveway entrance, located north of the UCSD baseball field. The aerial alignment would continue on UCSD property to Genesee Avenue, where it would enter the street right- of-way.

Caltrans is proposing to realign Voigt Drive to connect to Genesee Avenue and realign Campus Point Drive to connect to Voigt Drive. Voigt Drive is located on UCSD property. The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project’s columns would be placed so as not to preclude the realignment of Voigt Drive and Campus Point Drive. Localized widening of Voigt Drive would be required to minimize use of straddle bents to support the aerial structure along Voigt Drive within the UCSD East Campus.

The aerial alignment would cross the southbound lanes of Genesee Avenue just west of Regents Road and continue south on an aerial structure in the median of Genesee Avenue, following the existing alignment of Genesee Avenue to a station at Executive Drive and a terminal station at the UTC Transit Center. The project’s Genesee Avenue Design Option is located in the segment between Regents Road and the project’s terminus. This design option would use straddle bents rather than some center columns along Genesee Avenue to reduce right-of-way acquisition from adjacent properties.

Figure 1-8 presents a conceptual plan view of the project alignment and Genesee Avenue Design Option showing the location of the center columns and straddle bents

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-19 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-8. Genesee Avenue Design Concepts

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-20 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

under each design concept. The plan set contains cross sections and plans with more detailed information on the location of the columns and straddle bents, including structure dimensions.

Project with Center Column Design on Genesee Avenue Under the project, the support columns generally would be located in the center of the Genesee Avenue median, as shown in Figure 1-9. Visual Simulation of Genesee Avenue with the visual simulation Center Columns in Figure 1-9. The project would require two straddle bents along Genesee Avenue, as shown in Figure 1-8.

The first straddle bent would be located west of Regents Road where the alignment would enter Genesee Avenue at an angle. The second one would be located on Genesee Avenue at the Executive Square intersection. The straddle bents would have support columns either in the median of Genesee Avenue, along the south side of Genesee Avenue, or in the median of Executive Square. The remaining support columns would be spaced at approximately 125 to 210 feet apart. Localized widening of Genesee Avenue would be required to accommodate the support columns with necessary clearances and to maintain the number of existing traffic lanes. Figure 1-10. Visual Simulation of Genesee Avenue with Straddle Bents Project with Straddle Bent Design Option on Genesee Avenue The Genesee Avenue Design Option, which is visually simulated in Figure 1-10, would use some straddle bents in place of median support columns on Genesee Avenue, thereby reducing the amount of right-of-way acquisitions required by the project. The use of straddle bents along Genesee Avenue is the only change provided by this design option.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-21 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

The straddle bents would be located on each side of the right-of-way or in the median of Genesee Avenue to support cross beams that would span the roadway. Approximately 16 straddle bents would be required for this design option (Figure 1-8). The straddle bents would include one at Regents Road, four in the vicinity of Eastgate Mall, six in the vicinity of Executive Square and Executive Drive, and five in the vicinity of Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway and the UTC Transit Center. The guideway and stations would rest on the cross beams with the roadway underneath. Right-of-way acquisitions under this design option would be confined primarily to column locations along the right-of-way edge and where the columns cannot fit within the existing right-of-way. The straddle bents would be spaced at approximately the same distances as the project’s center columns without the design option, as shown in Figure 1-8.

1.3.2.2 Stations The project includes eight new stations for passenger access, plus an optional station at the VA Medical Center. All new stations would be side-platform stations with 360-foot- long platforms designed to accommodate up to four-car trains. All platforms would be fully accessible and comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Canopies would be provided at each station and would cover portions of the platforms and fare collection areas. Fare collection equipment, consisting of ticket/smart card vending machines and Compass Card validators, would be provided at each station. These amenities would be placed as appropriate on the platform where boarding occurs or at station entrances. Other station amenities would include benches, information kiosks, and security features according to SANDAG Design Criteria. Bicycle lockers would be provided at all stations except at the UTC Transit Center. Bicycle lockers at this station would be provided during the planned reconstruction of the bus transit center in the future, which is a separate project from the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. Parking and bus transfer facilities would be provided at five stations, as described later in this section. Lighting would be provided at all station platforms and parking areas.

For the at-grade stations south of Balboa Avenue where the southbound platform would be adjacent to the LOSSAN tracks, a screen wall would be constructed at the back of the platforms to shield passengers from the wind induced by a fast-moving Amtrak or COASTER train. On aerial platforms, a 10-foot-high safety fence or screen would be provided at the back of both platforms.

The new project stations include both at-grade and aerial stations. The project segment along the MTS right-of-way between the San Diego River crossing and Gilman Drive would include three at-grade stations at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, and Balboa Avenue. The site concept plans developed for these stations are described below. More detailed station site plans for each of the stations are provided in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft SEIS/SEIR Plan Set (SANDAG, 2013a).

· Tecolote Road Station—This at-grade station would be located south of the existing Tecolote Road overcrossing (Figure 1-11). Primary access to the station for northbound traffic would be provided via the existing signalized intersection at West Morena Boulevard and Vega Street. A driveway for right turns in and out would be

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-22 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-11. Site Concept for Tecolote Road Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

provided on West Morena Boulevard for southbound traffic. A traction power substation (TPSS) would be located immediately north of the station driveway on West Morena Boulevard. The station site would include 280 surface parking spaces, with 180 spaces adjacent to the west side of West Morena Boulevard and another 100 spaces to the south of Vega Street. Short-term parking spaces would be provided for pick up and drop off of passengers (referred to as kiss-and-ride). Bus stops and turnouts for transferring passengers would be provided on both sides of West Morena Boulevard by widening the roadway and removing approximately 15 existing on-street parking spaces along the east side of West Morena Boulevard. In the vicinity of the bus stops, a fence would be provided in the median of West Morena Boulevard to prevent passengers from crossing at mid-block. Pedestrian ramps and stairs would be constructed on the east side of West Morena Boulevard for access to the north and south sides of Tecolote Road. Additionally, a new sidewalk would be constructed along the east side of West Morena Boulevard to Knoxville Street. · Clairemont Drive Station—This at-grade station would be located south of the existing Clairemont Drive overcrossing adjacent to Morena Boulevard (Figure 1-12). The station platforms would be located along the west side of Morena Boulevard and a 150-space surface parking lot would be located across the street on the east side. The station parking lot would include a site for a TPSS. Access to the station parking lot would be provided via driveways on Ingulf Street and Clairemont Drive. Pedestrian access from Clairemont Drive to the station would be provided by new stairs and ADA- compliant access ramps located on both sides of Clairemont Drive. A new bus turnout

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-23 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-12. Site Concept for Clairemont Drive Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

would be provided on the south side of Clairemont Drive. New sidewalks would be constructed along the east side of Morena Boulevard from Ingulf Street to north of Clairemont Drive and along the west side of Morena Boulevard from the north side of the station platform to Gesner Street. Pedestrian crossings between the east and west sides of Morena Boulevard and the station parking lot would be provided by existing crosswalks at the signalized intersections at Morena Boulevard/Ingulf Street and Morena Boulevard/Gesner Street. · Balboa Avenue Station—This at-grade station would be located in the southwest quadrant of the Balboa Avenue/Morena Boulevard interchange (Figure 1-13). The station site would include a surface parking lot with approximately 220 spaces, five bus bays, and short-term parking for pick up and drop off of passengers. An additional on-street bus turnout would be provided on the west side of Morena Boulevard. To provide for bus and vehicular access to the station, the existing on ramp from eastbound Balboa Avenue to southbound Morena Boulevard would be removed and traffic would be diverted to the loop ramp connecting eastbound Balboa Avenue to Morena Boulevard. The loop ramp would be widened and its intersection with Morena Boulevard would be signalized, allowing traffic to turn south on Morena Boulevard. The westerly leg of this intersection would serve as the entrance to the

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-24 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-13. Site Concept for Balboa Avenue Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

station for buses and as an entrance and exit for vehicular traffic. Buses would exit the station via a new signalized intersection constructed at the southern end of the station site. Pedestrian access to the station from Morena Boulevard would be provided via new sidewalks on both sides of Morena Boulevard within the station area. Access from Balboa Avenue would be via ramps and stairs on both sides of the street. A pedestrian bridge would be provided across Balboa Avenue for access to the station from the north side of Balboa Avenue.

The project segment along the I-5 corridor between Gilman Drive and the alignment crossing of I-5 at Voigt Drive would include an aerial station at Nobel Drive, an optional at-grade station at the VA Medical Center, and an aerial station on the UCSD West Campus. The UCSD West Station includes two different station concepts depending on whether the VA Medical Center Station is included in the project. The site concept plans developed for these stations are described below.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-25 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

· Nobel Drive Station—This aerial station would be located within an existing parking area on the west side of I-5 and south of Nobel Drive at the La Jolla Village Square shopping center (Figure 1-14). The station would include a joint-use parking structure with 260 transit parking spaces as well as replacement parking for the surface parking spaces lost as a result of constructing the station and parking structure at the shopping center. Access to the station platform would be provided by stairs and elevators. No bus stops would be constructed at this station as part of the project. Nobel Drive currently has bus stops on both sides of the street in the vicinity of the station. Figure 1-14. Site Concept for Nobel Drive Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

· VA Medical Center Station—This optional at-grade station would be located at the VA Medical Center on the west side of I-5 and north of La Jolla Village Drive (Figure 1-15). The horizontal and vertical track alignment has been designed so as not to preclude this optional station under the Build Alternative. The station would be at approximately the same elevation as the surface parking lot of the VA Medical Center. No new parking or bus stops would be provided at this station. A connection to the hospital would be provided by improvements to the pedestrian paths between the station and the main hospital entrance. A TPSS would be located in Caltrans right-of-way, south of the station. · UCSD West Station—This aerial station would be located at the north end of Pepper Canyon and west of the UCSD student housing complex (Figure 1-16). The station would be located just east of the campus center and the Price Center. No parking would be provided at the station.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-26 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-15. Site Concept for Optional VA Medical Center Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

Because the alignment would have to clear the existing parking lot at the south end of the canyon and Lyman Drive at the north end of the canyon, this station would be constructed at an elevation higher than the elevation of the canyon rim. North of the station, two to three shuttle bus stops and a bus turnaround area would be provided for the UCSD shuttle bus service. The shuttle bus area would be located at grade below the north end of the elevated station platforms. Stairs and an elevator would provide access to the north end of the station platform.

Without the Optional VA Medical Center Station, access to the VA Medical Center would be provided by stairs and an elevator at the south end of the station platform (as shown in the top inset in Figure 1-16). These stairs and elevators would descend to the elevation of the westerly canyon rim. A walkway would be constructed to connect to the existing pedestrian walkways on the UCSD West Campus. With the Optional VA Medical Center Station (shown in the bottom inset in Figure 1-16), only stairs for emergency use would be provided at the south end of the platform because access to the VA Medical Center would be provided by the additional station.

The project segment east of I-5, along Voigt Drive, would include an aerial station on the UCSD East Campus west of Campus Point Drive, serving both the UCSD East Campus and Scripps Hospital. The site concept plan for the UCSD East Station is described below.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-27 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-16. Site Concepts for UCSD West Station (Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option)

Source: SANDAG, 2013

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-28 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

· UCSD East Station—This aerial station would be located along the south side of Voigt Drive, west of Campus Point Drive and the Preuss School, near Scripps Hospital (Figure 1-17). Station access would be provided by stairs and elevators. A pedestrian bridge would be provided across Voigt Drive for access to the north side of Voigt Drive. New sidewalks would be constructed on both sides of Voigt Drive to connect with the western end of the station. No station parking or new bus stops would be provided. A TPSS would be located to the west of the station platforms. Figure 1-17. Site Concept for UCSD East Station

Source: SANDAG, 2013

East of I-5 along Genesee Avenue, the project would include aerial stations at Executive Drive and at the UTC Transit Center. The site concept plans for these two stations, both with and without the Genesee Avenue Design Option, are described below.

· Executive Drive Station—This aerial station would be located in the center of Genesee Avenue, south of Executive Drive, and would span Executive Square (Figure 1-18). Station construction would require removal of the existing pedestrian bridge crossing Genesee Avenue. Pedestrian grade-separated access across Genesee Avenue at this location would be provided through the aerial station platform at Executive Drive via ramps, elevators, and stairway facilities connecting to the existing pedestrian facilities to the west and east sides of Genesee Avenue. Shuttle bus pullouts and passenger drop-off and pick-up areas would be constructed on both sides of Genesee Avenue. No parking would be provided at the station. A TPSS would be located near the southern end of the station site. The station layout and

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-29 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-18. Site Concepts for Executive Drive Station, with and without Genesee Avenue Design Option

Source: SANDAG, 2013

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-30 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

features under the Genesee Avenue Design Option (as shown in the bottom inset in Figure 1-18) would generally be the same as those under the Build Alternative (as shown in the top inset in Figure 1-18). However, under the Genesee Avenue Design Option, there would be no conflict between the existing pedestrian bridge and the proposed LRT guideway allowing the existing pedestrian bridge to remain in place. Minor modifications to the pedestrian bridge would be required to provide pedestrian access to the aerial LRT station. · UTC Transit Center—This aerial station would be located in the center of Genesee Avenue, south of Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway, with pedestrian bridges to the Westfield UTC shopping center on the east and the Costa Verde shopping center on the west (Figure 1-19). The station would provide 260 transit parking spaces in a joint-use parking facility at the Westfield UTC shopping center. Access to the station parking facility would be via the intersection of Genesee Avenue and Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway. The station also would include a connection to the new bus transit center, which would be built as part of the expansion of the Westfield UTC shopping center. The Westfield UTC shopping center expansion is scheduled for completion before revenue service begins on the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. A TPSS would be located near the southern end of the station site. Construction of the Build Alternative would require the removal of the pedestrian bridge across Genesee Avenue located mid-block between La Jolla Village Drive and Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway. Pedestrian access across Genesee Avenue would be provided approximately 500 feet to the south of the existing bridge at the intersection of Genesee Avenue and Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway. Grade-separated pedestrian access across Genesee Avenue would also be accommodated through the aerial station platform at the UTC Transit Center to be located just south of Esplanade Court/UTC Driveway via ramps, elevators, and stairway facilities connecting the LRT station to the parkway area along the west side of Genesee Avenue and the UTC Transit Center to the east of the LRT station. The station layout and features under the Genesee Avenue Design Option (as shown in the bottom inset in Figure 1-19) would generally be the same as those under the Build Alternative (as shown in the top inset in Figure 1-19). If the Genesee Avenue Design Option is constructed, the pedestrian bridge would be retained as there would be no conflict between the existing bridge and proposed LRT guideway.

1.3.2.1 Trolley Vehicle Fleet and Maintenance Facilities The Trolley Blue Line extension would require 36 new LRVs to cover peak-period service with spares in 2030. In the opening year of revenue service, 25 of the 36 new LRVs would be required. Fare collection would be the same as the existing proof-of- payment system currently in use on the Trolley. No fare collection equipment would be provided on the vehicle.

The MTS maintenance plan for LRVs, including those for the project, centralizes all functions at the existing maintenance facilities located at 1255 Imperial Avenue in Downtown San Diego. No expansion of existing maintenance facilities would be required for the project.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-31 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-19. Site Concepts for UTC Transit Center, with and without Genesee Avenue Design Option

Source: SANDAG, 2013

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-32 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

1.3.2.2 Power System and Signaling The LRVs would receive electrical power from overhead contact wires. Catenary support poles, approximately 25 feet high, would be located at approximately 150- to 180-foot intervals. The catenary poles generally would be located in the center of the project alignment. In some locations, the poles would be located on both sides of the Trolley tracks. The overhead electrical power lines would be suspended above the Trolley tracks.

Electricity to power the LRVs would be provided by TPSSs. The TPSSs would be of similar size and design to the existing substations used on the Trolley Green Line. Typical TPSS dimensions would be a 40-foot by 15-foot unmanned equipment enclosure within a 45-foot by 75-foot fenced site. Figure 1-20 shows an example of an existing TPSS.

Figure 1-20. Existing Traction Power Substation at Mission Valley Center Station

Source: SANDAG, 2012

Operation of the project would require 18 TPSSs, including four upgraded substations on three existing sites between Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC and 14 new substations. The TPSS locations and layouts are shown in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft SEIS/SEIR Plan Set (SANDAG, 2013a). Figure 1-21 illustrates the layout of a typical TPSS.

The project includes improvements and upgrades to three existing TPSS locations between Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC on Olive Street, on Bean Street, and at the OTTC. The site at Olive Street may require two substations. The extension of Trolley Blue Line service proposed on existing tracks between Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC also would require a new substation within the existing MTS Wright Street Yard. The other 13 new substations would be located north of the OTTC. Table 1-3 identifies the location of the existing substations and the proposed substation upgrades between Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC, and the proposed new substations north of the OTTC.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-33 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-21. Traction Power Substation Layout

Source: SANDAG, 2012

Table 1-3. Traction Power Substations Locations

No. Stationing Location 1, 2 64+00 Olive St, upgrade to an existing substation located along the east side of the right-of-way and addition of a second substation within the same site 3 101+50 Bean St, in City of San Diego right-of-way, may require modification to existing cul-de-sac 4 133+00 Wright Street Yard, within existing MTS property 5 171+00 OTTC, upgrade to an existing substation located along the west side of the right-of-way 6 199+30 South of the San Diego River and north of I-8, in City of San Diego right-of way 7 210+00 North of San Diego River, east of the tracks along Anna Ave 8 240+60 At Tecolote Rd Station, along the east side of the tracks and south of Tecolote Creek 9 312+00 At Clairemont Dr Station, along the east side of Morena Blvd, full acquisition from a shopping center 10 349+50 South of Baker St, in Caltrans right-of-way, along the west side of existing tracks 11 400+00 North of Balboa Ave and south of Jutland Dr, partial take from graded land east of MTS right-of-way 12 456+00 Just north of Jutland Dr, undeveloped parcel east of MTS right-of-way 13 550+50 Just south of La Jolla Colony Dr, in Caltrans right-of-way, along east side of tracks 14 600+50 Undeveloped parcel next to Charmant Dr and east of the alignment, just before the alignment crosses the freeway south of Nobel Dr 15 645+00 In Caltrans right-of-way along the west side of the alignment next to the VA Medical Center. Access would be from the parking lot at the VA Medical Center 16 694+00 Along the south side of Voigt Dr on the UCSD East Campus, next to the baseball field 17 752+50 Along the east side of Genesee Ave, just north of La Jolla Village Dr, partial acquisition of the landscape area in front of a high-rise office building 18 771+00 On Genesee Ave on partially acquired Westfield UTC shopping center property, near the south end of the UTC Transit Center platform Source: SANDAG, 2013a Notes: Caltrans = California Department of Transportation; MTS = Metropolitan Transit System; OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-34 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Communications and signaling (C&S) buildings centralize train control and communications for Trolley operations at each station. Each facility is an enclosure located within the station site area, typically adjacent to a station platform. Positioning of a C&S building must be selected to provide clearances for maintaining and servicing equipment and to maintain sight lines for LRT operations. Upgrades to the existing C&S system between the Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC would be required as part of the project; however, this would not require additional C&S buildings.

Other proposed physical improvements to the Trolley system south of the OTTC and north of Santa Fe Depot would include upgrades to existing systems, including the signaling system and the overhead catenary system (OCS) to accommodate all-day 7.5-minute Trolley Blue Line service. These potential improvements would be located within the existing railroad and MTS right-of-way, as described below:

· LRT signaling system improvements would include additional track circuit relays at County Center/Little Italy, Middletown, and Washington Street Stations; upgrades to the block signaling system to accommodate the reduced headways between Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC; and adjustments to the crossing gate controllers to ensure an efficient gate operation also meeting requirements of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (23 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 655, Subpart F). · OCS improvements would include the addition of a double messenger wire instead of the existing single messenger wire. · LOSSAN track improvements would provide for the relocation of an existing control point signal from the north side of Taylor Street to the south side of Taylor Street, just north of the existing station platform. The improvements would reduce railroad gate down time for northbound COASTER and Amtrak trains stopping at the OTTC.

1.3.2.3 Operating Plan Operating plans were developed using ridership forecasts. These operating plans were then used to develop the capital and operating cost estimates and to provide the basis for the analysis of potential project impacts.

Table 1-4 presents the existing 2010 Trolley operating plan and the Trolley operating plans developed for the opening year and 2030 revenue service. The 2030 operating plan for the No-Build Alternative (also provided in Table 1-2) is included for comparative purposes.

The 2010 operating plan (existing conditions) does not include the Build Alternative. Therefore, to evaluate project impacts compared to existing conditions, the Build Alternative was added into the 2010 operating plan to provide a basis for comparing project impacts to existing conditions.

At the startup of revenue operations, the project is expected to require 15-minute service during peak and off-peak periods. Figure 1-22 shows the operating plan for the opening year of service.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-35 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Table 1-4. Trolley Operating Plans

Peak Frequency Off-Peak Frequency (6:00 to 9:00 a.m.) (9:00 a.m. to Vehicle Fare Route (3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) 3:00 p.m.) Type (each way) 2010 Operating Plan (Existing Conditions) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 to OTTC Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit 7.5 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Center to OTTC Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 12th and Imperial Transit Center 2010 Operating Plan (Build Alternative) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 to OTTC Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit 7.5 7.5 Trolley $2.50 Center to UTC Transit Center Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 12th and Imperial Transit Center Opening Year Operating Plan* Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 12th and Imperial Transit Center Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit 7.5 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Center to America Plaza Trolley Blue Line America Plaza to UTC 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Transit Center Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 Santa Fe Depot 2030 Operating Plan (Build Alternative) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 12th and Imperial Transit Center Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro to UTC 7.5 7.5 Trolley $2.50 Transit Center Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 America Plaza 2030 Operating Plan (No-Build Alternative) Trolley Green Line Santee Town Center to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 12th and Imperial Transit Center Trolley Blue Line San Ysidro Transit 7.5 7.5 Trolley $2.50 Center to Santa Fe Depot Trolley Orange Line Gillespie Field to 15.0 15.0 Trolley $2.50 America Plaza Source: SANDAG, 2012 Notes: *The Trolley Blue Line would operate as a continuous run from the San Ysidro Transit Center to the UTC Transit Center. During peak periods in the opening year, alternating trains would turn back at America Plaza, resulting in 15-minute headways north of America Plaza and 7.5-minute headways south of America Plaza. OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UTC = University Towne Centre

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-36 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-22. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Opening Year Trolley Operating Plan

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-37 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

The proposed Trolley operating plan for the Build Alternative in 2030 presented in Table 1-4 includes the extension of the Trolley Blue Line to the UTC Transit Center. As shown in Figure 1-23, the Trolley Blue Line in 2030 would be operated as a single line with three-car trains from the existing San Ysidro Transit Center in the south to the UTC Transit Center in University City, with stops at all 29 intermediate stations. The Trolley Green and Orange Lines would operate the same as under the No-Build Alternative in 2030. Weekday Trolley Blue Line service in 2030 would operate every 7.5 minutes during peak periods (i.e., 6:00 to 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) and during the off-peak midday period (i.e., 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.). The fare structure would be the same as previously described for the No-Build Alternative.

The Trolley operating plan in 2010 that includes the Build Alternative is the same as the 2010 operating plan except for extension of the Trolley Blue Line from the OTTC to the UTC Transit Center and an increase in service frequency to 7.5 minutes during the off- peak period. Thus, under the Build Alternative in 2010, the Trolley Blue Line would operate at 7.5-minute intervals during both peak and off-peak periods.

With extension of Trolley Blue Line service to the UTC Transit Center, the service provided by bus Route 150 operating between Downtown San Diego and University City would duplicate the new Trolley services and therefore would be eliminated with implementation of the project, consistent with the 2030 RTP. In addition to this modification, minor changes would be made to several bus routes to improve access to the new Trolley stations proposed under the Build Alternative. These modifications consist of rerouting of bus routes to connect to stations. The service frequency of the routes serving the stations would not change. Table 1-5 identifies routes serving the Trolley stations under the Build Alternative and shows which routes would be modified to serve the stations. No changes to other bus routes or the COASTER would be required.

1.3.2.4 Schedule The project is currently in the Project Development phase of the New Starts process, which includes the completion of the NEPA and CEQA processes. Completion of the environmental review process is anticipated in mid-2014, following which SANDAG will seek FTA approval to advance the project to the Engineering phase pursuant to MAP- 21. During the Engineering phase, SANDAG and FTA will negotiate a Full Funding Grant Agreement, which is anticipated in early 2015. Construction is assumed to begin in 2015, and revenue service is expected to start by the end of 2018.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-38 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Figure 1-23. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project 2030 Trolley Operating Plan

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 1-39 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 1.0 – Introduction

Table 1-5. Build Alternative Bus Routes Serving Trolley Stations

Frequency of Service Peak Off-Peak (6:00 to 9:00 a.m.) (9:00 a.m. to Build Alternative Modified under Route Description (3:00 to 6:00 p.m.) 3:00 p.m.) Stations Served Build Alternative 8 OTTC to Garnet and 15 15 OTTC, Balboa Ave Yes Bayard 9 Garnet and Bayard to 15 15 OTTC, Balboa Ave Yes OTTC 27 Mission and Felspar to 15 15 Balboa Ave Yes Clairemont Mesa 30 UTC Transit Center to B 10 10 Washington St, OTTC, No and 9th Nobel Dr, UCSD West, UTC Transit Center 31 Mira Mesa Transit Center 15 15 Executive Dr, UTC No to UTC Transit Center Transit Center 41 Fashion Valley Trolley 10 10 UCSD West, Executive No Station to UCSD West Dr, UTC Transit Center 44 OTTC to Morena and 7.5 7.5 OTTC, Balboa Ave No Balboa 50 Park and Broadway to 15 15 Clairemont Dr, UTC No UTC Transit Center Transit Center 105 OTTC to UTC Transit 15 15 OTTC, Tecolote Rd, No Center UTC Transit Center 150* 5th and Broadway to * * Yes—Deleted UTC Transit Center 201 SuperLoop 7.5 7.5 Nobel Dr, VA Medical No Center, UCSD West, UCSD East, Executive Dr, UTC Transit Center 202 SuperLoop 7.5 7.5 Nobel Dr, VA Medical No Center, UCSD West, UCSD East, Executive Dr, UTC Transit Center 276 UCSD Route–Voigt Drive 15 15 VA Medical Center, Yes Loop UCSD West 284 UCSD Route–UCSD 15 15 UCSD West Yes West to Scripps Institution of Oceanography 921 Mira Mesa Transit Center 15 15 UCSD West, Executive No to UCSD West Dr, UTC Transit Center 960 UTC Transit Center to 30 0 Executive Dr, UTC No Euclid Avenue Trolley Transit Center Station Source: SANDAG, 2012 Notes: * Route 150 does not operate under the Build Alternative. OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 1-40 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

2.0 TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL AND TRAVEL DEMAND

This chapter describes the model used to forecast travel demand for the alternatives considered in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. The alternatives considered are described in Chapter 1.0 of this report and include the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative. The Build Alternative includes two options: the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option and the Genesee Avenue Design Option. The alternatives are further described in Chapter 3.0 of this report from a travel forecasting perspective. Additionally, model runs were completed for the 2010 transportation network with the addition of the project to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

This chapter describes the transportation forecasting demand model and presents the forecasts of travel demand or person trips for the Mid-Coast Corridor and the San Diego region for the purpose of understanding the trip distribution patterns. At the end of the chapter, major transit markets are discussed, which provides the basis for the development of the San Diego Trolley (Trolley) operating plan for the Build Alternative and options. 2.1 Travel Demand Model The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 11 Regional Travel Demand Forecasting Model (Series 11 model) (SANDAG, 2008b) was the base model used to develop forecasts of 2010 existing and 2030 future travel demand estimates for use in the analysis of existing conditions and the transportation impacts of the alternatives under consideration. This model was refined for the environmental documentation for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) New Starts funding application.

The SANDAG model is continuously revised to reflect updated data, changing trends, and changing policies; each growth forecast is designated with a series number that is affixed to the travel model to distinguish it from previous model results. The Series 11 model was used for the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP) (SANDAG, 2007), and the growth forecasts were adopted by the SANDAG Board of Directors in 2007. The model platform is currently the TransCAD® (Caliper Corporation) software package. There are four basic steps to the travel demand forecasting model: (1) the model generates person trips, (2) determines trip destinations using a gravity-based trip distribution model, (3) allocates these trips to the available travel modes, and (4) assigns vehicle trips to highway networks and transit trips to transit networks.

The model was calibrated and validated by SANDAG to the year 2003 based on observed travel demand in that year. Calibration data were compiled from eight different surveys, including the 1995 Travel Behavior Survey, the 2001 California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Statewide Survey, the 2001–2003 San Diego Regional Transit Survey (on-board survey), and the 2000 Census Transportation Planning Package. Traffic counts from Caltrans and the 18 cities and county governments (including the City of San Diego) and transit passenger counts from the SANDAG Transit Passenger Counting Program were the major sources of validation data.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 2-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

The base-year forecasts (year 2003) are a function of existing land use, including population, housing, and employment. The Series 11 model used 2003 as its base year. Future year forecasts (2010 and 2030) are a function of demographic and economic changes in the region—specifically, the changes in the amount and locations of employment and housing. Additionally, changes in the characteristics of the region’s transportation system, including proposed changes in transportation facilities and operating policies (such as vehicle occupancy, toll rates, and transit fares), also are included in the model for future forecasts. Future forecasts are based on the community plans adopted at the time the model was developed. For the Series 11 model, the City of San Diego General Plan (City of San Diego, 2008a) and the San Diego County General Plan (County of San Diego, 2006) were used for model development.

Various committees were convened to review the Series 11 model. The transportation model was reviewed at the Southwest Region Transportation Model User Group and at the State Transportation Modeler User Group. Additionally, a 2006 Independent Transit Review Panel evaluated the transit forecasts. A Regionwide Forecast Technical Review Committee, comprised of experts in demography, housing, and other disciplines from state and local agencies, reviewed the regional forecasts, data inputs, and assumptions. Additionally, the Regional Planning Technical Working Group assisted with local land use inputs, including existing and planned land uses and potential redevelopment and infill areas.

In 2008, for the purpose of applying for New Starts funding for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, the model was reviewed and further revised by the Mid-Coast Corridor team based upon the FTA New Starts guidelines and current best practices. The revision of the model focused on the mode choice model. The model originally was calibrated to the year 2003 for purposes of the 2030 RTP; it also was reviewed by the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project team and validated to 2008. This revised model was accepted by FTA in 2009. Refinements also were made in 2010 to represent better the transit and roadway networks in the corridor. For instance, the 2010 roadway and transit networks included in the model are based on the actual networks in 2008 and 2010, while the land use, population, and employment forecasts are based on development proposed for implementation by 2010.

For the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, the Series 11 model was run for existing conditions and 2030 future conditions under the No-Build and Build Alternatives and the VA Medical Center Station Option. The model also was run for the project in 2010 to comply with the CEQA Sunnyvale decision (Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association v. City of Sunnyvale, 190 Cal.App.4th 1351 [2010]), which requires an analysis of project impacts compared to existing conditions.

The 2030 Regional Growth Forecast Update: Process and Model Documentation (SANDAG, 2008a) and the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project SANDAG Mode Choice Model Calibration and Validation Report (SANDAG, 2010) further describe data inputs and SANDAG’s steps to calibrate and validate the Series 11 model. 2.2 Travel Analysis Districts The entire SANDAG region was divided into 29 travel analysis districts (Figure 2-1). Another travel analysis district was developed for external trips, which are trips

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 2-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

Figure 2-1. San Diego Travel Analysis District System

Source: SANDAG, 2011 Note: UCSD = University of California, San Diego

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 2-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

beginning or ending outside the region (either in Mexico or in a surrounding county). A travel analysis district is defined as an aggregation of traffic analysis zones that have similar socioeconomic characteristics. In addition, other factors considered in defining a travel analysis district include transit accessibility to capture the influence of major transit lines (existing or proposed) or major transit markets and large trip generators from the surrounding areas.

The Mid-Coast Corridor is comprised of the following travel analysis districts: 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, and 28, corresponding to Centre City, Golden Triangle, the University of California, San Diego, Torrey Pines, University City, Clairemont, La Jolla, Mission Bay, Point Loma, Uptown, and Fashion Valley, as shown in Figure 2-1 and referred to in this report as the Mid-Coast Corridor, or corridor. To better understand travel behavior in the travel analysis districts that could be affected by the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, some of the analysis focuses on seven of the travel analysis districts within the corridor that lie north of Interstate 8. These seven travel analysis districts, referred to as the New Trolley Service Area, are defined as the area served by the Trolley system extension under the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, as outlined in red in Figure 2-1. In addition, the districts outside the Mid-Coast Corridor are aggregated further based on their geographic locations relative to the corridor (i.e., North, Northeast, East, East County, and South areas). 2.3 Travel Demand Forecasts An analysis of existing and future person trip-making patterns, or travel demand, for the Mid-Coast Corridor and the region was conducted to determine the major travel markets for trips with origins and destinations in the corridor. Daily person trips are forecast by traffic analysis zone, and the traffic analysis zones were grouped into travel analysis districts as previously described.

The number of daily person trips to and from each of the travel analysis districts was modeled for 2010 conditions and 2030 future conditions. The 2030 person trip tables for the No-Build Alternative were used as input to the travel-forecasting model. Each trip has a production end (the home end for a home-based trip, or the trip origin for a non- home-based trip) and an attraction end (the non-home end of a home-based trip or the destination end for a non-home-based trip). A trip that is “produced” in the corridor is one that begins in the corridor; the return trip also counts as a production trip. A trip that is “attracted” to the corridor is one that begins outside the corridor; the return trip also counts as an attraction trip. Table 2-1 shows the 2010 and 2030 daily person trips produced in the corridor that travel to the other travel analysis districts. Table 2-2 shows the daily person trips attracted to the corridor from other travel analysis districts.

As shown in Table 2-1 and Table 2-2, the Mid-Coast Corridor is estimated to produce about 3,159,000 daily person trips and attract about 3,309,000 daily person trips in 2030, with 66 percent of the productions and 63 percent of the attractions internal to the corridor. Aside from the corridor itself, the travel analysis districts northeast, east, and south will attract a greater share of the trips produced in the corridor than the other areas, while the travel analysis districts east and south will produce a higher share of the trips attracted to the corridor than the other areas.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 2-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

Table 2-1. Daily Person Trip Productions from the Mid-Coast Corridor

2010 2030 Production Attraction Trips Percentage Trips Percentage Increase Corridor Corridor (internal trips) 1,734,518 66% 2,098,020 66% 363,502 To North Districts Corridor 1-Pendleton/Fallbrook 26,782 1% 38,966 1% 12,184 Corridor 2-San Dieguito 62,557 2% 69,954 2% 7,397 Corridor 19-Sorrento Mesa South 31,351 1% 33,646 1% 2,295 Corridor 21-Sorrento Mesa North 21,138 1% 23,770 1% 2,632 Corridor 22-Carmel Valley 8,589 0% 8,589 0% 0 To Northeast Districts Corridor 3-North Inland 16,691 1% 21,403 1% 4,712 Corridor 4-Poway/North City 82,900 3% 93,728 3% 10,828 Corridor 5-Kearny Mesa 190,416 7% 214,733 7% 24,317 To East Districts Corridor 6-Mission Trails 32,043 1% 35,763 1% 3,720 Corridor 7-Mission Valley 64,947 2% 69,177 2% 4,230 Corridor 8-North Park 56,098 2% 69,181 2% 13,083 Corridor 9-East San Diego 40,892 2% 45,697 1% 4,805 Corridor 13-East Suburbs 38,558 1% 45,240 1% 6,682 To East County District Corridor 14-East County 11,126 0% 18,200 1% 7,074 To South Districts Corridor 10-South San Diego 69,479 3% 79,670 3% 10,191 Corridor 11-South Bay 32,289 1% 39,034 1% 6,745 Corridor 12- Eastlake 25,552 1% 36,286 1% 10,734 Corridor 29-Marina-Ballpark 81,839 3% 117,634 4% 35,795 Corridor Production Total 2,627,764 100% 3,158,689 100% 530,925 Region-wide Total 18,129,310 22,646,008 4,516,698 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 2-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

Table 2-2. Daily Person Trip Attractions to the Mid-Coast Corridor

2010 2030 Production Attraction Trips Percentage Trips Percentage Increase Corridor Corridor (internal trips) 1,734,518 63% 2,098,020 63% 363,502 From North Districts 1-Pendleton/Fallbrook Corridor 49,863 2% 57,520 2% 7,657 2-San Dieguito Corridor 70,790 3% 81,778 2% 10,988 19-Sorrento Mesa South Corridor 19,034 1% 21,160 1% 2,126 21-Sorrento Mesa North Corridor 18,054 1% 19,697 1% 1,643 22-Carmel Valley Corridor 14,246 1% 16,339 0% 2,093 From Northeast Districts 3-North Inland Corridor 28,154 1% 36,372 1% 8,218 4-Poway/North City Corridor 104,388 4% 119,206 4% 14,818 5-Kearny Mesa Corridor 95,150 3% 113,758 3% 18,608 From East Districts 6-Mission Trails Corridor 47,699 2% 48,512 1% 813 7-Mission Valley Corridor 43,508 2% 45,836 1% 2,328 8-North Park Corridor 107,146 4% 129,253 4% 22,107 9-East San Diego Corridor 65,194 2% 78,618 2% 13,424 13-East Suburbs Corridor 57,177 2% 65,583 2% 8,406 From East County District 14-East County Corridor 18,493 1% 32,779 1% 14,286 From South Districts 10-South San Diego Corridor 108,357 4% 114,189 3% 5,832 11-South Bay Corridor 52,276 2% 53,626 2% 1,350 12-Eastlake Corridor 49,447 2% 59,195 2% 9,748 29-Marina-Ballpark Corridor 71,594 3% 117,674 4% 46,080 Corridor Attraction Total 2,755,087 100% 3,309,115 100% 554,028 Region-wide Total 18,129,310 22,646,008 4,516,698 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011

Compared to existing conditions, the overall Mid-Coast Corridor productions and attractions in 2030 both will increase by 20 percent. Most of the increase will occur for trips within the corridor, as 68 percent of the increase in productions and 66 percent of the increase in attractions will be within the corridor itself. As shown in these tables, the Marina-Ballpark travel analysis district, adjacent to Downtown San Diego, will experience the largest increase among the districts outside the corridor in attracting trips from the corridor by 36,000 trips (44 percent), as well as in producing trips to the corridor by 46,000 trips (64 percent). 2.4 Major Transit Markets In addition to the analysis of travel demand and travel markets independent of mode, some of these travel markets focus on transit more than others. For example, high concentrations of trips are better suited to transit because the service can be offered

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 2-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

more frequently, making transit more attractive to trip-makers than the automobile. People are more likely to use transit when their destination is a relatively dense, mixed- used area where good pedestrian connections are available.

The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Transportation Impacts and Mitigation Report (SANDAG, 2013d) presents data on trip density, or the number of daily trips per developable acre to and from the New Trolley Service Area. In 2010, the densest travel market refers to travel within the New Trolley Service Area. In terms of trip density, the highest potential transit markets are as follows:

· Travel entirely within the New Trolley Service Area · Travel between the New Trolley Service Area and the Centre City, Marina/Ballpark, and Uptown travel analysis districts to the south · Travel between the New Trolley Service Area and the Mission Valley and Fashion Valley travel analysis districts to the east

SANDAG predicts that these potential transit markets will grow by 15, 21, and 17 percent, respectively, between 2010 and 2030. Although the South San Diego and South Bay travel analysis districts are not among the highest in trip density, there is a substantial amount of travel between the New Trolley Service Area and these districts. Therefore, this transit market also should be considered a major market for the Mid- Coast Corridor Transit Project. The transit trips between these major transit markets are illustrated in Figure 2-2 in which the thickness of the arrow indicates the number of trips between or within the transit market.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 2-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 2.0 – Travel Demand Model and Travel Demand

Figure 2-2. Transit Travel Demand between Major Transit Markets

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 2-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

3.0 ALTERNATIVES FROM A TRAVEL FORECASTING PERSPECTIVE

This chapter describes the alternatives considered for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. The description focuses on the travel forecasting perspective, particularly those elements of the alternatives that may impact the forecasting results as determined through application of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 11 Regional Travel Demand Forecasting Model (Series 11 model) (SANDAG, 2008b). As defined in Chapter 1.0, the alternatives include the No-Build Alternative, the Build Alternative, and the Build Alternative with the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option. The Build Alternative with the Genesee Avenue Design Option, as described in Chapter 1.0 of this report, does not have any effect on the travel forecasting results; therefore, this option was excluded from the analysis and is not addressed in this report. Forecasting results for the project in 2010 are discussed further in Chapter 6.0 of this report. The operating plans for the No-Build and Build Alternatives are presented in Chapter 1.0. 3.1 No-Build Alternative The No-Build Alternative represents the existing transportation facilities and services in the Mid-Coast Corridor and other facilities and services that are considered committed improvements by 2030, as identified in the Revenue Constrained Scenario of the 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP) (SANDAG, 2007). The Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project is not included in the No-Build Alternative for purposes of comparing highway and transit forecasts in 2030 with and without the project. Among the key highway improvements included in the No-Build Alternative is the implementation of the Interstate (I-) 5 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes from I-8 north to Oceanside, with direct-access ramps at various locations, including Voigt Drive. The No-Build Alternative highway system also is included in the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option.

The San Diego Trolley (Trolley) system in the No-Build Alternative represents a 2030 operating plan that includes the Trolley Blue Line, which would operate from the U.S.– Mexico International Border through Downtown San Diego to the Santa Fe Depot; the Trolley Green Line, which would operate from Santee through Mission Valley and the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC) to the 12th and Imperial Transit Center; and the Trolley Orange Line, which would operate from Gillespie Field (in El Cajon) through Downtown San Diego to America Plaza. The future operating plan has been revised from existing conditions to provide a better balance between capacity and demand for the Trolley system. The Trolley Blue Line would be shortened from the OTTC to the Santa Fe Depot; the Trolley Green Line would be extended from the OTTC to the 12th and Imperial Transit Center; and the Trolley Orange Line would be shortened from the 12th and Imperial Transit Center to America Plaza. Trolley Blue Line headways in 2030 would be 7.5 minutes throughout the day; both Trolley Green Line and Trolley Orange Line headways would be 15 minutes throughout the day.

Under the No-Build Alternative, the existing bus Route 150 would be modified to operate along Broadway in Downtown San Diego and along Pacific Highway from Downtown

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 3-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

San Diego north to the OTTC. The route would include limited stops on Pacific Highway, generally at the same locations as the existing Trolley system. North of the OTTC, Route 150 would be modified to operate within the proposed I-5 HOV lanes. From the OTTC, Route 150 would travel west on Taylor Street, southwest on Rosecrans Street, and north on Camino Del Rio West to access the I-5 HOV lanes, a distance of 0.75 mile. Route 150 would exit the I-5 HOV lanes at the Nobel Drive interchange. This modification to the existing Route 150, which operates in the general-purpose lanes on I-5 north to Gilman Drive under existing conditions, would allow the route to use the HOV lanes planned for 2030.

Travel time under the No-Build Alternative for Route 150 from Downtown San Diego to the University Towne Centre (UTC) Transit Center with use of the HOV lanes would be approximately 49 minutes, an increase of approximately 1 minute from existing conditions. The slight increase in travel time is attributable to increased congestion throughout the roadway network. While the I-5 HOV lanes are forecast to operate at free-flow conditions, the I-5 general-purpose lanes would deteriorate to 37 miles per hour (mph) from 43 mph under 2010 conditions. Local access to I-5 from the OTTC (approximately 0.7 mile) and weaving across four general-purpose lanes to access or egress the HOV lanes would result in performance deterioration for Route 150.

With these changes to Route 150, service would improve for the major transit markets between Downtown San Diego and the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and the UTC Transit Center. For travel from the corridor to Mission Valley, transit users could transfer to the Trolley Green Line at the OTTC. For travel from the corridor to South San Diego/South Bay, transit users would transfer to the Trolley Blue Line in Downtown San Diego. Route 150 would operate at a frequency of 15 minutes during peak periods and 30 minutes during off-peak and mid-day periods. The $2.50 fare for Route 150, which is categorized as an express bus, is consistent with the flat fare of $2.50 adopted for the Trolley system in 2008. The model runs incorporate the one-way trip flat Trolley fare of $2.50. 3.2 Build Alternative The Build Alternative includes the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, as defined in Chapter 1.0 and shown in Figure 1-6. The project would extend the Trolley Blue Line service from its future terminus at the Santa Fe Depot to the UTC Transit Center, thus providing continuous service on the Trolley Blue Line from San Ysidro to the UTC Transit Center. The Trolley extension would include eight new stations at Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, Nobel Drive, UCSD West Campus, UCSD East Campus, Executive Drive, and the UTC Transit Center. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would add one additional station at the VA Medical Center, which would be located between the stations at Nobel Drive and the UCSD West Campus.

3.2.1 Operating Plan The Trolley Blue Line weekday service in 2030 under the Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option would operate at 7.5-minute headways during peak and

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 3-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

off-peak periods. The fare structure is assumed to be consistent with the flat-fare assumptions incorporated into the No-Build Alternative for the Trolley.

3.2.2 Station Parking Parking would be provided at the Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, and Nobel Drive Stations, and at the UTC Transit Center. Table 3-1 identifies the parking capacity for each of the proposed new Trolley stations under the Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option. The capacity numbers represent the inputs to the model.

Table 3-1. Park-and-Ride Capacity for the Trolley Blue Line Extension

UTC Tecolote Clairemont Balboa Nobel Transit Station Road Drive Avenue Drive Center Capacity 280 150 220 260 260 Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: UTC = University Towne Centre

3.2.3 Background Transit System The background transit system under the Build Alternative includes all transit system services and facilities in the No-Build Alternative as modified to eliminate duplicative services provided by the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project and to improve access to stations. Because extending the Trolley Blue Line would duplicate the service provided by bus Route 150, which would operate between Downtown San Diego and University City under the No-Build Alternative, Route 150 would be eliminated under the Build Alternative. Other local bus routes would be modified to improve access to the proposed Trolley stations. Aside from these route modifications, all other bus routes and the COASTER would have the same operating plan as under the No-Build Alternative. Table 3-2 lists the major rail and bus routes serving the Mid-Coast Corridor under the Build Alternative by route number, mode, service area, peak and off-peak headways, and station served. The table also identifies and shows the service change under the Build Alternative.

3.2.4 Travel Times Table 3-3 compares peak and off-peak travel times and distance between stations for Route 150 under the No-Build Alternative and the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option. The Trolley Blue Line is numbered as Route 510 in the transit networks.

Because Route 150 begins at Fifth Avenue and Broadway, the comparison is between the Fifth Avenue Station and the UTC Transit Center. As shown in Table 3-3, the overall running distance of Route 150 in the No-Build Alternative is slightly longer than the distance of the Trolley Blue Line in the Build Alternative by 0.7 mile, primarily because of the extra distance the bus takes to get on and off the freeway and the detour to get to the stations.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 3-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Table 3-2. Build Alternative Operating Plan for Major Transit Routes in the Mid-Coast Corridor

No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak Build Alternative Stations Modified under Build Route Mode Service Area Headway Headway Headway Headway Served Alternative 398 Commuter Rail COASTER 20 60 20 60 Santa Fe Depot, OTTC No 510 Light Rail Trolley Blue Line 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 All stations Yes. Extended to UTC Transit Center 520 Light Rail Trolley Orange 15 15 15 15 No Line 530 Light Rail Trolley Green Line 15 15 15 15 Santa Fe Depot, County No Center/Little Italy, Middletown, Washington St, OTTC 8 Local Bus OTTC to Garnet 15 15 15 15 OTTC, Balboa Avenue Yes. Extended to the and Bayard new Trolley station at Balboa Avenue 9 Local Bus Garnet and 15 15 15 15 OTTC, Balboa Avenue Yes. Extended to the Bayard to OTTC new Trolley station at Balboa Avenue 25 Local Bus Clairemont Mesa 15 15 15 15 No to Fashion Valley Trolley Station 27 Local Bus Mission and 15 15 15 15 Balboa Avenue Yes. Extended to the Felspar to new Trolley station at Clairemont Mesa Balboa Avenue 30 Local Bus Genesee and 10 10 10 10 Washington St, OTTC, Nobel No UTC Transit Drive, UCSD West, UTC Center to B and Transit Center 9th

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 3-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Table 3-2. Build Alternative Operating Plan for Major Transit Routes in the Mid-Coast Corridor (continued)

No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak Build Alternative Stations Modified under Build Route Mode Service Area Headway Headway Headway Headway Served Alternative 41 Local Bus Fashion Valley Trolley 10 10 10 10 UCSD West, Executive Drive, No Station to Gilman and UTC Transit Center Myers 44 Local Bus Morena and Balboa to 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 OTTC, Balboa Avenue No OTTC 50 Express Bus Genesee and UTC 15 15 15 15 Clairemont Drive, UTC Transit No Transit Center to Park Center and Broadway 105 Local Bus Genesee and UTC 15 15 15 15 OTTC, Tecolote Road, UTC No Transit Center to Transit Center OTTC 120 Express Bus Kearny Mesa Transit 15 15 15 15 No Center to 3rd and Market 150 Limited Bus Genesee and UTC 15 30 N/A N/A Yes. Deleted Transit Center to 5th and Broadway 201 Rapid Bus SuperLoop 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Nobel Drive, VA Medical No Center, UCSD West, UCSD East, Executive Drive, UTC Transit Center 202 Rapid Bus SuperLoop 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 Nobel Drive, VA Medical No Center, UCSD West, UCSD East, Executive Drive, UTC Transit Center 276 Local Bus UCSD Campus Loop 15 15 15 15 VA Medical Center, UCSD Yes. Extended to the West new Trolley station at UCSD West 284 Local Bus UCSD West to Scripps 15 15 15 15 UCSD West Yes. Extended to the Institute new Trolley station at UCSD West

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 3-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Table 3-2. Build Alternative Operating Plan for Major Transit Routes in the Mid-Coast Corridor (continued)

No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak Build Alternative Stations Modified under Build Route Mode Service Area Headway Headway Headway Headway Served Alternative 921 Local Bus Mira Mesa Transit 15 15 15 15 UCSD West, Executive Drive, No Center to Gilman and UTC Transit Center Myers 960 Express Bus Genesee and UTC 30 0 30 0 Executive Drive, UTC Transit No Transit Center to Center Euclid Avenue Trolley Station Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UTC = University Towne Centre; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 3-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Table 3-3. Station-to-Station Travel Times and Distances

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Build Alternative—Route Option—Route 510 Trolley No-Build Alternative – Route 150 510 Trolley Blue Line Blue Line NB SB Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Station and Stop Distance Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Distance Time Speed Distance Time Speed Fifth Ave Existing Civic Center/ Existing 0.2 2 6.0 2 6.0 1.9 6.3 1.9 6.3 0.2 2 6 0.2 2 6 1st St America Plaza/ Existing 0.3 2.7 6.7 2.7 6.7 2.5 7.2 2.6 6.9 0.4 3.8 6.3 0.4 3.8 6.3 Kettner St Santa Fe Depot Existing 0.2 3.1 3.9 0.2 3.1 3.9 County Center/ Existing 0.5 3.2 9.4 3.2 9.4 3.2 9.4 3.3 9.1 0.3 0.9 20 0.3 0.9 20 Cedar St Middletown/ Existing 0.8 2.9 16.6 2.9 16.6 2.8 17.1 2.9 16.6 0.9 3.1 17.4 0.9 3.1 17.4 Palm St Washington St Existing 0.8 1.8 26.7 1.9 25.3 2 24.0 2 24.0 0.8 1.6 30 0.8 1.6 30 OTTC Existing 1.5 3.8 23.7 3.8 23.7 3.4 26.5 3.4 26.5 1.3 2.8 27.9 1.3 2.8 27.9 Tecolote Rd New 1.1 2 33 1.1 2 33 Clairemont Dr New 1.3 2.2 35.5 1.3 2.2 35.5 Balboa Ave New 1.2 2.1 34.3 1.2 2.1 34.3 Nobel Dr New 8.7 20.7 25.2 13.5 38.7 12 43.5 12.2 42.8 4.8 7 41.1 4.8 7 41.1 VA Medical New 0.5 2 15 Center UCSD West New 0.8 4 12.0 4.4 10.9 3.3 14.5 3.3 14.5 0.8 2.8 17.1 0.3 1.5 12

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 3-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Table 3-3. Station-to-Station Travel Times and Distances (continued)

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Build Alternative – Route Option – Route 510 Trolley No-Build Alternative – Route 150 510 Trolley Blue Line Blue Line NB SB Peak Off-Peak Peak Off-Peak Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Travel Station and Stop Distance Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Time Speed Distance Time Speed Distance Time Speed UCSD East/ New 1 3.1 19.4 3.1 19.4 3.3 18.2 3.3 18.2 0.7 2.2 19.1 0.7 2.2 19.1 Campus Point Executive Dr New 0.8 3 16.0 3.1 15.5 2.9 16.6 2.9 16.6 0.8 2.2 21.8 0.8 2.2 21.8 UTC Transit New 0.4 2 12.0 2 12.0 2.4 10.0 2.3 10.4 0.3 1.1 16.4 0.3 1.1 16.4 Center TOTAL 15.6 49.2 19.2 42.6 22.3 39.7 23.9 40.1 23.6 15.1 38.9 23.3 15.1 39.6 22.9 Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: NB = Northbound; SB = Southbound; OTTC = Old Town Transit Center; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 3-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

Under the Build Alternative, the travel time for the Trolley Blue Line extension between Fifth Avenue in Downtown San Diego and the UTC Transit Center is 38.9 minutes during peak periods, as compared to 49.3 minutes for the northbound Route 150 during the a.m. peak period. Although Route 150 would serve fewer stations than the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative, bus service for the No-Build Alternative would have more variance in travel time as it would be subject to roadway congestion. This differs from the Build Alternative, which would operate on an exclusive right-of-way without interference from highway vehicles. Generally, Route 150 southbound service during the a.m. peak period would be faster than the northbound service, with a 10-minute difference in travel time because of the directionality of the traffic flow on the highway system in the corridor. More traffic travels from Downtown San Diego to Golden Triangle and University City during the a.m. peak period, resulting in a more congested roadway in the northbound direction. Generally, travel times on Route 150 would be shorter in the off-peak period than during the peak period because of the less congested roadway system in the off-peak period, particularly in the northbound direction. The Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option would have more consistent travel times between stations because of their exclusive right-of-way along the alignments.

The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option includes an additional station at the VA Medical Center, which would be located between the stations at Nobel Drive and at UCSD West. The addition of the station would increase the overall transit running time by 42 seconds because of the additional deceleration and acceleration times and dwell time at the VA Medical Center Station.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 3-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 3.0 – Alternatives From a Travel Forecasting Perspective

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 3-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

4.0 TRAVEL FORECASTING RESULTS

This chapter describes the travel forecasting results for the alternatives considered in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. The travel forecasting results discussed in this chapter include both transit and highway system performance measures and travel times.

As discussed in Chapter 1.0, the alternatives include the No-Build Alternative and the Build Alternative. Additionally, model runs were completed for the Build Alternative with the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option. Unless otherwise noted, results for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option are the same, or similar to, those described for the Build Alternative. As discussed in Chapter 3.0, the Build Alternative with the Genesee Avenue Design Option does not have any effect on the travel forecasting results and thus model runs were not completed for this design option.

The travel forecasting results described in this chapter are for the analysis of the 2030 alternatives only. The results of the analysis for 2010 with and without the project are presented in Chapter 6.0. 4.1 Transit Results This section describes the transit forecasting results for the forecast year 2030, including system-wide linked transit trips, transit ridership by mode and line, mode of access, passenger miles, transfer rates, and parking demand for each of the alternatives. The results were produced using the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 11 Regional Travel Demand Forecasting Model (Series 11 model) (SANDAG, 2011b) described in Chapter 2.0.

4.1.1 Daily Trips by Mode Improvements in transit service usually result in an increase in transit trips and a decrease in trips by auto or other travel modes. The mode choice model is used to determine the impact of transit service improvements on mode choice. SANDAG uses a mode choice model for travel forecasting that estimates transit trips by travel mode and by purpose that are internal to the modeling region. External transit trips are estimated through a separate procedure in the SANDAG model by factoring the observed external transit trip table from the base year to future years. The mode choice model also includes motorized (e.g., auto, transit, school bus) and non-motorized (e.g., walk and bicycle) modes. Auto and school bus trips include both internal trips within the region and external trips to or from outside the region.

Auto modes are further broken down into drive alone, carpools with two persons, and carpools with three or more persons. Transit modes are further broken down into commuter rail, light rail transit (LRT), express bus, and local bus. Trip purposes include home-based work, home-based college, home-based school, home-based other, non- home based, and serving passenger (home-based trips taken to assist a passenger in the vehicle (e.g., a parent dropping off a child at daycare). Because the purpose of

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

serving passenger does not involve the use of transit, this purpose was excluded from the analysis in this report.

Transit trips are expressed using linked transit trips in the region. A linked transit trip includes all travel segments from origin to final destination as a single trip, regardless of transfers or intermediate destinations. One measure of the overall benefits provided by a major transit project is the change in linked transit trips resulting from implementation of the project. Because of the interdependence between modes, the change is measured for all transit modes, not just for the new mode proposed for improvement.

Table 4-1 presents the forecast number of 2030 system-wide linked transit trips by mode for the No-Build Alternative, the Build Alternative, and the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, as well as the auto, school bus, and non-motorized trips. For comparison purposes, external transit trips also are presented. Transit trips are further broken down by purpose, as shown in Table 4-2.

Table 4-1. 2030 System-Wide Daily Trips

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Mode No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Station Option Commuter Rail1 14,691 13,762 13,845 Light Rail Transit1 122,254 149,922 149,200 Express Bus1 30,806 25,471 25,509 Local Bus1 142,093 134,651 134,821 External 37,947 37,891 37,891 Transit Subtotal 347,791 361,697 361,266 Percent Change LRT Trips over No-Build Alternative 22.63% 22.04% Percent Change Total Transit over No-Build Alternative 4.00% 3.87% Drive Alone 11,938,045 11,928,704 11,928,909 Carpool–2 Person 5,780,255 5,777,211 5,777,365 Carpool–3+ Person 3,917,802 3,916,503 3,916,576 Auto Subtotal2 21,636,102 21,622,419 21,622,850 School Bus2 143,488 143,488 143,488 Walk 512,862 512,643 512,643 Bicycle 52,375 52,316 52,316 Non-Motorized Subtotal 565,237 564,959 564,959 Total Daily 22,692,618 22,692,563 22,692,563 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Notes: LRT = Light Rail Transit 1 Transit trips estimated in the SANDAG mode choice model include trips internal to the modeling region only. 2 Auto and school bus trips estimated in the SANDAG model include both trips internal and external to the modeling region.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-2. 2030 System-Wide Daily Transit Trips by Purpose

Home Home Home Home Non- Alternative Mode Work College School Other Home Total No-Build Commuter Rail 10,417 550 318 2,300 1,106 14,691 Alternative Light Rail Transit 63,057 12,849 2,756 32,821 10,771 122,254 Express Bus 20,793 2,123 702 5,039 2,150 30,807 Local Bus 51,329 10,250 9,677 56,519 14,319 142,094 Daily Total 145,596 25,772 13,453 96,679 28,346 309,846 Trip Purpose Share % 47% 8% 5% 31% 9% 100% Build Alternative Commuter Rail 9,905 483 318 2,041 1,015 13,762 Light Rail Transit 76,405 18,660 3,102 38,518 13,237 149,922 Express Bus 17,633 892 659 4,401 1,886 25,471 Local Bus 48,908 7,678 9,553 54,745 13,767 134,651 Daily Total 152,851 27,713 13,632 99,705 29,905 323,806 Trip Purpose Share % 47% 9% 4% 31% 9% 100% Build Alternative Commuter Rail 9,924 488 319 2,086 1,028 13,845 with VA Medical Light Rail Transit 76,226 18,535 3,099 38,240 13,100 149,200 Center Station Option Express Bus 17,657 891 660 4,417 1,885 25,510 Local Bus 48,925 7,741 9,554 54,811 13,789 134,820 Daily Total 152,732 27,655 13,632 99,554 29,802 323,375 Trip Purpose Share % 47% 9% 4% 31% 9% 100% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

As shown in Table 4-1, the Build Alternative would increase transit trips by 4 percent over the No-Build Alternative to approximately 323,800 trips. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option was forecast to produce slightly fewer new transit trips than the Build Alternative without the VA Medical Center Station Option because of the increase in transit travel times by LRT.

In addition, the Build Alternative would have approximately 23 percent more LRT trips (22 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option), but 17 percent less express bus trips than the No-Build Alternative. This decrease in express bus trips would occur because the new LRT service in the Build Alternative would replace the express bus service in the Mid-Coast Corridor under the No-Build Alternative. The commuter rail trips decrease by 6 percent under the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative because of the increased competition in the corridor from the improved San Diego Trolley (Trolley) service under the Build Alternative. Auto and non-motorized trips would decrease slightly under the Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option. There would be no change in school bus trips.

As external transit trips are not forecasted by purpose, Table 4-2 only includes transit trips internal to the modeling region. As shown in Table 4-2, home-based work purpose transit trips account for 47 percent of the total transit trips. Home-based other has the second highest transit trips for 31 percent, followed by home-based college and non-

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

home based purposes with 9 percent each. Home-based school has the least share of the overall transit trips. Compared to the No-Build Alternative, LRT trips under the Build Alternative would increase significantly. Specifically, there would be approximately 13,000 additional home-based work trips and 6,000 additional home-based college and home-based other trips. The Golden Triangle and University City are regional business centers and are in close proximity to the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) campus. The increase in the number of trips to the centers will be served by the extension of the Trolley Blue Line to the University Towne Centre (UTC) Transit Center.

4.1.2 Daily Transit Boardings Transit boardings represent unlinked transit trips, including transfers. Boardings were estimated by transit mode system-wide, transit line or route, station or stop, and mode of access and egress.

As previously identified, transit trips estimated by the mode choice model are internal to the region only. External transit trips, estimated through a separate procedure, are then added to transit trip tables and assigned to the transit network. In the assignment of transit trips to the transit network, TransCAD software assigns transit trip origins and destinations onto the transit network via transit access points (TAPs). TAPs, a subset of transit stops, are located approximately every one-half mile along a transit route, and each TAP is associated with one transit stop. Eight separate transit assignments were produced for walk and auto access for local bus and premium services during peak and off-peak periods. These individual assignments were then summed to develop total transit boardings for each of the alternatives.

4.1.2.1 Daily Boardings by Mode and Line Table 4-3 presents the forecast of 2030 transit boardings by mode for the peak and off- peak periods and on a total daily basis. In addition, boardings on the key transit lines in the corridor also are included for the No-Build and Build Alternatives with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option. The transit modes include commuter rail, LRT, express bus, and local bus. LRT service is composed of the SPRINTER and Trolley Blue, Trolley Green, and Trolley Orange Lines. The SPRINTER Line would be unaffected by the project because it operates between Oceanside and Escondido, approximately 25 miles north of the UTC Transit Center—the north terminal of the project within the Mid-Coast Corridor. As identified in the table, the Build Alternative would increase system-wide boardings from 608,600 under the No-Build Alternative to 636,900 boardings under the Build Alternative. The Build Alternative also would have slightly higher daily boardings than the VA Medical Center Station Option. The extra 42-second travel time with the VA Medical Center Station Option contributes to the lower overall transit ridership.

The extension of the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative would replace the existing Route 150. Thus, while it is important to measure changes in system-wide ridership, it also is useful to compare boardings on the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative to boardings for Route 150 and the Trolley Blue Line under the No-Build Alternative. Based on the forecast of 2030 boardings for the two alternatives, the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option would have 40 percent and 38 percent more boardings, respectively, on the Trolley Blue Line than Route 150 and the

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-3. 2030 Daily Transit Boardings

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Option Off- Mode Peak Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Commuter Rail 11,719 3,004 14,723 11,003 2,770 13,773 11,018 2,873 13,891 Light Rail SPRINTER 9,220 12,463 21,684 9,204 12,266 21,468 9,203 12,405 21,608 Trolley Blue Line 38,751 37,948 76,699 54,509 58,543 113,052 54,407 57,579 111,986 Trolley Orange Line 12,346 14,227 26,573 12,172 14,217 26,390 12,173 14,185 26,358 Trolley Green Line 20,997 28,147 49,144 17,694 24,755 42,450 17,691 24,674 42,365 Total Trolley 72,094 80,322 152,416 84,375 97,515 181,892 84,271 96,438 180,709 Total Light Rail 81,314 92,785 174,100 93,579 109,781 203,360 93,474 108,843 202,317 Express Bus Route 150 2,542 1,726 4,268 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Other Express Bus 29,030 26,115 55,144 28,029 24,759 52,788 28,035 24,975 53,011 Total Express Bus 31,572 27,841 59,412 28,029 24,759 52,788 28,035 24,975 53,011 Local Bus 146,466 213,908 360,374 149,589 217,402 366,991 149,523 217,739 367,262 System Total 271,072 337,537 608,609 282,199 354,712 636,911 282,051 354,430 636,481 Transfer Rate 1.79 1.72 1.75 1.80 1.73 1.76 1.80 1.74 1.76 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: N/A – Route 150 does not operate under the Build Alternative; VA = Veterans Administration

Trolley Blue Line under the No-Build Alternative. The Build Alternative would have about 1,000 more total daily LRT boardings than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

With respect to boardings on other Trolley lines, the Trolley Orange Line is forecast to show little difference in boardings among the alternatives because it would not be affected greatly by the proposed transit improvement in the Build Alternative. Boardings on the Trolley Green Line are forecast to decrease by 14 percent under the Build Alternative because the line would operate in the Mid-Coast Corridor and compete with the Trolley Blue Line, where it shares the track between Santa Fe Depot and the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC).

Table 4-3 also presents the transfer rates for the system by time of day for each alternative. The transfer rate expresses the average number of transfers made to complete a trip. The average daily transfer rate slightly increases from 1.75 under the No-Build Alternative to 1.76 under the Build Alternative. Transfers increase because of the improved connections between the Trolley Blue and Green Lines for travel between Mission Valley and the Mid-Coast Corridor. Transit passengers are more likely to travel by Trolley—even though transfers are required—than take a bus with fewer transfers but potentially longer travel time. As identified in Chapter 2.0, this is a major transit market for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

4.1.2.2 Daily Boardings by Station Daily boardings by station or stop location were analyzed for the Trolley Blue Line and Route 150. These two major transit lines would be the focus of transit improvements under the No-Build and Build Alternatives, including the VA Medical Center Station Option. As the Trolley Green Line has several station locations that coincide with the Trolley Blue Line, the boardings at those stations also are analyzed.

As identified in Table 4-4, boardings for the Trolley Blue Line are separated into the south segment from the San Ysidro Transit Center to City College and the Mid-Coast segment from Fifth Avenue to the UTC Transit Center. As the Build Alternative would extend the Trolley Blue Line, providing continuous service from the San Ysidro Transit Center to University City, boardings are shown for each station along the Trolley Blue Line. Because Route 150 begins at Fifth Avenue and Broadway, the segment between the Fifth Avenue Station and the UTC Transit Center is referred to as the Mid-Coast segment even though the Mid-Coast Corridor extension of the Trolley Blue Line begins at the Santa Fe Depot. This reference to the Mid-Coast segment is for comparison purposes only.

As identified in Table 4-4, compared to the No-Build Alternative, the Build Alternative would increase boardings at all Trolley Blue Line stations in the south segment, except for the 12th and Imperial Transit Center because of the reduced need to transfer at this station and the perceived advantages (such as time savings and reliable service) of LRT for travel to the Mid-Coast Corridor.

The San Ysidro Transit Center has the highest forecast boardings (about 17,600 boardings) of any station. This is because the majority of external transit trips would use this station to enter the San Diego region. The station with the second-highest boardings is Civic Center. Located in Downtown San Diego, the Civic Center is a major activity center in the region for jobs, entertainment, and social activities.

Forecast boardings under the Build Alternative in the Mid-Coast segment are much higher than the No-Build Alternative because of improved travel times and connections to other Trolley lines and bus routes. The station with the highest boardings in the Mid- Coast Corridor is the OTTC. The OTTC would continue to be a major transfer point among all transit modes, especially to major destinations, such as Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, and UCSD. The UCSD West Station would have the second-highest boardings (approximately 6,000 in the Build Alternative and 4,100 under the VA Medical Center Station Option), as UCSD West is a major attractor in the Mid-Coast Corridor.

The station boardings on the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option (112,000) would be slightly lower than the boardings under the Build Alternative (113,100) because of the additional 42 seconds of running time. The forecasts indicate that the optional station at the VA Medical Center would not generate additional boardings, but mostly attract boardings from neighboring stations (e.g., stations at Nobel Drive and UCSD West). Under the Build Alternative, these two stations would have 8,400 boardings, while under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, the VA Medical Center, Nobel Drive, and UCSD West stations would have only 8,100 boardings.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-4. 2030 Daily Boardings by Station

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Station Option Trolley Route Trolley Trolley Trolley Trolley Trolley Segment Station Blue Line 150 Green Line Blue Line Green Line Blue Line Green Line San Ysidro 17,594 17,602 17,599 Transit Center Beyer Blvd 1,532 1,556 1,556 Iris Ave 4,668 5,010 4,991 Palm Ave 2,929 3,155 3,145 Palomar St 3,048 3,244 3,235 H St 3,441 3,680 3,665 Bayfront/E St 3,370 3,610 3,598 South 24th St 2,439 2,890 2,854 Segment 8th St 2,606 2,838 2,814 Pacific Fleet 1,005 1,022 1,021 Harborside 1,595 1,683 1,685 Barrio Logan 1,318 1,368 1,368 12th & Imperial 7,734 6,769 6,737 Transit Center Park & Market 1,730 2,145 2,136 City College 5,447 6,017 6,004 Fifth Ave 3,515 206 3,608 3,605 Civic Center 9,836 114 9,681 9,679 America Plaza 2,669 915 2,055 2,028 Santa Fe Depot 225 2,183 1,766 1,546 1,753 1,567 County Center 134 1,512 2,319 2,312 813 /Little Italy 814 Middletown 38 815 1,221 251 1,218 251 Washington St 28 1,090 1,977 587 1,940 583 Old Town Transit 790 4,915 7,193 4,237 6,970 4,115 Mid-Coast Center Comparison Tecolote Rd 1,126 1,126 Segment Clairemont Dr 763 761 Balboa Ave 3,187 3,183 Nobel Dr 284 2,398 2,357 VA Medical 1,611 Center UCSD West 1,240 6,041 4,088 UCSD East 293 1,882 1,869 Executive Dr 174 2,486 2,488 UTC Transit 55 2,765 2,597 Center Total 76,699 4,268 10,515 113,052 7,435 111,986 7,329 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 and presented in origin-destination format. Note: UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Regarding the station boardings for the Green Line, there are fewer boardings at the Santa Fe Depot and the OTTC in the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative, because of the reduced need to transfer between the Trolley Green Line and the Trolley Blue Line or Route 150 after the Trolley Blue Line is extended in the Build Alternative.

4.1.2.3 Daily Boardings and Alightings by Station and Station-to-Station Volumes Boardings and alightings were forecast for the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option and used to identify peak loading points and to ensure that adequate capacity is provided to serve the forecasted number of trips. Boardings and alightings refer to the number of passengers getting on or off transit vehicles or trains at stations. As such, boardings and alightings also are referred to as “ons” and “offs.” The number of passengers onboard between stations can then be calculated from the station ons and offs. Ons and offs and station-to-station volumes are typically shown in “diamond diagrams.” Diagrams showing station boardings and alightings and station-to- station volumes were developed for Route 150 under the No-Build Alternative and for the Trolley Blue, Trolley Green, and Trolley Orange Lines under the No-Build and Build Alternatives and the VA Medical Center Station Option.

Figure 4-1 presents a diamond diagram of the daily station boardings and alightings and station-to-station volumes in the northbound and southbound directions in production- attraction (PA) format for Route 150 under the No-Build Alternative and the Trolley Blue Line under the No-Build and Build Alternatives and the VA Medical Center Station Option. The PA format can be explained as follows: in describing the direction for a trip, the term “origin” refers to the starting point while the term “destination” refers to the ending point. However, for a home-based trip, the trip end at home is called the production, while the trip end at the non-home location is called the attraction, regardless of whether the trip begins or ends at home. Hence, the PA format does not always indicate the true direction of travel as opposed to the origin-destination format. Figure 4-2 presents the daily station boardings, alightings, and station-to-station volumes for the Trolley Green Line; Figure 4-3 presents this information for the Trolley Orange Line.

As shown in Figure 4-1 for the No-Build Alternative, America Plaza would have the highest daily boardings (1,495) for Route 150, and UCSD West would have the highest daily alightings (2,034), with both in the northbound direction. The highest station-to-station volume of 3,235 would occur in the northbound direction between the OTTC and the Nobel Drive Stations. The Trolley Blue Line would experience the highest boardings (29,209) at the San Ysidro Transit Center heading northbound, and the highest alightings at Civic Center (18,998), also northbound. The highest station-to-station daily volume of 44,106 would occur in the northbound direction between the 8th Street and Pacific Fleet Stations. A map of the No-Build Alternative Trolley system is provided in Chapter 1.0.

Under the Build Alternative, the number of alightings on the northbound Trolley Blue Line would slightly decrease at Civic Center (17,895) because the extension eliminates the need to transfer to Route 150 for travel to UCSD. The second highest number of alightings would occur at UCSD West (9,022). The addition of the VA Medical Center Station Option would attract some of the alightings (2,877) from UCSD West, which would have 5,493 alightings. The highest station-to-station volume on the northbound Trolley Blue Line extension under

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-1. Route 150 and Trolley Blue Line Daily Boardings and Alightings

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 and presented in production-attraction format.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-1. Route 150 and Trolley Blue Line Daily Boardings and Alightings (continued)

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 and presented in production-attraction format.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-11 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-12 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-2. Trolley Green Line Daily Boardings and Alightings

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 and presented in production-attraction format.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-13 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-14 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-3. Trolley Orange Line Daily Boardings and Alightings

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 and presented in production-attraction format.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-15 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-16 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

the Build Alternative would occur between the Washington Street Station and the OTTC with a daily volume of 18,731. The volume would be slightly lower under the VA Medical Center Station Option. The highest station-to-station volume for the Trolley Blue Line still would occur between the 8th Street and Pacific Fleet Stations. Under the Build Alternative, it would increase to 48,802 daily.

It should be noted that the boardings, alightings, and the station-to-station volumes in these diagrams are in the PA format. As explained above, the PA format does not reflect the true direction of a trip. As shown in these diagrams, the northbound volume is much heavier than the southbound; however, the southbound and northbound volumes would be more balanced over the course of a day.

Peak-hour, peak direction station-to-station volumes also were analyzed for the Trolley Blue Line extension under the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option. For purposes of the peak-hour, peak-direction analysis, the six-hour peak- period ridership data (in PA format) from the Series 11 model was converted to the a.m. peak hour in origin-destination format. To convert ridership, Metropolitan Transit System data for Trolley Blue Line boardings during the a.m. peak hour were compared to daily ridership numbers. The analysis indicated that 22.1 percent of the six-hour totals occurred within the highest morning peak hour. Based upon this finding, a factor of 0.22 was selected for converting peak values from the model into an a.m. peak-hour total.

Within the Mid-Coast Corridor under the Build Alternative, the highest peak-hour, peak- direction volume of 1,970 would occur in the northbound direction between the Santa Fe Depot and the County Center/Little Italy Stations. In the southbound direction, the peak- hour, peak-direction volume of 590 would occur between the Middletown and County Center/Little Italy and between the County Center/Little Italy and Santa Fe Depot Stations. Under the VA Medical Center Station Option, the peak-hour, peak-direction volume would be approximately the same as under the Build Alternative.

The Trolley Green Line would experience substantial decreases in boardings and alightings under the Build Alternative because the line would share tracks with the Trolley Blue Line between the OTTC and Santa Fe Depot. The largest decrease would occur at the OTTC, which would have 2,880 alightings northbound under the No-Build Alternative, and 322 alightings under the Build Alternative (or 274 alightings under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option). Under the No-Build Alternative, transit passengers accessing the New Trolley Service Area (NTSA) from the south would transfer from the Trolley Green Line to a bus at the OTTC. However, this transfer would be eliminated under the Build Alternative as transit passengers would take the Trolley Blue Line directly to the NTSA, which avoids the additional transfer at the OTTC. In addition, there would be a significant increase in the number of alightings from southbound Trolley Green Line trains at the OTTC under the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative (from 3,690 alightings under the No-Build Alternative to 5,316 and 5,127 alightings under the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option, respectively). This increase mostly occurs because the major transfer points between the Trolley Blue Line and the Trolley Green Line shift from the 12th and Imperial Transit Center and Santa Fe Depot to the OTTC.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-17 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

It is also noted that alightings at the Fashion Valley Station would decrease by 1,000 in the westbound direction. The Trolley station at Fashion Valley is served by a few bus routes; for example, Route 41 operates between Mission Valley and University City. Under the No- Build Alternative, travelers from Mission Valley would transfer from LRT at Fashion Valley and take Route 41 to the UTC Transit Center rather than transfer at the OTTC and take Route 150 to the UTC Transit Center. However, with the extension of the Trolley Blue Line to the UTC Transit Center under the Build Alternative, travelers instead would transfer at the OTTC and take the Trolley Blue Line to their destination in University City.

The station boardings and alightings on the Trolley Orange Line have very minor difference between the No-Build and Build Alternatives. Because the Trolley Orange Line does not operate in the Mid-Coast Corridor, the impact of the project on this Trolley line is limited.

4.1.2.4 Boardings and Alightings by Mode of Access and Egress The modes that passengers use for access to and egress from stations also were analyzed for existing and new Trolley stations under the No-Build Alternative and under the Build Alternative with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option. Daily station boardings and alightings by mode of access and egress for stations between Santa Fe Depot and the UTC Transit Center are shown in PA format in Figure 4-4 through Figure 4-9 for the No- Build Alternative, the Build Alternative, and the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. Tables containing the 2030 forecasts of boardings and alightings by mode of access and egress are provided in Appendix A.

Under all alternatives, the primary mode of access for boardings is transfers—66 percent under the No-Build Alternative, 65 percent under the Build Alternative, and 64 percent under the VA Medical Center Station Option. For alightings, transfers are still substantial with 47 percent of alightings transferring under both the No-Build and Build Alternatives and 48 percent under the VA Medical Center Station Option. The high number of transfers for access and egress indicates that the Mid-Coast Corridor stations would be well connected with the other transit routes in the corridor.

The OTTC would remain a major transfer point for the Trolley Green Line, Trolley Blue Line, and other transit service in the corridor, such as Route 150. In addition to the OTTC, the UCSD West Station and the UTC Transit Center are also stations with significant transfer volumes under the Build Alternative, mostly serving the transit demand in the UCSD and Golden Triangle travel analysis districts. Under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, the UTC Transit Center still would be a major transfer point, but the UCSD West Station would have lower transfer volumes than under the Build Alternative because some of the transfer passengers would shift to the VA Medical Center Station.

In addition to transferring, walk access is also an important mode of access for transit trips. Under the No-Build Alternative, passengers would walk to access transit nine times as much as they would drive to access transit because of the lack of park-and-ride facilities in the corridor. Although the number of walk access trips would increase under the Build Alternative, passengers would walk only twice as much as they would drive to access transit because of the new park-and-ride facilities at the Trolley stations.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-18 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-4. No-Build Alternative—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

Figure 4-5. No-Build Alternative—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-19 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-20 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-6. Build Alternative—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

Figure 4-7. Build Alternative—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-21 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-22 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Figure 4-8. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option—Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

Figure 4-9. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option—Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-23 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-24 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

4.1.3 Passenger Miles Table 4-5 presents the forecasts of transit passenger miles for the 2030 alternatives. As identified in the table, the Build Alternative would produce more than 3.8 million daily passenger miles systemwide, about 6 percent more than the No-Build Alternative. LRT and local bus would account for most of the passenger miles—44 percent and 33 percent, respectively, in the Build Alternative, as compared to 43 percent by LRT under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The LRT mode has the largest increase in passenger miles under the Build Alternative (24 percent) compared to the No-Build Alternative. LRT’s large share of passenger miles would be attributable to its frequent service and improved connectivity to areas with high transit demand.

Table 4-5. 2030 Transit Passenger Miles

Transit Passenger Miles Alternative Transit Mode Peak Off-Peak Daily Share No-Build Alternative Commuter Rail 222,257 56,687 278,944 8% Light Rail Transit 657,043 678,275 1,335,319 37% Express Bus 370,554 359,462 730,016 20% Local Bus 482,812 777,766 1,260,578 35% System Total 1,732,667 1,872,190 3,604,858 100% Build Alternative and Commuter Rail 209,615 48,823 258,438 7% Percent Difference from Percent Difference -6% -14% -7% No-Build Alternative Light Rail Transit 803,564 857,053 1,660,617 44% Percent Difference 22% 26% 24% - Express Bus 323,480 317,625 641,104 17% Percent Difference -13% -12% -12% - Local Bus 479,058 774,063 1,253,121 33% Percent Difference -1% 0% -1% - System Total 1,815,717 1,997,564 3,813,281 100% Percent Difference 5% 7% 6% - Build Alternative with VA Commuter Rail 209,983 52,530 262,513 7% Medical Center Station Percent Difference -6% -7% -6% - Option and Percent Difference from No-Build Light Rail Transit 801,853 845,697 1,647,550 43% Alternative Percent Difference 22% 25% 23% - Express Bus 323,627 323,504 647,132 17% Percent Difference -13% -10% -11% Local Bus 478,598 764,504 1,243,102 33% Percent Difference -1% -2% -1% System Total 1,814,061 1,986,235 3,800,297 100% Percent Difference 5% 6% 5% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-25 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

4.1.4 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets One of the major purposes of this project is to provide improvements that complement and integrate with the existing transit system, particularly with transit improvements that provide direct connections or with a minimum number of transfers. Transfer rates, measured as the average number of transfers made to complete a trip, between major transit markets is an important indicator of such an improvement. Table 4-6 identifies the transfer rates between major transit markets under the No-Build and Build Alternatives and the VA Medical Center Station Option. As identified in the table, the transfer rates for trips between University City and the south would be reduced significantly under the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative. An average daily rate of 2.83 (meaning a traveler transfers on average 1.83 times from origin to destination) is forecast for the No-Build Alternative in comparison to 2.32 under the Build Alternative. The transfer rates for trips between the south and University City are forecast to decrease from 2.62 to 2.08 under the Build Alternative in comparison to the No-Build Alternative. This reduction in transfer rate can be explained by the extension of the Trolley Blue Line under the Build Alternative that would eliminate the need to transfer between the Trolley Blue Line and Route 150 in Downtown San Diego under the No-Build Alternative.

Table 4-6. 2030 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets

Build Alternative with VA Medical No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Center Station Option From Area To Area Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily University City East 2.37 2.48 2.43 2.60 2.65 2.63 2.60 2.65 2.63 Downtown 1.98 2.04 2.01 1.76 1.63 1.69 1.77 1.64 1.70 South 2.82 2.85 2.83 2.33 2.31 2.32 2.33 2.32 2.32 East University City 2.32 2.66 2.51 2.37 2.37 2.37 2.37 2.39 2.38 Downtown 1.45 1.39 1.41 1.45 1.39 1.42 1.45 1.39 1.42 South 2.08 1.99 2.03 2.08 1.98 2.02 2.08 1.99 2.03 Downtown University City 1.67 1.65 1.66 1.41 1.36 1.38 1.41 1.36 1.38 East 1.78 1.72 1.74 1.78 1.72 1.74 1.78 1.72 1.74 South 1.37 1.41 1.39 1.35 1.39 1.37 1.35 1.39 1.37 South University City 2.61 2.63 2.62 2.10 2.07 2.08 2.09 2.06 2.08 East 2.22 2.14 2.17 2.21 2.13 2.17 2.21 2.15 2.18 Downtown 1.61 1.53 1.57 1.59 1.53 1.56 1.59 1.53 1.56 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

In addition, the transfer rates between University City and Downtown San Diego would noticeably decrease. An average daily rate of 2.01 is forecast for the No-Build Alternative in comparison to 1.69 under the Build Alternative and 1.70 under the VA Medical Center Station Option. For transit trips from Downtown San Diego to University City, the transfer rate is forecast to decrease from 1.66 to 1.38. With the extension of the Trolley Blue Line from Santa Fe Depot to the UTC Transit Center under the Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option, passengers who

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-26 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

take the Trolley Green Line and then transfer to Route 150 would instead use the Trolley Blue Line. These service changes would have a mixed effect on transfer rates between University City and the east, as the daily rate from University City to the east increases from 2.43 in the No-Build Alternative to 2.63 in the Build Alternative, but decreases from 2.51 to 2.37 (2.38 with the VA Medical Center Station Option) in the opposite direction. The transfer rates between other transit markets do not show significant change between these alternatives.

4.1.5 Parking Demand Parking capacity and demand at stations within the Mid-Coast Corridor between Santa Fe Depot and the UTC Transit Center are summarized in Table 4-7. Five new park-and- ride facilities would be added at the Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, and Nobel Drive Stations and at the UTC Transit Center under the Build Alternative. Except at the OTTC, there are no existing park-and-ride lots other than informal park- and-ride locations south of the OTTC. As shown in the table, all park-and-ride facilities would be fully utilized.

Table 4-7. Parking Demand Summary for Alternatives

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station No-Build Alternative Build Alternative Option Park-and-Ride Lot Capacity Demand Capacity Demand Capacity Demand Santa Fe Depot ------County Center/Little Italy 0 15 0 15 0 15 Middletown 0 15 0 15 0 15 Washington St 0 15 0 15 0 15 Old Town Transit Center 397 397 397 397 397 397 Tecolote Rd - - 280 280 280 280 Clairemont Dr - - 150 150 150 150 Balboa Ave - - 220 220 220 220 Nobel Dr - - 260 258 260 256 VA Medical Center ------UCSD West ------UCSD East ------Executive Dr ------UTC Transit Center - - 260 260 260 260 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

4.2 Highway Results The Build Alternative would improve transit as an alternative mode of travel to the automobile, which would result in a shift of trips from automobile to transit. This shift in mode would impact the regional and Mid-Coast Corridor highway and roadway system.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-27 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

This section describes how the alternatives would affect regional mobility from a highway performance and user’s perspective using the measures vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle hours traveled (VHT), and average speed.

Table 4-8 summarizes these measures by roadway functional classification for each alternative at the regional level, and Table 4-9 summarizes these measures for the Mid- Coast Corridor only.

4.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled The No-Build Alternative, which would produce the highest number of daily auto-person trips of the alternatives under consideration (see Table 4-1), also would produce the highest VMT with approximately 109,150,000 daily VMT region-wide and 13,009,000 daily VMT within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The Build Alternative would reduce VMT at the regional level by approximately 139,400, or 0.13 percent, compared to the No-Build Alternative.

Within the Mid-Coast Corridor, the Build Alternative would produce approximately 61,600 fewer VMT than the No-Build Alternative, which accounts for 44 percent of the region- wide VMT reduction. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have a greater reduction in daily VMT, with approximately 64,900 vehicle miles or 0.50 percent less VMT than the No-Build Alternative. The reduction in the daily VMT under the Build Alternative with and without the VA Medical Center Station would include reductions in VMT on most facility types. Because the Build Alternative would attract more transit trips, there would be fewer auto trips and fewer VMT, which would help alleviate congestion on roadways.

4.2.2 Vehicle Hours of Travel As shown in Table 4-8 and Table 4-9, the differences in daily VHT between the alternatives are small. The No-Build Alternative would produce daily VHT of 3,263,300 hours region-wide and 527,300 within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The Build Alternative would have approximately 8,600 hours (0.26 percent) fewer VHT region-wide and 3,300 hours (0.63 percent) fewer VHT within the Mid-Coast Corridor than the No-Build Alternative. The decrease in VHT under the Build Alternative would occur on all facility types.

With 8,400 hours (or 0.23 percent) of fewer region-wide daily VHT than the No-Build Alternative, the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have slightly higher VHT than the Build Alternative. As shown in the tables, the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would produce higher VHT, but lower VMT within the Mid-Coast Corridor than the Build Alternative, which would indicate a slightly more congested highway network.

4.2.3 Average Speed Under the Build Alternatives, the average speed in the region would not change significantly from the No-Build Alternative. It would average 33.45 miles per hour (mph) under the No-Build Alternative and 33.49 mph under the Build Alternatives.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-28 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-8. 2030 Daily Highway System Measures for Region

Build Alternative No-Build Alternative Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option Functional Classification VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed Freeway 53,842,995 1,067,238 50.45 53,750,100 1,063,249 50.55 53,752,661 1,062,971 50.57 Prime Arterial 9,248,947 324,941 28.46 9,265,148 324,907 28.52 9,264,587 324,914 28.51 Major Arterial 18,516,145 726,342 25.49 18,477,841 724,328 25.51 18,480,207 724,458 25.51 Collector 8,197,917 299,844 27.34 8,189,549 299,103 27.38 8,193,385 299,267 27.38 Local Collector 5,300,122 220,864 24.00 5,293,724 220,278 24.03 5,293,205 220,280 24.03 Rural Collector 1,577,193 45,083 34.98 1,576,862 45,074 34.98 1,575,177 45,024 34.99 Local Street 1,704,048 77,867 21.88 1,704,124 77,708 21.93 1,703,292 77,694 21.92 Fwy-Fwy Ramp 2,166,615 68,817 31.48 2,163,100 68,556 31.55 2,164,142 68,711 31.50 Ramp 2,948,365 198,807 14.83 2,944,906 198,097 14.87 2,943,508 198,139 14.86 Subtotal 103,502,347 3,029,803 34.16 103,365,354 3,021,300 34.21 103,370,164 3,021,458 34.21 Zone Connector 5,648,016 233,525 24.19 5,645,570 233,408 24.19 5,646,032 233,429 24.19 Total 109,150,363 3,263,328 33.45 109,010,924 3,254,708 33.49 109,016,196 3,254,887 33.49 Difference to No-Build Alternative Freeway -92,895 -3,989 -90,334 -4,267 Prime Arterial 16,201 -34 15,640 -27 Major Arterial -38,304 -2,014 -35,938 -1,884 Collector -8,368 -741 -4,532 -577 Local Collector -6,398 -586 -6,917 -584 Rural Collector -331 -9 -2,016 -59 Local Street 76 -159 -756 -173 Fwy-Fwy Ramp -3,515 -261 -2,473 -106 Ramp -3,459 -710 -4,857 -668 Subtotal -136,993 -8,503 -132,183 -8,345 Zone Connector -2,446 -117 -1,984 -96 Total -139,439 -8,620 -134,167 -8,441 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: Fwy-Fwy = Freeway to Freeway; VA = Veterans Administration; VHT = Vehicle Hours Traveled; VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-29 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-9. 2030 Daily Highway System Measures for Mid-Coast Corridor

Build Alternative No-Build Alternative Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option Functional Classification VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed Freeway 6,193,183 131,714 47.02 6,155,464 130,406 47.20 6,153,792 130,268 47.24 Prime Arterial 1,186,041 66,470 17.84 1,181,790 66,010 17.90 1,181,029 66,069 17.88 Major Arterial 2,690,009 159,340 16.88 2,680,184 158,606 16.90 2,679,696 158,767 16.88 Collector 393,316 21,965 17.91 391,205 21,761 17.98 392,539 21,859 17.96 Local Collector 890,667 49,427 18.02 887,258 49,163 18.05 886,636 49,134 18.05 Rural Collector - - 0 0 - Local Street 158,209 26,359 6.00 158,235 26,326 6.01 157,974 26,377 5.99 Fwy-Fwy Ramp 322,872 9,720 33.22 321,675 9,675 33.25 322,412 9,769 33.00 Ramp 615,666 36,953 16.66 613,818 36,717 16.72 612,246 36,771 16.65 Subtotal 12,449,963 501,947 24.80 12,389,630 498,664 24.85 12,386,324 499,013 24.82 Zone Connector 558,925 25,365 22.04 557,678 25,305 22.04 557,701 25,306 22.04 Total 13,008,888 527,313 24.67 12,947,308 523,970 24.71 12,944,025 524,320 24.69 Difference to No-Build Alternative Freeway -37,719 -1,308 -39,391 -1,446 Prime Arterial -4,251 -460 -5,012 -401 Major Arterial -9,825 -734 -10,313 -573 Collector -2,111 -204 -778 -106 Local Collector -3,409 -264 -4,032 -293 Rural Collector 0 0 0 0 Local Street 26 -33 -235 18 Fwy-Fwy Ramp -1,197 -45 -460 49 Ramp -1,848 -236 -3,420 -182 Subtotal -60,333 -3,283 -63,640 -2,934 Zone Connector -1,247 -60 -1,224 -59 Total -61,580 -3,343 -64,864 -2,993 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: Fwy-Fwy = Freeway to Freeway; VA = Veterans Administration; VHT = Vehicle Hours Traveled; VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-30 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Among the functional classifications of roadways, the speed on freeways would vary the most, from 50.45 mph under the No-Build Alternative to 50.55 mph under the Build Alternative, or 50.57 mph under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The rural collectors would have the least variation in speed because they are located far from the Mid-Coast Corridor and therefore would experience negligible impacts from the transit improvements in the corridor.

The average speed within the Mid-Coast Corridor generally would be much lower than the regional average. The average speed would increase slightly from 24.67 mph to 24.71 mph under the Build Alternative, or 24.69 mph with the VA Medical Center Station Option. Compared to the difference of the region-wide average speeds on the freeway between these alternatives, the impact of the project on freeways within the Mid-Coast Corridor is slightly greater because the freeway within the corridor is more congested. Except for ramps, all facility types within the corridor would experience much lower speeds than the region, which demonstrates the serious congestion in the corridor. 4.3 Highway and Transit Travel Times Peak highway and transit travel times in 2030 between major travel markets for the alternatives are summarized in Table 4-10. These travel pairs were selected as the Mid- Coast Corridor Transit Project could have the greatest impacts on travel between these pairs. The peak travel times for 2010 also are included for comparison. As shown in the table, the highway travel times in 2030 generally would be higher than in 2010 because of congestion caused by increased travel demand in the future. On the transit side, some of the transit travel times between travel analysis districts would be shorter under the No-Build Alternative than in 2010 because of improved transit service and connectivity in 2030. Moreover, among a few major travel markets, the Build Alternative would have transit travel times that would be competitive with 2030 highway travel times. For example, transit travel for the Build Alternative between the Clairemont and UCSD travel analysis districts would be 4.14 minutes faster than the highway travel time (the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would be 3.45 minutes faster). The travel times between these travel analysis districts in the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option either would be the same or slightly slower because their transit networks would be the same except for the additional Trolley station at the VA Medical Center.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 4-31 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 4.0 – Travel Forecasting Results

Table 4-10. 2010 and 2030 Travel Time Summary

Peak Hwy Travel District Time (min) Peak Transit Travel Time1 (min) Build Alternative with No-Build Build VA Medical Center From To 2010 2030 2010 Alternative Alternative Station Option 23 Clairemont 15 Centre City 11.44 12.76 21.72 21.30 25.36 25.36 16 Golden Triangle 15 Centre City 18.77 21.16 53.60 47.10 42.76 43.45 17 UCSD 15 Centre City 19.91 20.55 45.20 38.54 37.19 37.87 7 Mission Valley 26 Point Loma 15.38 17.56 40.25 39.40 39.40 39.40 8 North Park 16 Golden Triangle 18.90 26.87 80.13 79.11 71.72 72.40 15 Centre City 16 Golden Triangle 21.65 28.71 55.72 56.84 42.76 43.45 11 South Bay 16 Golden Triangle 34.61 46.53 85.97 87.87 68.00 68.68 10 South San Diego 23 Clairemont 23.79 29.08 50.42 50.77 39.41 39.41 17 UCSD 23 Clairemont 14.26 14.20 50.49 48.99 15.60 16.29 5 Kearny Mesa 23 Clairemont 15.44 15.56 86.66 65.16 45.42 45.42 28 Fashion Valley 18 Torrey Pines 24.60 29.60 70.59 66.61 56.12 56.81 11 South Bay 17 UCSD 39.26 51.24 77.78 79.77 62.43 63.11 10 South San Diego 17 UCSD 31.17 39.50 66.60 68.58 51.25 51.93 15 Centre City 17 UCSD 26.30 33.67 47.53 48.74 37.19 37.87 8 North Park 17 UCSD 23.55 31.58 71.94 71.01 66.15 66.83 7 Mission Valley 17 UCSD 21.69 28.33 52.40 51.59 38.42 39.10 28 Fashion Valley 17 UCSD 21.71 25.90 47.58 46.78 33.60 34.29 23 Clairemont 17 UCSD 20.26 19.74 57.27 49.42 15.60 16.29 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Forecast Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011. Notes: min = minutes; UCSD = University of California, San Diego; VA = Veterans Administration 1 Includes initial wait time, transfer wait time, and walk time

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 4-32 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

5.0 TRANSIT USER BENEFITS

This chapter presents the results of the analysis of transit user benefits for the Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option considered in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement/Subsequent Environmental Impact Report. In this chapter, the definition and purpose of the user benefit analysis are first discussed, followed by the user benefits analysis results for each alternative against the No-Build Alternative and the New Starts Baseline Alternative. Finally, the maps of user benefits are presented to illustrate the distribution of user benefits across the entire region for the Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The New Starts Baseline Alternative is used only for cost-effectiveness purposes, as required by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and not for the comparison of environmental or transportation impacts. 5.1 The Concept of User Benefits In late 2000, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) established the Final Rule on Major Capital Investment Projects (Federal Register, December 7, 2000), also known as the “New Starts Final Rule.” This rule modified some New Starts criteria. The most notable change, which also has the greatest relevance to travel demand forecasting, was the change from cost per new rider to cost per hour of user benefits. The user benefit measure is a more comprehensive measure that includes benefits such as travel time savings for new riders as well as existing riders.

Transportation projects or policies generally effect changes in travelers’ time and/or out- of-pocket costs. The user benefits measure is based on the concept of consumer surplus, a principle in microeconomic theory that measures the changes in user benefits. Transportation system user benefits capture a diverse set of benefits to transit riders— including reductions in walk time, wait time, ride time, transfer time, and costs (converted to time)—expressed in terms of savings in travel time. User benefits or “disbenefits” (if there is an increase in time or cost related to the proposed project) are assumed to arise due to changes in mobility for individual travelers that are caused by a project (or policy) and are measured in hours of travel time and aggregated over all travelers. User benefits are estimated using results from the travel demand forecasting model runs for the Build Alternative, relative to the New Starts Baseline Alternative.

A program called Summit developed by the FTA is the tool used to estimate the change in transportation system user benefits between alternatives for all travelers, trip purposes, and modes. The Summit user benefit procedures combine the changes in generalized travel prices by mode to arrive at the composite change in the price of all modes as a result of an alternative’s transportation investments. This composite price of travel is derived from the “log sum” denominator of the logit equation within the mode choice component of the travel demand model. The log sum reflects the importance or share of travel by each mode. In the case where total trip making is assumed to remain constant, which was a guiding assumption of this study, the change in consumer surplus is simply the change in the composite price of all modes multiplied by the number of person trips.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

The generalized cost of travel by mode, as well as the composite price of travel reflecting all modes, is measured in units of time. In-vehicle travel time savings are already expressed by the travel demand forecasting model in units of time. Monetary costs, such as tolls, parking, vehicle operating costs, and transit fares, are converted to time units using assumptions and factors within the mode choice element of the travel demand model. Other time costs, such as transit wait time, are weighted by assumptions used in the travel demand model

Typical Summit outputs include daily user benefits in person-minutes by trip purpose, mode of travel, and time of day. In addition to user benefits, Summit also produces total transit trips for the Build Alternative and the New Starts Baseline Alternative, from which new transit trips can be calculated. For the Build Alternative, new transit trips and user benefits were calculated against the New Starts Baseline Alternative. 5.2 New Starts Baseline Alternative The FTA New Starts rating system relies on a baseline alternative against which the incremental costs and benefits of a proposed New Starts project are measured. A New Starts Baseline Alternative was designed to meet the FTA requirements for a baseline alternative, against which the user benefits and cost-effectiveness of the build alternatives were calculated. The New Starts Baseline Alternative represents the best that can be done to improve mobility in the corridor without a major capital investment.

The New Starts Baseline Alternative proposed for the New Starts rating and evaluation process in the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project would provide for high-frequency, higher-speed bus services that would use the planned Interstate (I-) 5 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, which would improve upon the level of transit service offered in the No-Build Alternative. Under the New Starts Baseline Alternative, a new rapid bus route, Route 156, would be added to the No-Build Alternative transit system to improve service to the major transit markets. The new Route 156 would serve the same areas and station locations as the Build Alternative. In addition, Route 150 would be modified to provide non-stop express service between Downtown San Diego, the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC), and University City. It would operate at the same frequency as the proposed Trolley Blue Line service. Both Routes 150 and 156 would use the planned I-5 HOV lanes.

Table 5-1 presents the service frequency for Route 150 and Route 156. The bus routes and stop/station locations for Routes 150 and 156 are shown in Figure 5-1 under the New Starts Baseline Alternative.

Table 5-1. Route 150 and Route 156 Service Headways in the New Starts Baseline Alternative

Route Peak Headway (min) Off-Peak Headway (min) Fare Route 150 7.5 7.5 $2.50 Route 156 15 30 $2.50 Source: SANDAG, 2012 Note: min = minutes

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-1. New Starts Baseline Alternative

Source: SANDAG, 2012

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Unless otherwise noted, results for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option are the same as those described for the Build Alternative without the VA Medical Center Station Option. 5.3 New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Trip Purpose and Time Period User benefits are one of the primary inputs used to determine the cost-effectiveness of a New Starts transit project. The FTA Summit software was used to analyze user benefits for the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative and the New Starts Baseline Alternative. User benefits were calculated in minutes and then converted to hours of user benefits.

Another key component of the analysis is new transit trips, which indicate new transit demand from transit service improvements. In the following sections, both user benefits and new transit trips are summarized by trip purpose and time period for the Build Alternative and Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option compared to the No-Build Alternative and the New Starts Baseline Alternative.

5.3.1 Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative Table 5-2 presents the forecast of new transit trips and user benefits by purpose and time period for the Build Alternative in comparison to the No-Build Alternative. In general, improvements in transit service such as in frequency of service, reliability, travel times, or service coverage, usually attract more transit trips. The number of new transit trips compared to the No-Build Alternative is one indication of the effectiveness of the Build Alternative in increasing transit ridership and transit mode share.

As shown in Table 5-2, the Build Alternative would experience the greatest increase in new transit trips over the No-Build Alternative, with approximately 14,000 new trips, or by 4.5 percent of total transit trips. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have fewer new trips than the Build Alternative, with approximately 13,500 new trips, or 4.4 percent of total transit trips in the No-Build Alternative. This is consistent with the travel forecast results discussed in Chapter 4.0, which show that the increase in the Trolley Blue Line run time (42 seconds one-way) under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option over the Build Alternative would result in slightly fewer transit trips. In addition, the new optional station at the VA Medical Center would not attract additional boardings, but rather would attract boardings from its neighboring stations. Overall, the transit trips for each trip purpose would increase in approximately the same proportion with or without the VA Medical Center Station Option.

More than half (52 percent) of the new daily transit trips would be home-based work trips, and more than half (59 percent) of the new transit trips would occur during the off-peak period. The improved San Diego Trolley (Trolley) service would not only be beneficial to home-based work trips but also other purposes, such as home-based college, home-based other, and non-home-based trips that occur mainly in the off-peak period, as the new Trolley service would serve the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) and major regional activity centers. New transit trips would consist of 52 percent from home-based work; 22 percent from home-based other; and 14 percent from home- based college. The Build

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Table 5-2. 2030 Daily New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Trip Purpose (Build Alternatives Compared to No-Build Alternative)

Change in Daily New Transit Trips Daily User Benefits (Hours) Build Alternative with VA Medical Build Alternative with Build Center Station VA Medical Center Alternative Option Build Alternative Station Option Time User User Period Trip Purpose Trips Share Trips Share Benefits Share Benefits Share Peak Home-Based Work 4,160 30% 4,120 30% 3,950 27% 3,910 28% Home-Based College 480 3% 470 3% 660 5% 640 5% Home-Based School 100 1% 100 1% 120 1% 120 1% Home-Based Other 610 4% 600 4% 730 5% 720 5% Non-Home 430 3% 430 3% 380 3% 380 3% Peak Total 5,770 41% 5,710 42% 5,850 41% 5,780 42% Off-Peak Home-Based Work 3,100 22% 3,020 22% 2,560 18% 2,500 18% Home-Based College 1,470 10% 1,420 10% 2,030 14% 1,970 14% Home-Based School 80 1% 80 1% 100 1% 100 1% Home-Based Other 2,420 17% 2,270 17% 2,850 20% 2,630 19% Non-Home 1,130 8% 1,030 8% 1,030 7% 940 7% Off-Peak Total 8,190 59% 7,820 58% 8,560 59% 8,140 58% Daily Home-Based Work 7,250 52% 7,140 53% 6,510 45% 6,410 46% Home-Based College 1,940 14% 1,880 14% 2,690 19% 2,620 19% Home-Based School 180 1% 180 1% 220 2% 220 2% Home-Based Other 3,030 22% 2,880 21% 3,580 25% 3,350 24% Non-Home 1,560 11% 1,460 11% 1,410 10% 1,320 9% Daily Total 13,960 100% 13,530 100% 14,410 100% 13,920 100% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would be similar, with 53 percent, 21 percent, and 14 percent for the same trip purposes, respectively.

Similar to the new transit trips, the Build Alternative would result in higher regional user benefits with more than 14,400 daily hours compared to 13,900 daily hours under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have 3 percent fewer user benefits compared to the Build Alternative because of the increased travel time with the additional station and fewer new transit trips. Total regional user benefits in the Build Alternative would consist of 45 percent from home-based work; 25 percent from home- based other; and 19 percent from home-based college. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would be similar, with 46 percent, 24 percent, and 19 percent for the same trip purposes, respectively. More than half of the daily user benefits would occur in the off-peak period. Although the majority of user benefits for

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

home-based work trips would occur in the peak period, most of the user benefits for other purposes would occur in the off-peak period.

5.3.2 Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative Table 5-3 presents the forecast of new transit trips and user benefits by purpose and time period for the Build Alternative in comparison to the New Starts Baseline Alternative. Similar to the analysis of the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative, the Build Alternative would experience the greatest increase in new transit trips over the New Starts Baseline Alternative, with approximately 11,200 trips. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have fewer new transit trips compared to the Build Alternative, with approximately 10,700 new trips.

Table 5-3. 2030 Daily New Transit Trips and Daily User Benefits by Trip Purpose (Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative)

Change in Daily New Transit Trips Daily User Benefits (Hours) Build Alternative Build Alternative with VA Medical with VA Medical Center Station Center Station Build Alternative Option Build Alternative Option Time User User Period Purpose Trips Share Trips Share Benefits Share Benefits Share Peak Home-Based Work 3,440 31% 3,400 32% 3,320 28% 3,280 29% Home-Based College 420 4% 410 4% 580 5% 560 5% Home-Based School 90 1% 90 1% 110 1% 110 1% Home-Based Other 550 5% 540 5% 680 6% 670 6% Non-Home 380 3% 380 4% 360 3% 350 3% Peak Total 4,880 44% 4,820 45% 5,040 42% 4,980 43% Off-Peak Home-Based Work 2,230 20% 2,150 20% 1,930 16% 1,860 16% Home-Based College 1,170 10% 1,120 10% 1,630 14% 1,570 14% Home-Based School 70 1% 70 1% 90 1% 90 1% Home-Based Other 1,990 18% 1,840 17% 2,480 21% 2,230 19% Non-Home 850 8% 750 7% 860 7% 740 6% Off-Peak Total 6,300 56% 5,930 55% 6,980 58% 6,490 57% Daily Home-Based Work 5,670 51% 5,550 52% 5,250 44% 5,140 45% Home-Based College 1,590 14% 1,530 14% 2,210 18% 2,130 19% Home-Based School 160 1% 160 1% 210 2% 210 2% Home-Based Other 2,530 23% 2,380 22% 3,150 26% 2,910 25% Non-Home 1,230 11% 1,120 10% 1,210 10% 1,090 10% Daily Total 11,180 100% 10,750 100% 12,030 100% 11,470 100% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Overall, the transit trips for each trip purpose would increase in approximately the same proportion between the Build Alternative with or without the VA Medical Center Station Option. More than half of the new daily transit trips would be home-based work trips, while more than half of the new transit trips would occur in the off-peak period. Not only would home-based work trips benefit from the improved Trolley service, but so would other purposes, such as home-based college, home-based other, and non-home-based trips that would occur mostly in the off-peak period.

New transit trips for the Build Alternative would consist of 51 percent from home-based work; 23 percent from home-based other; and 14 percent from home-based college. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would be similar, with 52 percent, 22 percent, and 14 percent for the same trip purposes, respectively.

The user benefits for the Build Alternative would result in higher regional user benefits with more than 12,000 daily hours, compared to 11,500 daily hours under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have 5 percent fewer user benefits, as compared to the Build Alternative, because of the increased travel time with the additional station and fewer new transit trips. Total regional user benefits for the Build Alternative would consist of 44 percent from home-based work; 26 percent from home-based other; and 18 percent from home-based college.

The Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would be similar, with 45 percent, 25 percent, and 19 percent for the same trip purposes, respectively. More than half of the daily user benefits occur in the off-peak period because of the large contribution from the home-based college and home-based other trip purposes in the off-peak period. 5.4 New Transit Trips and User Benefits by Major Transit Market New transit trips and user benefits also are summarized by major transit market under the Build Alternative against both the No-Build Alternative and the New Starts Baseline Alternative. As identified in Chapter 2.0, the major markets for transit trips include the travel analysis districts of Marina-Ballpark, South Bay, South San Diego, Mission Valley, Mission Trails, and East San Diego, in addition to the Mid-Coast Corridor. The data for the Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, North Park, Kearny Mesa, and East San Diego travel analysis districts are summarized as major activity centers.

5.4.1 Build Alternatives Compared to No-Build Alternative Table 5-4 and Table 5-5 present the forecast of new transit trips and user benefits by transit market for the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative. The Build Alternative would serve the new transit trips traveling from or to the Mid-Coast Corridor very well, accounting for approximately 90 percent of total new transit trips, or 91 percent for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The remainder of the new transit trips represents trips traveling through the Mid-Coast Corridor, with both productions and attractions located outside the corridor. The Build Alternative would have about 200 more new transit trips from or to the Mid-Coast Corridor than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. Among new transit trips, about 37 percent would occur within the Mid-Coast Corridor under the Build Alternative or 38

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Table 5-4. Summary of Daily New Transit Trips by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative)

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Build Alternative Station Option Transit Market Trips Percent Trips Percent New Transit Trips in the Region 13,960 - 13,530 - New Transit Trips from/to Mid-Coast Corridor 12,500 89.5% 12,300 90.9% New Transit Trips within Mid-Coast Corridor 5,210 37.3% 5,180 38.3% New Transit Trips from/to Major Transit Markets1 4,240 30.4% 4,060 30.0% New Transit Trips from/to Major Activity Centers2 4,380 31.3% 4,300 31.8% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Notes: VA = Veterans Administration 1 Excluding Mid-Coast Corridor 2 Major Activity Centers in Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, North Park, East San Diego, and Kearny Mesa Districts

Table 5-5. Summary of Daily User Benefits by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to No-Build Alternative)

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Build Alternative Option User User Transit Market Benefits Percent Benefits Percent User Benefits for the Region (Daily) 14,410 - 13,920 - User Benefits from/to Mid-Coast Corridor 12,820 89.0% 12,630 90.7% User Benefits within Mid-Coast Corridor 4,830 33.5% 4,810 34.5% User Benefits from/to Major Transit Markets1 4,890 34.0% 4,680 33.6% User Benefits from/to Major Activity Centers2 4,920 34.1% 4,840 34.8% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Notes: VA = Veterans Administration 1 Excluding Mid-Coast Corridor 2 Major Activity Centers in Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, North Park, East San Diego, and Kearny Mesa Districts

percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The new transit trips traveling from, to, or within the corridor would be largely comprised of new trips in the UCSD, University Towne Centre (UTC), Fashion Valley, and Downtown San Diego travel analysis districts.

As identified in Table 5-4, the new transit trips from or to the major travel markets outside the Mid-Coast Corridor would account for 30 percent of the total new transit trips under the Build Alternative, indicating that the use of transit not only increases for trips internal to the corridor but also for trips traveling between major transit markets outside

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

the corridor. The Build Alternative also was evaluated on how well it would improve access to regional activity centers. The results indicate that the Build Alternative would improve access to these locations—31 percent of new transit trips or 32 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

As identified in Table 5-5, approximately 89 percent of the user benefits under the Build Alternative would be for travel from or to the Mid-Coast Corridor, with approximately 12,800 hours of daily user benefits. For the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, approximately 91 percent of the user benefits would be from or to the corridor, with approximately 12,600 hours daily. Compared to the Build Alternative, the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have 1.5 percent fewer user benefits because of the additional run time with the VA Medical Center Station Option. Travel within the corridor would account for 34 percent of user benefits under the Build Alternative or 35 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

Under the Build Alternative, travel from or to major transit markets outside the Mid-Coast Corridor would improve substantially, accounting for 34 percent of the overall user benefits. Similar to the new transit trips, the Build Alternative would have slightly higher user benefits (approximately 4,900 daily hours) from or to the major regional activity centers than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option (approximately 4,800 daily hours), which accounts for 34 percent of the overall user benefits in the Build Alternative and 35 percent of the overall user benefits in the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. With improved transfers at the OTTC provided by the Trolley Blue Line for travel to or from the major travel markets, the Build Alternatives would provide significantly improved access to regional activity centers compared to the No-Build Alternative.

5.4.2 Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative Table 5-6 and Table 5-7 present the forecast of new transit trips and user benefits by transit market for the Build Alternative compared to the New Starts Baseline Alternative. Similar to the new transit trips for the Build Alternative compared to the No-Build Alternative, approximately 91 percent of total new transit trips in the Build Alternative (92 percent in the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option) would serve travel to or from the Mid-Coast Corridor. Among new transit trips, about 40 percent would occur within the corridor under the Build Alternative or 41 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

As identified in Table 5-6, the new transit trips traveling to or from the major travel markets outside the corridor would account for 29 percent of the total new transit trips under the Build Alternative. Results show that the Build Alternative would strengthen access to regional activity locations, which would result in 32 percent of new transit trips (33 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option).

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Table 5-6. Summary of Daily New Transit Trips by Major Transit Market (Build Alternatives Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative)

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Build Alternative Option Transit Market Trips Percent Trips Percent New Transit Trips in the Region 11,180 - 10,750 - New Transit Trips from/to Mid-Coast Corridor 10,130 90.6% 9,930 92.4% New Transit Trips within Mid-Coast Corridor 4,430 39.6% 4,400 40.9% New Transit Trips from/to Major Transit Markets1 3,290 29.4% 3,110 28.9% New Transit Trips from/to Major Activity Centers2 3,570 31.9% 3,490 32.5% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Notes: VA = Veterans Administration 1 Excluding Mid-Coast Corridor 2 Major Activity Centers in Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, North Park, East San Diego, and Kearny Mesa Districts

Table 5-7. Summary of Daily User Benefits by Major Transit Market (Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative)

Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Build Alternative Option User User Transit Market Benefits Percent Benefits Percent User Benefits for the Region (Daily) 12,030 - 11,470 - User Benefits from/to Mid-Coast Corridor 10,850 90.2% 10,600 92.4% User Benefits within Mid-Coast Corridor 4,300 35.8% 4,260 37.2% User Benefits from/to Major Transit Markets1 3,970 33.0% 3,740 32.6% User Benefits from/to Major Activity Centers2 4,100 34.1% 4,020 35.0% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 model runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011 Notes: VA = Veterans Administration 1 Excluding Mid-Coast Corridor 2 Major Activity Centers in Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, North Park, East San Diego, and Kearny Mesa Districts

As shown in Table 5-7, approximately 90 percent of the user benefits in the Build Alternative would be to or from the corridor, with approximately 10,900 hours daily. For the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, approximately 92 percent of the user benefits would be to or from the corridor, with approximately 10,600 hours daily. Travel within the corridor would account for 36 percent of user benefits under the Build Alternative, or 37 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

The Build Alternative also shows that travel to or from major transit markets outside the Mid-Coast Corridor would improve significantly, with 33 percent of the overall user benefits. Similar to the new transit trips, the Build Alternative would have slightly higher user benefits (approximately 4,100 daily hours) to or from the major regional activity centers than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option (approximately 4,000 daily hours), which accounts for 34 percent of the overall user benefits in the Build Alternative and 35 percent of the overall user benefits in the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. With improved transfers at the OTTC provided by the Trolley Blue Line for travel to or from major travel markets, the Build Alternatives would provide significantly improved access to regional activity centers. 5.5 Thematic Maps Summit also provides the zone-to-zone benefits (or disbenefits), which were mapped to show the areas that would benefit or would not benefit from the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option. These maps are referred to as thematic maps. In this section, user benefits are presented in minutes, consistent with the unit of time used for the thematic maps.

5.5.1 Development of Thematic Maps FTA requires thematic maps for a New Starts application. User benefit maps by trip purpose and time period were developed for the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option, compared to the New Starts Baseline Alternative. Two thematic maps were developed for each trip purpose, one showing user benefits for trips produced in the zones and another showing user benefits for trips attracted to the zones. For the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project, this required development of 36 maps for each of the two build alternatives—the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option.

The FTA guidance on developing the thematic maps suggest using shades of green for identifying the zones with benefits and shades of red for disbenefits. The FTA also provides the following guidance on the determination of the breakpoints:

1. Sum all of the benefits in zones with positive benefits. 2. Sort the zones in descending order of benefits. 3. Calculate the percentage of benefits as the benefits in a zone divided by the sum from Step 1. 4. Set the breakpoints so that the darkest shade applies to zones that, in total, represent the top 40 percent of positive user benefits; the medium shade represents the next 30 percent of positive user benefits; and the lightest shade represents the next 20 percent of positive user benefits.

The maps have three shades of green according to their amount of user benefits:

· Dark Green—The set of zones with the highest user benefits whose accumulative user benefits reaches 40 percent of the total positive user benefits for the project.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-11 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

· Medium Green—The set of zones (by descending order of user benefits) whose accumulative user benefits reaches the next 30 percent of the total positive user benefits for the project. · Light Green—The set of zones (by descending order of user benefits) whose accumulative user benefits reaches the next 20 percent of the total positive user benefits of the project.

All remaining zones with positive user benefits are shown in white. Zones with negative user benefits are shown as one of three shades of red. The breakpoints for the negative user benefit categories are established based on the corresponding breakpoints for each category of positive user benefits.

5.5.2 Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative for all Income Levels Combined Thematic maps were developed for the Build Alternative and the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option based on the criteria described in the previous section. Four thematic maps are generated for each alternative, by daily productions and attractions for all trip purposes and by daily productions and attractions for home- based work trips only. The same set of thematic maps also was developed for low- income travelers, as discussed in the following section.

Figure 5-2 through Figure 5-9 show the distribution of regional daily user benefits in minutes for the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option. The maps represent productions and attractions with all income levels combined for all trip purposes combined and for the home-based work purpose. For reference, the thematic maps include the alignment and station locations of the Build Alternative outlined in purple, the alignment of trolley lines outlined in yellow, and the COASTER alignment outlined in red. The district boundaries are outlined with a thick black line. In these maps, a zone without color means that the positive or negative user benefits that the zone has in the Build Alternative over the New Starts Baseline Alternative fall into the last 10 percent of the total positive user benefits, which is negligible to the analysis of user benefits.

As shown in the thematic maps, the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option would have similar distributions of user benefit across the region. The production maps show the user benefits in trip productions from a particular zone to every other zone in the region. As shown in these maps, the user benefits of trip productions would be concentrated in the Mid-Coast Corridor and major markets, including the travel analysis districts of Marina-Ballpark, Mission Valley, North Park, Kearny Mesa, East San Diego, South San Diego, and South Bay. The maximum user benefits in trip productions from a particular zone would vary between 14,900 minutes in the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option and 15,000 minutes in the Build Alternative, both within the Centre City travel analysis district.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-12 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-2. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-13 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-3. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-14 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-4. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-15 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-5. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-16 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-6. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-17 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-7. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-18 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-8. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-19 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-9. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-20 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

On the attraction end, the user benefits would not be distributed across the entire Mid- Coast Corridor and major travel markets as it is for the user benefits on the production end. The attraction maps show the user benefits in trip attractions to a particular zone from every other zone in the region. The benefits would be concentrated in the areas around the alignment of the proposed Trolley Blue Line extension, especially in the areas surrounding the proposed stations. As shown in the maps, the attraction of user benefits would be concentrated in the major activity centers within the corridor (i.e., Downtown San Diego and UCSD). The maximum user benefits to a particular zone would vary between 57,000 minutes with the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option and 58,700 minutes with the Build Alternative, both within the USCD travel analysis district.

On both the production and attraction user benefit maps, the Build Alternative would have higher maximum user benefits than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The higher user benefits would be attributable to the Build Alternative’s shorter Trolley run times to the UCSD/UTC area from the south and to OTTC and Downtown San Diego from the north. In addition, very few zones have negative user benefits, and those zones are in included in the last 10 percent of the total positive user benefits category, which indicates that the Build Alternative would substantially improve corridor transit service over the New Starts Baseline Alternative with little or negligible loss of benefits.

In addition to the maps for all trip purposes, the maps for only the home-based work purpose show similar patterns, as the user benefits from home-based work would account for more than 44 percent of the total user benefits. As shown in the maps, the production and attraction of user benefits for home-based work trips would be more concentrated in the corridor than it would be for all purposes. For home-based work trips, the maximum user benefits from productions in a particular zone to every other zone would be approximately 7,000 minutes for the Build Alternative, while the maximum user benefits from attractions to a particular zone from every other zone would vary between 13,400 minutes under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option and 13,800 minutes for the Build Alternative.

5.5.3 Build Alternative Compared to New Starts Baseline Alternative for Low-Income Travelers Only The same set of thematic maps for low-income travelers only are shown in Figure 5-10 through Figure 5-17 for all trip purposes and for the home-based work purpose. Low- income travelers are defined as those having an annual household income of less than $30,000 in 1990 dollars.

Low-income travelers tend to be more transit-dependent than travelers in other income levels. The user benefits that would be generated from low-income travel would account for more than 60 percent of the total user benefits for all trip purposes. As shown in the thematic maps, the Build Alternative and VA Medical Center Station Option would have similar distributions of user benefit across the region compared to the distribution for all income levels combined. Approximately 37 percent of total user benefits at the low- income level are from home-based work trips under the Build Alternative and 39 percent under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option, slightly less than

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-21 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-10. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-22 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-11. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-23 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-12. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-24 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-13. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-25 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-14. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-26 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-15. Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-27 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-16. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Production Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-28 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Figure 5-17. Home-Based Work Daily User Benefits: New Starts Baseline vs. Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option by Attraction Zones for Low-Income Travelers

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-29 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

the shares for all income levels combined (44 percent and 45 percent). The maximum user benefits from trip productions from a particular zone to every other zone would be approximately 12,100 minutes under both the Build Alternatives, while the maximum user benefits from trip attractions to a particular zone from every other zone would vary between 34,500 minutes under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option and 34,900 minutes under the Build Alternative.

Similar to the user benefits for all income levels combined, the Build Alternative would have higher maximum user benefits than the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option on both productions and attractions. Again, this pattern can be explained by shorter Trolley Blue Line run times for travel to the UCSD/UTC area from the south and for travel to the OTTC and Downtown San Diego from the north.

For home-based work trips, the user benefits that would be generated from low-income travel would account for more than 53 percent of the total user benefits for all trip purposes. The maximum user benefits from productions in a particular zone to every other zone would be approximately 5,100 minutes for the Build Alternative, while the maximum user benefits from attractions to a particular zone from every other zone would vary between 7,400 minutes under the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option and 7,600 minutes under the Build Alternative.

5.5.4 Summary The new transit trips and user benefits in the Build Alternative when compared to the No- Build Alternative (approximately 14,000 trips and 14,400 hours) are higher than when compared to the New Starts Baseline Alternative (11,200 trips and 12,000 hours). The additional bus service in the New Starts Baseline Alternative would result in more transit trips and benefits than the No-Build Alternative, making the comparison of the Build Alternative to the New Starts Baseline slightly less attractive.

There would be approximately 12,030 hours of daily user benefits with the Build Alternative compared to the Baseline Alternative. Approximately 42 percent of the user benefits would be generated in the peak period, and the remaining 58 percent would be produced in the off-peak period. Home-based work trips, the largest market for the Build Alternative, would produce about 44 percent of the total user benefits. As the proposed project extends to University City, where UCSD is located, the home-based university trips also would experience benefits, which would account for 18 percent of the daily user benefits.

Moreover, based on the user benefits analysis, the majority of user benefits either would be produced in or attracted to the Mid-Coast Corridor, while approximately 36 percent of the total user benefits are for trips traveling within the Mid-Coast Corridor. When combined with trips traveling to or from the corridor, the corresponding user benefits would account for as much as 90 percent of the total user benefits. In addition, the Build Alternative would be beneficial for trips to or from the major transit markets and regional activity centers. Excluding the Mid-Coast Corridor, the user benefits for trips to or from major transit markets would account for 33 percent of the total user benefits and 34 percent for trips to or from major activity centers.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-30 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

Daily user benefits by production zone would be distributed largely in zones near the proposed alignment of the Build Alternative within the Mid-Coast Corridor, although benefits also would occur along the Trolley Blue Line alignment south of the corridor. Daily user benefits for attraction zones would be highly concentrated in zones surrounding the proposed Trolley stations within the Mid-Coast Corridor.

The user benefits analysis results for the Build Alternative and the VA Medical Center Station Option are very similar. The only difference between the two alternatives is the additional station at the VA Medical Center, which would result in 42 seconds of additional running time for the Trolley Blue Line, which causes slightly lower user benefits for the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. However, the distribution patterns for user benefits across the region and the shares of user benefits for trips to or from the corridor, major transit markets, and activity centers are very similar between the two alternatives.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 5-31 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 5.0 – Transit User Benefits

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 5-32 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

6.0 RESULTS FOR ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS WITH THE PROJECT

This chapter presents the travel forecasting results for the analysis of existing conditions and the project in 2010 that was performed for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The CEQA Sunnyvale decision (Sunnyvale West Neighborhood Association v. City of Sunnyvale, 190 Cal.App.4th 1351 (2010)) requires an analysis of project impacts to existing conditions without the project. Existing conditions for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project are assumed to be 2010. The operating plan assumptions for the project in 2010 are described in Chapter 1.0.

The project in 2010 with the Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center Station Option also was analyzed, corresponding to the Build Alternative with the VA Medical Center Station Option. Unless otherwise noted, results for the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option are the same, or similar, to those described for the project without this optional station. 6.1 Transit Results This section describes the transit forecasting results for the forecast year 2010, including system-wide linked transit trips, transit ridership by mode and line, mode of access, passenger miles, transfer rates, and parking demand for the project with and without the VA Medical Center Station in comparison to existing conditions without the project. The results were produced using the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Series 11 Regional Transit Demand Forecasting Model (Series 11 model) (SANDAG, 2008b) described in Chapter 2.0.

6.1.1 Daily Trips by Mode Improvements in transit service usually result in an increase in transit trips and a decrease in trips by auto or other travel modes. The mode choice model is used to determine the impact of transit service improvements on mode choice. SANDAG uses a mode choice model for travel forecasting that estimates transit trips by travel mode and by purpose. Modes include motorized (i.e., auto, transit, school bus) and non-motorized (i.e., walk and bicycle) modes. Auto and school bus trips include both internal trips within the region and external trips to or from outside the region. In comparison, transit trips estimated from the mode choice model are internal to the region only.

Table 6-1 presents the forecast number of system-wide linked transit trips by mode for existing conditions with and without the project and for the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option. The table also presents auto, school bus, and non-motorized trips. Transit trips are further broken down by purpose, as shown in Table 6-2. Similar to the Build Alternatives, the transit trips in Table 6-2 do not include external transit trips because external transit trips are not stratified by purpose. As identified in Table 6-1, transit trips would increase by approximately 5.5 percent in 2010 with the project to approximately 290,000 trips compared to existing conditions without the project, and by 5.3 percent with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-1. 2010 System-Wide Daily Trips

Existing Existing Conditions with the Conditions with Project with the VA Medical Mode Existing Conditions the Project Center Station Option Commuter Rail1 7,849 7,213 7,238 Light Rail1 110,093 136,495 135,681 Express Bus1 11,078 8,426 8,448 Local Bus1 122,225 114,318 114,466 External 23,624 23,556 23,558 Transit Subtotal 274,869 290,008 289,391 Percent Change LRT Trips over Existing Conditions 23.98% 23.24% Percent Change Total Transit Trips over Existing Conditions 5.51% 5.28% Drive Alone 9,541,832 9,531,214 9,531,598 Carpool–2 Person 4,591,009 4,588,041 4,588,200 Carpool–3+ Person 3,111,433 3,110,149 3,110,225 Auto Subtotal2 17,244,274 17,229,404 17,230,023 School Bus2 138,113 138,113 138,113 Walk 456,793 456,522 456,523 Bicycle 44,922 44,854 44,855 Non-Motorized Subtotal 501,715 501,376 501,378 Total Daily 18,158,971 18,158,901 18,158,905 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Notes: LRT = light rail transit; VA = Veterans Administration 1 Transit trips estimated in the SANDAG mode choice model include trips internal to the modeling region only. 2 Auto and school bus trips estimated in the SANDAG model include both trips internal or external to the modeling region.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-2. 2010 System-Wide Daily Transit Trips by Purpose

Home Home Home Home Non- Alternative Mode Work College School Other Home Total Existing Conditions Commuter Rail 6,038 430 292 618 471 7,849 Light Rail 59,598 13,148 2,424 27,394 7,530 110,093 Express Bus 7,455 711 208 2,027 677 11,078 Local Bus 43,032 10,293 9,172 48,591 11,137 122,225 Daily Total 116,123 24,582 12,096 78,630 19,815 251,245 Share % 46% 10% 5% 31% 8% 100% Existing Conditions with Commuter Rail 5,653 380 282 498 401 7,213 the Project Light Rail 72,332 17,932 2,775 33,449 10,007 136,495 Express Bus 5,627 379 185 1,683 553 8,426 Local Bus 40,472 7,658 9,052 46,528 10,610 114,318 Daily Total 124,084 26,349 12,294 82,158 21,571 266,452 Share % 46% 10% 5% 31% 8% 100% Existing Conditions with Commuter Rail 5,656 383 282 513 403 7,238 the Project with the VA Light Rail 72,102 17,831 2,773 33,096 9,879 135,681 Medical Center Station Option Express Bus 5,635 387 185 1,687 554 8,448 Local Bus 40,491 7,718 9,052 46,586 10,619 114,466 Daily Total 123,884 26,319 12,292 81,882 21,455 265,833 Share % 46% 10% 5% 31% 8% 100% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

In addition, the project in 2010 would have approximately 24 percent more light rail transit (LRT) or San Diego Trolley (Trolley) trips, or 23 percent more with the VA Medical Center Station Option, because the improved LRT service would attract more trips from other modes. Express bus trips and local bus trips would decrease by 24 percent and 6 percent, respectively, compared to existing conditions without the project. This large decrease in express bus trips would occur because the new Trolley service with the project would replace the express bus service provided by Route 150 in the Mid-Coast Corridor under existing conditions. Commuter rail trips decrease by 8 percent with the project compared to existing conditions because of the increased competition in the corridor from the improved Trolley service.

Auto and non-motorized trips would decrease slightly with the project and the VA Medical Center Station Option. There would be no change in school bus trips.

As shown in Table 6-2, transit trips of home-based work purpose account for approximately 46 percent of the total transit trips under existing conditions with and without the project. Home-based other has the second highest transit trips for 31 percent, followed by home-based college and non-home based purposes with 10 percent and 8 percent, respectively. Home-based school has the least share of the overall transit trips.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

6.1.2 Daily Transit Boardings In this section, the boardings were reported by transit mode system-wide, transit line or route, station or stop, and mode of access and egress.

6.1.2.1 Boardings by Mode and by Line Table 6-3 presents the forecast of transit boardings by mode for peak and off-peak periods and on a total daily basis for 2010 with and without the project. Boardings also are identified for Route 150 and broken down for each of the Trolley lines. Transit modes include commuter rail, LRT, express bus, and local bus. LRT service is composed of the SPRINTER and Trolley Blue, Trolley Green, and Trolley Orange Lines. The SPRINTER would be unaffected by the project because it is located in North San Diego County far from the Mid-Coast Corridor.

Table 6-3. 2010 Daily Transit Boardings

Existing Conditions with the Existing Conditions with Project with the VA Medical Existing Conditions the Project Center Station Option Mode Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Commuter Rail 6,591 1,260 7,850 6,311 902 7,214 6,315 923 7,239 COASTER 6,591 1,260 7,850 6,311 902 7,214 6,315 923 7,239 Light Rail Trolley Blue Line 36,831 31,860 68,691 47,553 52,776 100,329 47,456 52,015 99,471 Trolley Orange Line 14,588 18,132 32,719 14,556 17,886 32,441 14,557 17,843 32,399 Trolley Green Line 13,319 18,702 32,022 13,488 18,913 32,401 13,475 18,794 32,270 SPRINTER 4,617 6,083 10,701 4,616 6,049 10,665 4,616 6,052 10,668 Total Light Rail 69,355 74,777 144,133 80,213 95,624 175,836 80,105 94,704 174,809 Express Bus Route 150 3,583 511 4,094 ------Total Express Bus 12,120 9,881 22,002 6,712 9,044 15,756 6,717 9,062 15,779 Local Bus 111,984 164,242 276,226 116,172 169,892 286,064 116,098 169,729 285,827 System Total 200,050 250,160 450,210 210,819 275,462 486,282 210,647 274,418 485,065 Transfer Rate 1.69 1.60 1.64 1.71 1.65 1.68 1.71 1.65 1.68 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

As identified in the table, the project would increase system-wide ridership from 450,210 daily riders under existing conditions to 486,282 daily riders. The project also would have slightly higher daily ridership than the VA Medical Center Station Option. The extra 42- second travel time with the VA Medical Center Station Option likely would contribute to the lower overall transit ridership.

The extension of the Trolley Blue Line under the project would replace the existing Route 150. Thus, while it is important to measure changes in system-wide ridership, it also is useful to compare the number of boardings on the Trolley Blue Line with the project to the boardings for Route 150 and the Trolley Blue Line under existing conditions. Based on the

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

forecast of existing boardings for the two alternatives, the project and the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have 38 percent and 37 percent more boardings, respectively, than the sum of boardings for Route 150 and the Trolley Blue Line under existing conditions. The project would have 1,000 additional daily LRT boardings than the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

With respect to boardings on other Trolley lines, the Trolley Orange Line and the Trolley Green Line were forecast to have minimal differences in boardings between existing conditions with and without the project. The Trolley Orange Line has fewer boardings with the project, mostly in the off-peak period. This is because the Trolley Orange Line shares an alignment and station locations with the Trolley Blue Line in parts of Downtown San Diego. Additionally, service on the Trolley Blue Line increases from 15-minute headways under existing conditions to 7.5-minute headways with the project, thus attracting more boardings while reducing the number of boardings on the Trolley Orange Line.

Boardings increase on the Trolley Green Line with the project, compared to existing conditions because the extension of the Trolley Blue Line from the Old Town Transit Center (OTTC) to the University Towne Centre (UTC) Transit Center would improve connectivity within the Trolley system for trips between Mission Valley and University City.

Table 6-3 also presents the transfer rates for the system by time of day for existing conditions with and without the project, including the VA Medical Center Station Option. The average daily transfer rate slightly increases from 1.64 under existing conditions to 1.67 with the project. Transfers increase mostly because of the improved connections between the Trolley Blue and Trolley Green Lines for travel between Mission Valley and the Mid-Coast Corridor. As identified in Chapter 2.0, these are the major transit markets for the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project. In addition, the average transfer rates in 2010 are slightly lower than the transfer rate in 2030 because the transit service under existing conditions is less frequent than under the alternatives in 2030. Additionally, the transit travel demand in 2030 is significantly increased between major transit markets where a transfer is needed than under existing conditions (e.g., the transit travel demand between Mission Valley and the Mid-Coast Corridor).

6.1.2.2 Daily Boardings by Station Daily boardings by station or stop location were analyzed for the Trolley Blue Line and Route 150 as they are the two lines that operate along the Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project alignment. The Trolley Blue Line would be the focus of transit improvements with the project and the VA Medical Center Station Option, while Route 150 would be eliminated under the project.

Similar to the analysis for the alternatives in 2030, boardings for the Trolley Blue Line are separated into the south segment from the San Ysidro Transit Center to City College and the Mid-Coast comparison segment from Fifth Avenue to the UTC Transit Center, as shown in Table 6-4. It is important to note that the alignment of Route 150 under existing conditions does not completely coincide with the alignment of the project.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-4. 2010 Daily Boardings by Station

Existing Existing Existing Conditions Conditions Conditions with with the Project with the Project VA Medical Center Trolley Trolley Blue Station Option Segment Station Blue Line Rt. 150 Line Trolley Blue Line South San Ysidro Transit Center 11,089 11,141 11,142 Segment Beyer Blvd 1,263 1,355 1,354 Iris Ave 4,134 4,663 4,652 Palm Ave 2,774 3,175 3,169 Palomar St 3,419 3,857 3,851 H St 3,412 3,995 3,987 Bayfront/E St 2,596 3,086 3,079 24th St 2,076 2,582 2,571 8th St 2,049 2,710 2,698 Pacific Fleet 942 1,051 1,051 Harborside 1,304 1,525 1,524 Barrio Logan 920 1,078 1,077 12th & Imperial Transit Center 3,104 3,990 3,977 Park & Market 1,595 2,155 2,138 City College 4,564 5,961 5,927 Ninth Ave/C St 165 Ninth Ave/B St 1 Tenth Ave 219 Tenth Ave/C St 66 Ninth Ave 118 Seventh Ave 10 Mid-Coast Fifth Ave 3,773 83 4,343 4,340 Comparison Civic Center/3rd Ave 6,549 30 6,786 6,778 Segment 1st St 135 B St 648 A Street/Ash Street 91 America Plaza 1,294 1,845 1,820 Santa Fe Depot Transit Center 747 1,513 1,505 County Center/Cedar St 2,036 2,777 2,769 Middletown/Palm St 964 1,103 1,102 Washington St 870 21 1,861 1,815 Enterprise St 95 Old Town Transit Center 7,223 595 10,026 9,909 Tecolote Rd 1,048 1,046 Clairemont Dr 729 727 Balboa Ave 2,515 2,494 Gilman /Ramp I-5 SB 21 Via Alicante - Villa La Jolla Dr 106

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-4. 2010 Daily Boardings by Station (continued)

Existing Existing Conditions Conditions Existing Conditions with the with the Project with Project VA Medical Center Trolley Trolley Blue Station Option Segment Station Blue Line Rt. 150 Line Trolley Blue Line Mid-Coast Nobel Dr 2,476 2,547 Comparison Caminito Viva/Evening Way - Segment Eucalyptus Grove 503 Myers Dr 263 Gilman Dr 196 VA Medical Center 5 1,371 UCSD West 5,208 3,704 Villa La Jolla Dr 57 Lebon Dr 149 Regents Rd - UCSD East 1,118 1,101 Genesee Ave/Executive Dr 435 2,859 2,546 UTC Transit Center 88 1,806 1,708 Total 68,691 4,094 100,329 99,471 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

As identified in Table 6-4, the project would increase boardings at all Trolley Blue Line stations in the south segment as compared to existing conditions. The San Ysidro Transit Center would have the highest forecast boardings (about 11,100 boardings) of any station. This is because the majority of the external transit trips use this station after entering the San Diego region. The station with the second highest boardings is the OTTC (10,000). The OTTC is the major transfer point among all the transit modes, especially the Trolley, to major destinations such as Downtown San Diego, Mission Valley, and the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). The Civic Center Station would have the third highest boardings with the project.

Located in Downtown San Diego, the Civic Center is a major attractor in the region for jobs, entertainment, and social activities.

Forecast boardings with the project in the Mid-Coast comparison segment are much higher than existing conditions because of the improved travel times and connections to other Trolley lines and bus routes. Specifically, the UCSD West Station would have a high number of boardings, with 5,200 daily boardings with the project, and 3,700 daily boardings with the VA Medical Center Station Option, as it would be a major attraction and a major transfer point in the New Trolley Service Area.

Station boardings on the Trolley Blue Line under the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option would produce fewer total boardings (99,500) compared to the project without the optional station (100,300) because of the additional 42 seconds of running time. The

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

forecasts indicate that the station at the VA Medical Center would not generate additional boardings, but mostly attract boardings from its neighboring stations (i.e., stations at Nobel Drive and UCSD West). With the project, these two stations would have 7,700 daily boardings, while the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option, the VA Medical Center, Nobel Drive, and UCSD West Stations would have only 7,600 daily boardings.

6.1.2.3 Boardings and Alightings by Access and Egress Mode The modes that passengers use for access to and egress from stations were analyzed for existing and new Trolley stations under existing conditions with and without the project and the VA Medical Center Station Option. This was used to determine impacts of the project on the existing transportation system at the stations.

Daily station boarding and alighting by mode of access and egress for stations between Santa Fe Depot and the UTC Transit Center are shown in a production-attraction format in Figure 6-1 through Figure 6-6 for existing conditions, existing conditions with the project, and the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option, respectively. Tables containing the existing conditions and existing conditions with the project forecasts of boardings and alightings by mode of access and egress are contained in Appendix A.

Under existing conditions with and without the project, the primary mode of access is transfers, with 70 percent of the passengers transferring under the project in 2010. For egress, transfers are still forecast to be high with 50 percent of persons transferring with the project. The high number of transfers for access and egress indicates that the Mid- Coast Corridor stations would be well-connected with the other transit routes in the corridor.

The OTTC still would be a major transfer point for the Trolley Green Line, the Trolley Blue Line, and other transit service in the corridor. In addition to the OTTC, the UCSD West Station would be a major transfer point in the University City area, mostly serving the transit demand in the UCSD and Golden Triangle travel analysis districts. With the addition of the VA Medical Center Station Option, the UCSD West Station would have lower transfer volumes because some of the transfer passengers would shift to the VA Medical Center Station.

In addition to transferring, walk is also an important mode of access for transit trips. Walking would remain the primary access mode in the segment south of the OTTC. However, drive access to the stations on the Trolley extension north of the OTTC would increase because of the new park-and-ride facilities at the Trolley stations.

6.1.3 Passenger Miles Table 6-5 presents the forecast of transit passenger miles under existing conditions and existing conditions with the project, with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option. As identified in the table, the project would have the highest number of passenger miles with approximately 2.7 million daily passenger miles, slightly higher than the VA Medical Center Station Option. The project would have 11 percent more passenger miles than existing conditions, and 10 percent more passenger miles with the VA Medical Center Station Option. An increase in passenger miles indicates an improvement in transit services.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Figure 6-1. Existing Conditions Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project run on December 15, 2011

Figure 6-2. Existing Conditions Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project run on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Figure 6-3. Existing Conditions with the Project Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project run on December 15, 2011

Figure 6-4. Existing Conditions with the Project Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project run on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-11 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-12 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Figure 6-5. Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Medical Center Station Option Daily Station Boardings by Mode of Access

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project run on December 15, 2011

Figure 6-6. Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Medical Center Station Option Daily Station Alightings by Mode of Egress

Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-13 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-14 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-5. 2010 Transit Passenger Miles

Transit Passenger Miles Scenario Transit Mode Peak Off-Peak Daily Share Existing Conditions Commuter Rail 158,169 34,360 192,529 8% Light Rail 536,319 540,187 1,076,507 44% Express Bus 133,018 82,402 215,421 9% Local Bus 373,238 583,383 956,621 39% System Total 1,200,744 1,240,333 2,441,077 100% Existing Conditions Commuter Rail 154,798 23,143 177,941 7% with the Project and % -2% -33% -8% Percent Change from Existing Light Rail 659,176 722,950 1,382,126 52% Conditions % 23% 34% 28% Express Bus 88,615 76,711 165,326 6% % -33% -7% -23% Local Bus 380,324 577,099 957,424 36% % 2% -1% 0% System Total 1,282,913 1,399,903 2,682,816 100% % 7% 13% 10% Existing Conditions Commuter Rail 154,737 23,858 178,595 7% with the Project with % -2% -31% -7% the VA Medical Center Station Light Rail 657,504 710,983 1,368,486 51% Option and Percent % 23% 32% 27% Change from Express Bus 88,738 77,042 165,780 6% Existing Conditions % -33% -7% -23% Local Bus 379,897 569,387 949,283 36% % 2% -2% -1% System Total 1,280,875 1,381,270 2,662,144 100% % 7% 11% 9% Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

Under the project, LRT would account for 52 percent of passenger miles, as compared to 44 percent under existing conditions. LRT’s large share of passenger miles would be attributable to its frequent service and improved connectivity to areas with high transit demand.

6.1.4 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets Table 6-6 identifies the transfer rates between major transit markets under the existing conditions and the existing conditions with the project with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option to show the improvement in connectivity of the transit service to or from the Mid-Coast Corridor. As identified in the table, the transfer rates for trips between University City and the south would be reduced significantly with the project compared to existing conditions. An average daily rate of 2.67 is forecast for existing

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-15 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-6. 2010 Transfer Rate between Major Transit Markets

Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Existing Conditions with the Medical Center Station From Existing Conditions Project Option Area To Area Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily Peak Off-Peak Daily University East 2.43 2.38 2.40 2.65 2.57 2.60 2.65 2.58 2.61 City Downtown 1.51 1.77 1.65 1.58 1.55 1.56 1.58 1.55 1.56 South 2.66 2.68 2.67 2.30 2.24 2.27 2.30 2.24 2.27 East University City 2.40 2.82 2.63 2.39 2.38 2.38 2.39 2.38 2.38 Downtown 1.61 1.52 1.56 1.60 1.54 1.57 1.60 1.54 1.57 South 2.10 1.96 2.02 2.10 1.99 2.04 2.10 1.99 2.04 Downtown University City 1.83 1.37 1.59 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 East 2.04 1.91 1.96 2.04 1.93 1.98 2.04 1.93 1.98 South 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.44 1.42 1.40 1.44 1.42 South University City 2.80 2.51 2.66 2.06 2.05 2.06 2.06 2.05 2.05 East 2.24 2.17 2.20 2.24 2.22 2.23 2.24 2.22 2.23 Downtown 1.58 1.48 1.53 1.58 1.56 1.57 1.58 1.56 1.57 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: VA = Veterans Administration

conditions in comparison to 2.27 with the project. The transfer rates for trips between the south and University City are forecast to decrease from 2.66 to 2.06 with the project (2.05 for the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option) in comparison to existing conditions. This reduction in transfer rate can be explained by the extension of the Trolley Blue Line under the project that would eliminate the need to transfer between the Trolley Blue Line and Route 150 in Downtown San Diego under existing conditions.

In addition, transfer rates between Downtown San Diego and University City would have a noticeable decrease. An average daily rate of 1.59 is estimated under existing conditions in comparison to 1.34 with the project. For transit trips from University City to Downtown San Diego, the transfer rate is forecast to decrease from 1.65 to 1.56. With the extension of the Trolley Blue Line from Santa Fe Depot to the UTC Transit Center under the project with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option, passengers who take the Trolley Blue Line and then transfer to Route 150 under existing conditions would instead use the Trolley Blue Line under the project. These service changes would have a mixed effect on transfer rates between University City and the east, as the daily rate from University City to the east increases from 2.40 under existing conditions to 2.60 with the project, but decreases from 2.63 to 2.38 in the opposite direction. Rather than using more direct bus service with fewer transfers, transit passengers would use the Trolley Blue Line and the Trolley Green Line service, which may require more transfers.

The transfer rates between other transit markets do not show significant change between these scenarios, as the extension of the Trolley Blue Line does not significantly affect the travel of those district interchanges.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-16 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

6.1.5 Parking Demand Parking capacity and demand at stations within the Mid-Coast Corridor between Santa Fe Depot and the UTC Transit Center are summarized in Table 6-7. Five new park-and- ride facilities would be added at the Tecolote Road, Clairemont Drive, Balboa Avenue, and Nobel Drive Stations and at the UTC Transit Center under the project. Except at the OTTC, there are no existing park-and-ride facilities other than informal park-and-ride locations south of the OTTC. As shown in the table, the park-and-ride facilities at the OTTC and the Clairemont Drive and Balboa Avenue Stations would be fully utilized, while the park-and-ride facilities at the UTC Transit Center and the Nobel Drive and Tecolote Road Stations would have demand less than capacity.

Table 6-7. 2010 Parking Demand Summary

Existing Conditions with the Project with the VA Existing Existing Conditions with Medical Center Station Conditions the Project Option Park-and-Ride Lot Capacity Demand Capacity Demand Capacity Demand Santa Fe Depot ------County Center 0 15 0 15 0 15 Middletown 0 15 0 15 0 15 Washington St 0 15 0 15 0 15 Old Town Transit Center 397 397 397 397 397 397 Tecolote Road - - 280 242 280 243 Clairemont Drive/Morena Blvd - - 150 150 150 150 Balboa Avenue - - 220 220 220 220 Nobel Drive - - 260 278 260 270 VA Medical Center ------UCSD West ------UCSD East ------Executive Drive ------UTC Transit Center - - 260 253 260 257 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: UCSD = University of California, San Diego; UTC = University Towne Centre; VA = Veterans Administration

6.2 Highway Summary As the extension of the Trolley Blue Line would provide an alternative mode of travel to the automobile, the impact of the project on the highway and roadway system is discussed in this section. More specifically, this section describes how the project would affect regional mobility under the existing conditions from a highway performance and user’s perspective using the measures vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle hours traveled (VHT), and average speed.

Table 6-8 summarizes these measures by roadway functional classification for each alternative at a regional level, and Table 6-9 summarizes these measures for the Mid- Coast Corridor only.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-17 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-8. 2010 Daily Highway System Measures for Region

Existing Conditions with the Project with the Functional Existing Conditions Existing Conditions with the Project VA Medical Center Station Option Classification VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed Freeway 44,127,899 819,650 53.84 44,020,899 812,954 54.15 44,027,680 813,718 54.11 Prime Arterial 6,859,182 232,395 29.52 6,849,710 232,011 29.52 6,852,489 232,123 29.52 Major Arterial 14,745,948 570,967 25.83 14,727,375 570,156 25.83 14,728,895 570,177 25.83 Collector 5,930,727 220,781 26.86 5,926,644 220,654 26.86 5,925,303 220,654 26.85 Local Collector 4,251,615 176,469 24.09 4,243,459 176,123 24.09 4,245,365 176,202 24.09 Rural Collector 933,239 26,530 35.18 931,733 26,497 35.16 932,108 26,505 35.17 Local Street 1,217,044 52,711 23.09 1,216,633 52,718 23.08 1,217,010 52,733 23.08 Fwy-Fwy Ramp 1,798,867 52,874 34.02 1,795,477 52,773 34.02 1,795,532 52,761 34.03 Ramp 2,543,201 144,847 17.56 2,537,831 144,162 17.60 2,537,919 144,139 17.61 Subtotal 82,407,722 2,297,224 35.87 82,249,761 2,288,046 35.95 82,262,301 2,289,012 35.94 Zone Connector 4,404,687 187,265 23.52 4,402,216 187,146 23.52 4,402,126 187,143 23.52 Total 86,812,409 2,484,489 34.94 86,651,977 2,475,192 35.01 86,664,427 2,476,154 35.00 Difference from Existing Conditions Freeway -107,000 -6,696 -100,219 -5,932 Prime Arterial -9,472 -384 -6,693 -272 Major Arterial -18,573 -811 -17,053 -790 Collector -4,083 -127 -5,424 -127 Local Collector -8,156 -346 -6,250 -267 Rural Collector -1,506 -33 -1,131 -25 Local Street -411 7 -34 22 Fwy-Fwy Ramp -3,390 -101 -3,335 -113 Ramp -5,370 -685 -5,282 -708 Subtotal -157,961 -9,178 -145,421 -8,212 Zone Connector -2,471 -119 -2,561 -122 Total -160,432 -9,297 -147,982 -8,335 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: Fwy-Fwy = Freeway to Freeway; VA = Veterans Administration; VHT = Vehicle Hours Traveled; VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-18 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

Table 6-9. 2010 Daily Highway System Measures for Mid-Coast Corridor Existing Conditions with the Project with the Functional Existing Conditions Existing Conditions with the Project VA Medical Center Station Option Classification VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed VMT VHT Speed Freeway 5,490,253 115,620 47.49 5,446,077 114,130 47.72 5,453,550 114,381 47.68 Prime Arterial 897,040 40,985 21.89 892,661 40,718 21.92 892,910 40,677 21.95 Major Arterial 2,303,883 123,727 18.62 2,292,143 122,971 18.64 2,295,042 123,098 18.64 Collector 337,880 17,062 19.80 337,293 17,075 19.75 337,055 17,036 19.79 Local Collector 736,741 38,620 19.08 734,243 38,440 19.10 734,025 38,509 19.06 Rural Collector - 0 0 - - Local Street 110,871 7,390 15.00 110,660 7,367 15.02 110,321 7,366 14.98 Fwy-Fwy Ramp 280,626 7,914 35.46 279,748 7,896 35.43 279,896 7,890 35.47 Ramp 523,783 28,015 18.70 521,258 28,023 18.60 521,195 27,773 18.77 Subtotal 10,681,077 379,333 28.16 10,614,083 376,620 28.18 10,623,995 376,729 28.20 Zone Connector 472,710 21,471 22.02 471,473 21,411 22.02 471,542 21,414 22.02 Total 11,153,787 400,804 27.83 11,085,557 398,032 27.85 11,095,537 398,144 27.87 Difference from Existing Conditions Freeway -44,177 -1,491 -36,703 -1,240 Prime Arterial -4,379 -266 -4,130 -308 Major Arterial -11,739 -756 -8,840 -629 Collector -587 13 -825 -27 Local Collector -2,498 -180 -2,716 -111 Rural Collector 0 0 0 0 Local Street -211 -23 -551 -24 Fwy-Fwy Ramp -878 -18 -730 -24 Ramp -2,525 9 -2,588 -242 Subtotal -66,994 -2,713 -57,082 -2,604 Zone Connector -1,236 -60 -1,168 -57 Total -68,230 -2,772 -58,250 -2,660 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model; 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing conditions with the project run on December 15, 2011 Note: Fwy-Fwy = Freeway to Freeway; VA = Veterans Administration; VHT = Vehicle Hours Traveled; VMT = Vehicle Miles Traveled

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 6-19 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 6.0 – Results for Analysis of Existing Conditions with the Project

6.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled The highest number of daily auto-person trips and VMT would occur under existing conditions (Table 6-1). Under existing conditions, there would be approximately 86,812,000 daily VMT region-wide and 11,154,000 daily VMT within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The project would reduce VMT at the regional level by approximately 160,400, or 0.18 percent compared to existing conditions.

Within the Mid-Coast Corridor, the project would produce approximately 68,200 less VMT than under existing conditions, which accounts for 43 percent of the region-wide VMT reduction. The project with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have less reduction in daily VMT, with approximately 58,300 vehicle miles or 0.50 percent less VMT than under existing conditions. The reduction in the daily VMT with the project with and without the VA Medical Center Station Option would include reductions in VMT on most facility types. Because the project would attract more transit trips, there would be fewer auto trips and less VMT, which would help alleviate congestion on the roadway network.

6.2.2 Vehicle Hours of Travel As shown in Table 6-8 and Table 6-9, the differences in daily VHT between the scenarios are small. Under existing conditions, there would be approximately 2,484,500 hours of VHT region-wide and 400,800 within the Mid-Coast Corridor. The project would have approximately 9,300 hours (0.37 percent) less VHT region-wide and 2,800 hours (0.69 percent) less VHT within the Mid-Coast Corridor than existing conditions. The decrease in VHT with the project would occur on all facility types.

With 8,300 hours (or 0.34 percent) less region-wide daily VHT than under existing conditions, the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option would have slightly higher VHT than the project without the optional station. As shown in the tables, the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option would produce higher VHT, but lower VMT within the Mid-Coast Corridor than the project, which would indicate a slightly more congested highway network.

6.2.3 Average Speed Under existing conditions with the project, the average speed in the region would not change significantly from existing conditions. Speed would average 34.9 miles per hour (mph) under existing conditions and 35.0 mph with the project.

Among the functional classifications of roadways, the speed on freeways would vary the most, from 53.8 mph under existing conditions to 54.2 mph with the project, or 54.1 mph with the project with the VA Medical Center Station Option.

The average speed within the Mid-Coast Corridor generally would be much lower than the regional average. The average speed would increase slightly from 27.8 mph to 27.9 mph with the project. Except for ramps, all the facility types within the corridor would experience much lower speeds than the region, which demonstrates the serious congestion in the corridor.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 6-20 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 7.0 – References

7.0 REFERENCES

City of San Diego, 2008a. City of San Diego General Plan.

City of San Diego, 2008b. University Towne Center Revitalization Project Environmental Impact Report.

County of San Diego, 2006. San Diego County General Plan.

Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB), 1995a. Mid-Coast Corridor Alternatives Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Draft Environmental Impact Report.

Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB). 1995b. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mid-Coast Corridor. December 1995.

Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB). 2001. Mid-Coast Corridor Project Balboa Extension and Nobel Drive Coaster Station Final Environmental Impact Statement. June 2001.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2007. 2030 San Diego Regional Transportation Plan: Pathways for the Future (2030 RTP).

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2008a. Series 11: 2030 Regional Growth Forecast Update: Process and Model Documentation.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2008b. Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2010. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project SANDAG Mode Choice Model Calibration and Validation.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2011. 2050 Regional Transportation Plan: Our Region, Our Future (2050 RTP). Adopted October 28, 2011. http://www.sandag.org/uploads/2050RTP/F2050rtp_all.pdf

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2013a. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Draft SEIS/SEIR Plan Set.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2013b. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Property Acquisitions Technical Report.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2013c. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Construction Impacts Technical Report.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2013d. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Transportation Impacts and Mitigation Report.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), 2014. Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project Final Revised Build Alternative Report.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 7-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Chapter 7.0 – References

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT 7-2 August 2014 Appendix A Mode of Access and Egress Tables

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

APPENDIX A MODE OF ACCESS AND EGRESS TABLES

Table A-1. Station Boardings by Access Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center 23 37 2,460 2,520 57 33 4,372 4,463 80 70 6,833 6,983 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 53 - 183 236 60 - 12 72 113 - 195 308 County Center 155 15 25 195 141 5 29 175 296 20 55 370 Middletown 136 4 - 139 176 1 - 177 311 5 - 316 Washington St 92 26 177 295 119 7 101 228 212 33 278 523 Old Town Transit Center ------Blue Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 36 428 1,927 2,390 238 329 1,204 1,771 274 757 3,131 4,161 Washington St 92 19 86 196 129 6 76 211 221 24 161 407 Middletown 157 129 - 286 226 16 - 242 383 145 - 528 County Center 204 38 1 243 204 19 1 224 408 57 3 468 Santa Fe Depot 14 - - 14 32 - - 32 47 - - 47 Route 150 North-Bound Broadway 7 - 137 144 5 - 3 8 12 - 140 152 B St 1 - 1,094 1,095 1 - 136 137 2 - 1,230 1,232 Ash St 35 - 46 82 11 - 1 11 46 - 47 93 Washington 6 2 9 16 5 0 0 5 11 2 9 22 Sports Arena/Enterpr 9 - 82 91 2 - 4 6 11 - 85 97 Old Town 1 9 912 922 1 2 11 14 3 11 922 936 Ramp I-5 SB 7 - - 7 4 - - 4 11 - - 11 Via Alicante ------

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-1. Station Boardings by Access Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Villa La Jolla 27 - - 27 2 - - 2 29 - - 29 Camto Viva/Evening ------Eucalyptus Grove - - 6 6 ------6 6 Myers 0 5 - 5 - - - - 0 5 - 5 Gilman 0 - 0 0 - - - - 0 - 0 0 VA Medical Center 0 - - 0 - - - - 0 - - 0 Villa La Jolla 6 - - 6 - - - - 6 - - 6 Lebon 25 - - 25 - - - - 25 - - 25 Regents ------Genesee ------UTC Transit Center ------Route 150 South-Bound UTC Transit Center 12 - 0 12 7 - 0 7 18 - 0 18 Genesee 27 - 2 30 36 - 5 40 63 - 7 70 Regents ------Lebon 76 - - 76 44 - - 44 120 - - 120 Villa La Jolla 5 - 10 15 3 - 8 11 8 - 18 26 VA Medical Center 2 - - 2 1 - - 1 3 - - 3 Gilman 9 - 0 9 5 - 0 5 15 - 0 15 Myers 5 19 - 24 3 18 - 21 8 37 - 44 Eucalyptus Grove - - 152 152 - - 81 81 - - 233 233 Camto Viva/Evening ------Villa La Jolla 71 - - 71 61 - - 61 132 - - 132 Via Alicante - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 Ramp I-5 SB 15 - - 15 15 - - 15 29 - - 29 Old Town ------

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-2 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-1. Station Boardings by Access Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Sports Arena/Enterpr ------Washington ------A Front 9 0 - 9 6 0 - 6 15 0 - 15 B Front 2 - - 2 2 - - 2 3 - - 3 Broadway ------Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-3 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-2. Station Alightings by Egress Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 246 91 2,403 2,740 398 59 1,358 1,815 644 150 3,760 4,555 Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 78 17 - 95 72 10 - 81 150 27 - 177 County Center 786 220 0 1,006 727 528 0 1,255 1,513 748 0 2,260 Middletown 163 532 - 694 131 8 - 140 294 540 - 834 Washington St 236 19 71 326 138 8 56 202 374 27 127 528 Old Town Transit Center 771 181 3,653 4,605 532 46 5,101 5,679 1,303 227 8,754 10,284 Blue Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Washington St 101 30 56 187 73 9 12 94 173 39 69 281 Middletown 112 30 - 142 97 11 - 108 209 40 - 249 County Center 371 213 3 586 257 126 5 388 628 339 8 974 Santa Fe Depot 334 182 36 552 249 127 34 410 582 310 70 962 Route 150 North-Bound Broadway 5 - 0 5 - - - - 5 - 0 5 B St 4 - 0 4 - - - - 4 - 0 4 Ash St 3 - 0 3 - - - - 3 - 0 3 Washington 3 0 5 7 - - - - 3 0 5 7 Sports Arena/Enterpr 61 4 1 66 - - - - 61 4 1 66 Old Town 12 0 85 96 - - - - 12 0 85 96 Ramp I-5 SB 1 0 - 2 0 0 - 0 2 0 - 2

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-4 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-2. Station Alightings by Egress Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Via Alicante - - 0 0 - - 0 0 - - 0 0 Villa La Jolla 38 7 - 45 3 0 - 4 42 7 - 49 Camto Viva/Evening ------Eucalyptus Grove - - 733 733 - - 33 33 - - 766 766 Myers 312 54 - 366 94 10 - 103 406 64 - 470 Gilman 269 50 3 322 44 6 1 52 314 55 5 374 VA Medical Center 0 2 - 2 4 0 - 4 4 2 - 6 Villa La Jolla 57 11 10 78 3 0 0 3 60 11 10 81 Lebon 123 26 - 149 3 0 - 4 127 26 - 153 Regents ------Genesee 259 44 485 788 8 0 4 12 267 44 489 800 UTC Transit Center 57 9 88 154 3 0 0 4 60 9 88 157 Route 150 South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Genesee ------Regents ------Lebon ------Villa La Jolla ------VA Medical Center ------Gilman 2 - - 2 - - - - 2 - - 2 Myers 7 - - 7 - - - - 7 - - 7 Eucalyptus Grove - - 0 0 ------0 0 Camto Viva/Evening ------Villa La Jolla 2 0 - 2 1 - - 1 2 0 - 2 Via Alicante ------

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-5 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-2. Station Alightings by Egress Mode under Existing Conditions (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Ramp I-5 SB 0 0 - 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 - 0 Old Town 5 0 118 124 2 0 31 34 7 0 150 157 Sports Arena/Enterpr 11 0 9 20 5 0 2 7 15 1 11 26 Washington 1 0 10 11 1 0 1 2 1 0 11 13 A Front 33 2 1 36 31 2 0 34 64 4 2 70 B Front 24 1 1 27 27 2 1 30 52 3 2 57 Broadway 40 3 8 51 49 4 8 61 89 7 16 112 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-6 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-3. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project Alternative (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 70 0 411 481 155 0 26 180 225 0 437 662 County Center 212 16 75 303 232 11 106 349 444 27 180 652 Middletown 163 5 - 168 236 1 - 237 398 6 - 404 Washington St 119 29 816 965 182 11 1,025 1,218 302 40 1,841 2,183 Old Town Transit Center 18 51 2,100 2,168 39 66 1,917 2,022 57 117 4,016 4,190 Tecolote Rd 42 77 12 131 54 100 50 205 96 178 63 336 Clairemont Dr 58 71 77 205 71 63 16 150 129 134 93 355 Balboa Ave 36 172 489 698 41 54 455 549 77 226 944 1,247 Nobel Dr 168 106 95 369 334 152 210 696 502 259 305 1,065 UCSD West 1 - 63 64 3 - 126 129 4 - 189 193 UCSD East 1 - 1 2 4 - - 4 5 - 1 6 Executive Dr 15 - 21 37 36 - 64 100 51 - 85 136 UTC Transit Center ------Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center 254 265 474 992 489 378 922 1,790 743 643 1,396 2,782 Executive Dr 111 - 293 404 288 - 409 696 399 - 702 1,101 UCSD East 16 - 27 44 24 - 4 28 40 - 31 71 UCSD West 13 - 318 331 23 - 1,032 1,055 36 - 1,350 1,386 Nobel Dr 176 245 422 844 245 310 578 1,133 421 555 1,000 1,977 Balboa Ave 74 458 669 1,201 114 131 621 866 187 589 1,290 2,066 Clairemont Dr 103 147 39 289 161 173 1 335 264 320 40 624 Tecolote Rd 86 186 34 307 141 309 99 549 228 495 133 856 Old Town Transit Center 29 172 1,541 1,742 249 307 1,522 2,078 278 478 3,063 3,820 Washington St 91 17 86 193 139 3 107 249 230 20 193 443

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-7 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-3. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Middletown 155 138 - 294 250 16 - 265 405 154 - 559 County Center 207 39 1 247 463 24 2 489 670 62 3 735 Santa Fe Depot 14 - - 14 35 - - 35 49 - - 49 Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center 22 29 2,561 2,611 42 31 5,000 5,073 64 59 7,561 7,684 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project runs on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-8 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-4. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 76 17 - 93 80 9 - 88 156 25 - 181 County Center 780 217 0 997 886 520 0 1,406 1,666 737 0 2,403 Middletown 159 606 - 765 159 8 - 167 318 614 - 933 Washington St 237 19 73 328 174 7 70 252 411 26 143 580 Old Town Transit Center 711 174 3,338 4,223 738 17 5,131 5,886 1,449 191 8,468 10,108 Tecolote Rd 238 30 36 304 300 75 69 445 538 105 105 749 Clairemont Dr 123 16 3 143 177 13 - 190 300 29 3 333 Balboa Ave 138 25 498 661 174 19 515 708 312 44 1,013 1,369 Nobel Dr 522 162 269 953 481 54 38 573 1,003 216 307 1,526 UCSD West 1,305 245 1,258 2,807 2,215 296 2,092 4,604 3,520 540 3,350 7,411 UCSD East 401 48 570 1,019 891 59 1 951 1,292 107 572 1,970 Executive Dr 796 236 1,120 2,152 675 88 676 1,439 1,471 324 1,796 3,591 UTC Transit Center 164 41 161 366 275 28 160 463 439 69 321 829 Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Executive Dr 232 69 84 384 333 90 83 506 565 159 167 890 UCSD East 45 10 17 71 97 19 2 118 142 28 19 189 UCSD West 269 51 85 405 744 117 159 1,021 1,014 168 244 1,426 Nobel Dr 105 25 4 133 205 36 9 250 310 61 13 383 Balboa Ave 20 4 124 148 32 5 162 199 52 9 286 347 Clairemont Dr 36 11 13 59 61 9 16 86 97 20 29 146 Tecolote Rd 50 16 2 68 62 10 13 85 112 26 15 154 Old Town Transit Center 157 45 601 802 202 46 884 1,131 359 91 1,484 1,934 Washington St 114 35 106 254 122 22 118 261 235 56 224 515

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-9 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-4. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Middletown 122 34 - 156 134 20 - 154 256 54 - 310 County Center 512 297 8 817 612 315 19 946 1,124 611 27 1,763 Santa Fe Depot 493 281 90 863 674 328 268 1,270 1,167 609 358 2,133 Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 235 67 2,692 2,994 282 44 2,559 2,885 516 111 5,251 5,879 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project runs on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-10 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-5. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 70 0 408 479 150 0 24 174 220 0 432 652 County Center 212 16 75 303 227 11 99 337 439 27 175 640 Middletown 162 5 - 167 233 1 - 234 395 6 - 401 Washington St 119 29 815 963 180 11 940 1,131 299 40 1,755 2,094 Old Town Transit Center 18 51 2,068 2,137 37 65 1,730 1,833 55 117 3,798 3,969 Tecolote Dr 41 77 12 130 53 97 44 194 94 174 56 324 Clairemont Dr 58 70 75 203 68 64 16 148 126 133 91 351 Balboa Ave 35 169 484 689 40 49 428 517 75 218 912 1,206 Nobel Dr 155 102 96 353 271 133 244 648 427 234 340 1,000 VA Medical Center 1 - 0 1 2 - 87 89 3 - 87 90 UCSD West 1 - 63 63 2 - 127 128 2 - 189 191 UCSD East 1 - 1 2 4 - - 4 5 - 1 6 Executive Dr 15 - 22 38 36 - 64 100 52 - 86 138 UTC Transit Center ------Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center 254 267 465 985 484 383 759 1,626 738 650 1,223 2,611 Executive Dr 110 - 287 397 283 - 406 689 393 - 692 1,085 UCSD East 16 - 27 43 23 - 3 26 39 - 30 69 UCSD West 9 - 306 315 15 - 998 1,013 24 - 1,305 1,329 VA Medical Center 5 - 15 20 9 - 34 44 14 - 50 64 Nobel Dr 176 246 423 846 245 310 580 1,136 421 556 1,004 1,981 Balboa Ave 74 460 669 1,203 114 131 621 866 188 591 1,290 2,069 Clairemont Dr 103 146 39 288 161 174 1 336 264 320 40 624 Tecolote Rd 86 186 34 307 141 313 99 554 228 500 133 861

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-11 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-5. Station Boardings by Access Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Old Town Transit Center 29 172 1,541 1,742 249 301 1,522 2,073 278 473 3,064 3,815 Washington St 91 17 86 194 139 3 107 249 230 20 193 443 Middletown 155 138 - 294 250 16 - 266 405 154 - 559 County Center 207 39 1 247 463 24 2 489 670 62 3 735 Santa Fe Depot 14 - - 14 35 - - 35 49 - - 49 Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center 22 29 2,560 2,610 42 31 4,999 5,072 64 59 7,559 7,683 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project runs on December 15, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-12 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-6. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 76 17 - 93 80 9 - 88 156 25 - 181 County Center 780 217 0 997 886 520 0 1,406 1,666 737 0 2,403 Middletown 159 607 - 766 159 8 - 167 318 614 - 933 Washington St 236 19 73 328 174 7 70 252 411 26 143 580 Old Town Transit Center 711 174 3,338 4,223 738 17 5,132 5,887 1,449 191 8,470 10,110 Tecolote Rd 238 30 36 304 300 80 69 449 539 110 105 753 Clairemont Dr 123 16 3 143 177 13 - 190 300 29 3 333 Balboa Ave 138 25 498 662 174 19 515 708 313 44 1,013 1,370 Nobel Dr 524 162 272 958 481 54 243 779 1,005 217 515 1,737 VA Medical Center 339 80 285 704 284 44 1,443 1,771 623 124 1,728 2,475 UCSD West 966 165 954 2,086 1,996 263 375 2,635 2,962 429 1,330 4,721 UCSD East 390 41 559 989 886 58 1 946 1,276 99 560 1,935 Executive Dr 789 229 1,099 2,118 668 86 91 845 1,458 315 1,190 2,963 UTC Transit Center 158 40 154 351 272 27 154 453 430 67 307 804 Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Executive Dr 232 70 87 389 333 90 93 517 565 160 180 905 UCSD East 46 10 17 72 98 19 2 119 143 29 19 192 UCSD West 240 41 85 365 581 84 136 801 821 124 221 1,167 VA Medical Center 36 11 0 48 41 14 11 66 77 25 11 113 Nobel Dr 102 23 3 128 203 35 8 247 305 58 12 375 Balboa Ave 19 4 123 146 32 5 161 197 51 9 284 343 Clairemont Dr 36 11 13 60 61 9 16 86 97 20 29 146

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-13 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-6. Station Alightings by Egress Mode for Existing Conditions with the Project with VA Medical Center Station Option (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Tecolote Rd 50 16 2 68 62 10 13 85 111 26 15 153 Old Town Transit Center 156 45 597 798 202 45 879 1,126 358 91 1,475 1,924 Washington St 113 35 105 253 121 22 117 260 235 56 222 513 Middletown 122 34 - 156 134 20 - 154 256 54 - 310 County Center 512 297 8 816 611 314 19 944 1,122 611 27 1,760 Santa Fe Depot 492 281 89 862 673 327 266 1,266 1,165 609 355 2,128 Green Line North-Bound Old Town Transit Center ------Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 235 67 2,679 2,981 282 44 2,425 2,751 516 111 5,105 5,732 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2010 model run on December 7, 2011; Existing Conditions with the Project runs on December 15, 2011.

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-14 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-7. No-Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 46 0 416 461 93 0 532 626 139 0 948 1,087 County Center 315 21 21 358 439 9 52 501 755 31 73 859 Middletown 248 7 0 256 342 1 - 343 590 9 0 599 Washington St 123 32 238 393 203 12 376 591 326 44 614 984 Old Town Transit Center 28 74 883 985 75 16 943 1,034 103 90 1,826 2,019 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 28 114 383 526 186 34 495 715 214 149 878 1,241 Washington St 78 10 79 167 117 3 137 257 195 13 216 424 Middletown 164 36 - 200 262 12 - 274 426 48 - 474 County Center 193 30 5 229 309 22 10 341 503 52 15 570 Santa Fe Depot 14 - 211 225 46 - 253 299 61 - 464 524 Route 150 North-Bound Kettner 5 - 905 910 10 - 575 585 15 - 1,480 1,495 Cedar 84 1 0 85 73 0 0 74 157 1 1 159 Palm 20 1 - 21 20 0 - 20 41 1 - 41 Washington 6 1 14 21 7 1 4 12 13 2 18 33 Old Town 1 5 671 676 4 2 446 453 5 7 1,117 1,129 Nobel ------Gilman ------Campus Point ------Executive ------UTC Transit Center ------

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-15 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-7. No Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Route 150 South-Bound UTC Transit Center 25 - 4 29 15 - 1 16 41 - 4 45 Executive 19 - 28 46 11 - 5 16 30 - 32 62 Campus Point 9 - 3 13 8 - 1 9 18 - 4 22 Gilman 12 - 177 189 10 - 247 257 22 - 424 446 Nobel 70 - 108 178 83 - 22 105 152 - 130 282 Old Town 0 2 77 79 0 0 1 1 0 2 79 81 Washington 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 Palm 10 1 - 11 5 0 - 5 15 1 - 17 Cedar 20 1 - 21 - - - - 20 1 - 21 Kettner ------Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-16 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-8. No Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 104 5 89 198 147 0 142 289 250 5 232 487 County Center 118 29 1 148 323 17 1 341 441 46 2 489 Middletown 118 13 - 132 125 6 - 131 243 20 - 263 Washington St 210 13 39 261 122 5 46 172 332 18 84 434 Old Town Transit Center 373 20 1,097 1,490 566 16 808 1,390 939 36 1,905 2,880 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 267 69 1,923 2,258 371 39 1,022 1,432 637 108 2,945 3,690 Washington St 99 26 48 173 108 11 44 164 207 37 93 337 Middletown 116 30 - 146 133 14 - 147 248 44 - 293 County Center 274 235 4 513 296 142 155 593 571 377 158 1,106 Santa Fe Depot 454 385 256 1,094 584 267 321 1,172 1,037 652 578 2,267 Route 150 North-Bound Kettner ------Cedar 0 - - 0 - - - - 0 - - 0 Palm 8 1 - 8 1 0 - 1 9 1 - 10 Washington 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 3 Old Town 4 0 32 36 1 0 5 6 5 0 37 42 Nobel 163 29 23 215 60 5 7 72 223 34 30 286 Gilman 672 71 238 980 516 79 458 1,053 1,188 150 696 2,034 Campus Point 257 35 145 437 106 9 12 127 363 43 158 564 Executive 109 11 124 245 20 1 20 41 129 12 144 286 UTC Transit Center 32 2 15 50 4 0 11 15 36 3 27 65

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-17 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-8. No Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Route 150 South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Executive ------Campus Point ------Gilman ------Nobel ------Old Town 6 0 186 193 4 0 131 135 10 0 318 328 Washington 1 0 7 9 1 0 6 7 3 0 14 16 Palm 6 0 0 6 2 0 - 2 8 0 0 8 Cedar 59 2 - 61 25 1 - 26 84 3 - 87 Kettner 74 2 101 176 35 0 123 158 109 2 224 334 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-18 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-9. Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 61 0 407 468 115 0 669 784 176 0 1,076 1,252 County Center 430 18 56 504 516 14 89 619 946 32 145 1,123 Middletown 251 10 1 261 350 1 2 352 600 11 2 613 Washington St 133 33 879 1,045 211 20 1,298 1,528 344 52 2,177 2,574 Old Town Transit Center 23 60 2,006 2,088 56 27 2,843 2,926 79 87 4,849 5,014 Tecolote Rd 63 107 15 184 93 178 28 298 156 285 42 483 Clairemont Dr 74 111 49 234 100 115 73 288 174 225 123 523 Balboa Ave 37 195 630 862 67 63 581 711 104 258 1,211 1,573 Nobel Dr 162 131 98 391 309 192 271 772 471 323 370 1,164 UCSD West 4 - 47 51 11 - 133 144 15 - 180 195 UCSD East 4 - 11 15 8 - 15 23 12 - 26 38 Executive Dr 36 - 27 63 75 - 70 145 111 - 97 208 UTC Transit Center ------Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center 194 273 944 1,411 393 340 1,779 2,513 587 614 2,723 3,924 Executive Dr 98 - 49 146 164 - 172 335 261 - 220 482 UCSD East 22 - 136 158 37 - 140 177 59 - 276 335 UCSD West 16 - 183 199 26 - 505 531 42 - 688 730 Nobel Dr 125 189 460 773 189 220 501 910 314 409 961 1,683 Balboa Ave 62 327 583 971 110 124 482 716 171 451 1,064 1,687 Clairemont Dr 90 104 17 211 129 118 23 270 219 222 40 481 Tecolote Rd 90 137 8 236 146 340 10 497 236 478 19 732 Old Town Transit Center 26 87 721 834 345 40 644 1,029 371 127 1,365 1,863 Washington St 78 10 66 153 105 2 85 192 183 12 150 345 Middletown 175 161 1 336 259 15 - 274 434 175 1 610

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-19 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-9. Build Alternative Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total County Center 324 33 1 358 561 24 1 586 885 57 2 944 Santa Fe Depot 11 - 0 11 23 - 7 30 34 - 7 41 Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 37 0 290 327 69 0 327 396 106 0 617 723 County Center 151 5 17 173 196 3 39 238 347 8 56 411 Middletown 74 2 0 76 101 1 - 101 175 2 0 177 Washington St 39 5 177 222 56 2 261 319 95 8 438 541 Old Town Transit Center 22 21 988 1,032 49 20 1,264 1,333 71 41 2,253 2,365 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 8 29 169 206 23 10 231 264 30 39 400 470 Washington St 19 3 64 85 29 1 114 143 47 4 178 229 Middletown 37 8 - 46 61 4 - 65 98 12 - 110 County Center 57 7 6 70 101 9 44 154 158 16 50 224 Santa Fe Depot 14 - 235 249 46 - 242 288 61 - 477 537 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-20 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-10. Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 77 17 9 102 77 9 30 116 154 26 39 218 County Center 495 131 0 626 637 489 0 1,126 1,132 620 0 1,752 Middletown 149 717 0 866 146 7 - 153 295 724 0 1,020 Washington St 250 15 110 374 146 6 90 242 396 21 200 617 Old Town Transit Center 739 35 2,155 2,928 850 19 1,820 2,689 1,589 53 3,975 5,618 Tecolote Rd 258 200 15 473 310 89 11 409 567 288 26 882 Clairemont Dr 125 14 9 148 177 10 12 199 302 24 21 347 Balboa Ave 151 24 1,261 1,435 202 16 1,004 1,222 353 40 2,265 2,657 Nobel Dr 461 99 444 1,004 465 47 55 568 926 146 499 1,572 UCSD West 1,515 234 1,219 2,968 2,523 290 3,241 6,054 4,038 524 4,460 9,022 UCSD East 645 66 705 1,416 1,334 81 157 1,573 1,980 147 862 2,989 Executive Dr 667 159 911 1,738 605 83 812 1,500 1,272 242 1,724 3,238 UTC Transit Center 138 25 572 734 258 22 592 872 396 46 1,164 1,606 Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Executive Dr 243 72 139 454 341 66 184 590 584 137 323 1,044 UCSD East 105 27 19 151 205 40 6 251 310 67 25 402 UCSD West 465 103 69 637 1,134 186 178 1,498 1,600 289 247 2,135 Nobel Dr 108 28 5 140 195 30 11 237 303 58 16 377 Balboa Ave 25 5 165 195 36 4 221 262 61 9 386 457 Clairemont Dr 36 9 23 68 66 8 34 107 102 17 57 175 Tecolote Rd 48 14 4 66 68 10 11 89 116 24 15 155 Old Town Transit Center 117 33 644 795 166 35 895 1,096 283 68 1,540 1,891 Washington St 72 12 105 189 81 9 138 228 153 21 243 417 Middletown 81 14 - 95 96 9 - 105 177 22 - 199

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-21 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-10 Build Alternative Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal County Center 274 97 4 375 275 103 66 443 549 199 70 819 Santa Fe Depot 568 204 268 1,040 608 215 158 980 1,176 419 426 2,021 Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 104 5 81 190 147 0 121 268 251 6 202 458 County Center 30 14 2 47 50 8 1 59 80 22 4 106 Middletown 19 3 1 22 25 1 2 28 44 4 2 50 Washington St 24 3 35 62 29 1 52 82 53 4 87 145 Old Town Transit Center 33 1 65 99 41 1 182 224 73 1 248 322 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 202 55 2,515 2,773 264 33 2,247 2,543 466 88 4,762 5,316 Washington St 64 18 41 122 67 9 60 135 130 27 101 258 Middletown 65 19 1 85 71 10 - 80 136 28 1 165 County Center 237 168 3 407 215 117 147 479 452 284 150 886 Santa Fe Depot 276 259 151 686 303 199 184 687 579 458 336 1,373 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-22 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-11. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 61 0 401 462 122 0 668 790 182 0 1,069 1,251 County Center 429 18 54 501 519 14 87 619 948 32 141 1,120 Middletown 250 10 1 260 355 1 0 356 605 11 1 617 Washington St 133 33 878 1,044 213 21 1,225 1,458 346 53 2,103 2,502 Old Town Transit Center 22 60 1,974 2,056 57 27 2,422 2,506 80 88 4,395 4,563 Tecolote Rd 63 106 15 184 92 180 27 299 155 286 42 483 Clairemont Dr 74 111 46 231 100 115 73 288 174 226 119 519 Balboa Ave 34 188 618 841 60 60 602 722 94 248 1,220 1,562 Nobel Dr 157 126 95 378 288 185 270 742 445 311 364 1,121 VA Medical Center 1 - 0 1 3 - 99 102 4 - 99 103 UCSD West 3 - 47 50 5 - 133 138 8 - 180 188 UCSD East 4 - 11 15 8 - 15 23 11 - 26 38 Executive Dr 37 - 27 63 75 - 71 146 112 - 98 210 UTC Transit Center ------Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center 191 275 941 1,406 390 342 1,612 2,344 580 617 2,553 3,750 Executive Dr 96 - 48 144 163 - 168 331 260 - 216 476 UCSD East 22 - 134 156 37 - 138 175 59 - 272 331 UCSD West 12 - 178 190 22 - 487 509 34 - 665 699 VA Medical Center 4 - 6 10 8 - 11 19 12 - 17 29 Nobel Dr 125 189 465 779 190 220 504 914 315 409 969 1,693 Balboa Ave 62 327 583 972 110 129 482 721 171 456 1,066 1,693 Clairemont Dr 90 104 17 211 129 118 23 269 219 222 40 480 Tecolote Rd 90 137 8 236 146 340 10 496 236 477 19 732 Old Town Transit Center 26 87 723 836 345 41 640 1,026 371 128 1,363 1,862 Washington St 78 10 66 153 105 2 84 191 183 12 150 345

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-23 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-11. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Boardings by Access Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Station Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Subtotal Access Access Transfer Total Middletown 175 161 1 336 249 14 - 263 424 175 1 599 County Center 324 33 1 358 555 23 1 579 880 56 2 937 Santa Fe Depot 11 - 0 11 23 - 7 30 34 - 7 41 Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 37 0 290 327 69 0 333 402 106 0 623 729 County Center 151 5 17 173 196 3 39 238 347 8 56 411 Middletown 74 2 0 76 101 1 - 101 175 2 0 177 Washington St 39 5 177 222 56 2 261 319 95 8 438 541 Old Town Transit Center 22 21 987 1,030 49 20 1,261 1,330 71 41 2,248 2,360 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 8 29 169 206 23 10 229 262 31 39 398 468 Washington St 19 3 64 85 29 1 112 142 47 4 176 227 Middletown 37 8 - 46 61 4 - 65 98 12 - 110 County Center 57 7 6 70 101 9 43 153 158 16 49 223 Santa Fe Depot 14 - 235 249 46 - 244 291 61 - 479 540 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-24 August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A –Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-12. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Blue Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 77 17 9 102 77 9 30 116 154 26 39 219 County Center 495 131 0 626 636 489 0 1,126 1,131 620 0 1,751 Middletown 149 717 0 866 146 7 - 153 295 724 0 1,020 Washington St 250 15 110 375 148 6 90 244 398 21 200 619 Old Town Transit Center 739 35 2,155 2,928 849 19 1,836 2,704 1,588 53 3,991 5,632 Tecolote Rd 258 200 15 473 309 89 11 409 567 288 26 882 Clairemont Dr 125 14 9 148 177 10 12 199 302 24 21 347 Balboa Ave 156 24 1,262 1,442 202 16 1,007 1,226 358 40 2,269 2,667 Nobel Dr 462 99 422 983 465 48 44 556 926 147 466 1,540 VA Medical Center 301 60 306 667 266 35 1,910 2,210 567 95 2,216 2,877 UCSD West 1,208 169 902 2,279 2,340 248 626 3,214 3,548 418 1,527 5,493 UCSD East 642 64 689 1,394 1,326 80 163 1,569 1,968 144 852 2,964 Executive Dr 657 155 893 1,705 594 82 852 1,527 1,251 237 1,745 3,232 UTC Transit Center 137 24 551 712 258 22 452 731 395 46 1,003 1,444 Blue Line South-Bound UTC Transit Center ------Executive Dr 249 72 140 461 345 65 186 596 594 137 326 1,057 UCSD East 106 27 20 153 207 41 4 252 313 68 24 404 UCSD West 446 94 69 608 948 171 68 1,187 1,393 264 137 1,795 VA Medical Center 30 11 0 42 34 9 128 171 64 21 128 213 Nobel Dr 105 26 4 135 194 30 1 225 299 56 5 360 Balboa Ave 20 4 163 187 36 4 215 256 56 8 378 443 Clairemont Dr 36 9 23 68 66 8 34 107 101 17 57 175 Tecolote Rd 48 14 4 66 68 10 11 88 116 24 15 155 Old Town Transit Center 117 33 641 791 166 35 892 1,092 282 68 1,532 1,883

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 A-25 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix A – Mode of Access and Egress Tables

Table A-12. Build Alternative with VA Station Option Station Alightings by Egress Mode (in PA Format) (continued)

Peak Off-Peak Daily Walk Drive Walk Drive Walk Drive Access Access Access Access Access Access Station Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Walk Egress Transfer Subtotal Washington St 71 12 105 189 77 9 138 224 149 21 243 413 Middletown 81 14 - 95 96 9 - 104 177 22 - 199 County Center 273 97 4 374 274 103 65 442 548 199 69 816 Santa Fe Depot 568 204 268 1,040 599 215 140 954 1,167 419 408 1,994 Green Line North-Bound Santa Fe Depot 104 5 82 191 147 0 147 294 251 6 229 485 County Center 30 14 1 45 50 8 1 59 80 22 2 105 Middletown 19 3 1 22 25 1 0 27 44 4 1 49 Washington St 24 3 34 61 30 1 49 80 54 4 83 141 Old Town Transit Center 33 1 68 101 41 1 132 173 73 1 200 274 Green Line South-Bound Old Town Transit Center 202 55 2,511 2,768 263 33 2,063 2,359 465 88 4,574 5,127 Washington St 64 18 41 122 65 9 60 134 129 27 101 256 Middletown 65 19 1 85 71 10 - 80 136 28 1 165 County Center 237 168 3 407 215 117 147 479 452 284 150 886 Santa Fe Depot 276 259 151 686 303 198 193 694 579 457 344 1,380 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model, 2030 Model Runs between October 26, 2011 and December 14, 2011

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT A-26 August 2014 Appendix B User Benefits by Travel Analysis District

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix B – User Benefits by Travel Analysis District

APPENDIX B USER BENEFITS BY TRAVEL ANALYSIS DISTRICT

Table B-1. User Benefits by Travel Analysis District

Build Alternative Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option All Purposes Home-Based Work All Purposes Home-Based Work Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Travel Analysis District Production Attraction Production Attraction Production Attraction Production Attraction 1 Pendleton/ Fallbrook 15,591 25,329 2,090 1,017 13,166 15864 1,960 291 2 San Dieguito 9,622 29,687 3,184 8,092 8,931 19161 3,001 6,792 3 North Inland 8,894 1,711 2,883 231 8,780 678 2,847 115 4 Poway/ North City 18,386 19,145 4,712 10,129 18,352 17,956 4,660 9,677 5 Kearny Mesa 5,717 27,384 2,286 16,476 5,567 27204 2,207 16,356 6 Mission Trails 4,642 874 2,301 324 4,114 809 2,138 287 7 Mission Valley 2,105 1,033 1,094 677 1,816 1026 1,018 664 8 North Park 45,282 1,927 20,743 753 43,648 1922 20,295 747 9 East San Diego 31,858 1,394 12,721 442 29,445 1617 12,312 458 10 South San Diego 81,072 7,454 39,709 3,554 75,414 7421 38,559 3,544 11 South Bay 82,599 8,113 47,820 1,685 77,529 8228 46,649 1,690 12 Eastlake 22,653 5,196 9,123 1,435 20,033 5431 8,792 1,394 13 East Suburbs 7,945 218 5,483 32 5,151 240 4,689 41 14 East County 5,149 165 1,158 7 4,235 131 1,109 4 15 Centre City 36,961 66,700 13,929 43,719 37,343 66346 13,827 43,608 16 Golden Triangle 53,169 68,528 16,514 40,228 52,715 67218 16,367 39,318 17 UCSD 13,882 217,455 2,422 67,075 13,751 212541 2,402 66,155 18 Torrey Pines 18,247 31,978 6,558 16,558 17,957 31109 6,442 16,024 19 Sorrento Mesa South 761 11,232 - 7,411 721 10411 - 6,877 20 University City South 8,169 2,359 3,693 811 8,082 2302 3,649 783 21 Sorrento Mesa North 1,058 8,157 111 5,306 1,010 7028 109 4,559 22 Carmel Valley 1,540 1,780 552 1,259 1,519 1731 543 1,223

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT August 2014 B-1 Travel Forecasting Results Report Appendix B – User Benefits by Travel Analysis District

Table B-1. User Benefits by Travel Analysis District (continued)

Build Alternative Build Alternative with VA Medical Center Station Option All Purposes Home-Based Work All Purposes Home-Based Work Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Daily Travel Analysis District Production Attraction Production Attraction Production Attraction Production Attraction 23 Clairemont 74,377 53,955 36,075 23,599 73,977 53878 35,839 23,573 24 La Jolla 18,709 7,413 9,743 3,565 18,658 7326 9,668 3,532 25 Mission Bay 47,141 28,256 25,812 12,320 47,501 28103 25,676 12,273 26 Point Loma 47,181 47,714 21,962 22,463 42,276 46174 21,569 22,462 27 Uptown 38,802 23,199 17,824 14,126 37,110 23117 17,537 14,081 28 Fashion Valley 2,762 2,036 1,360 1,387 2,439 2095 1,325 1,426 29 Marina-Ballpark 17,305 21,187 2,924 10,105 17,113 21286 2,914 10,149 Total 721,579 721,579 314,786 314,786 688,353 688,353 308,103 308,103 Source: SANDAG Series 11 Travel Demand Forecasting Model

MID-COAST CORRIDOR TRANSIT PROJECT B-2 August 2014